On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Michael Meskes <mes...@postgresql.org> wrote: > Am 14.10.2010 08:52, schrieb David Newall: >> >> On 14/10/10 12:14, Itagaki Takahiro wrote: >>> >>> Which solution is better? Or, another idea? >> >> This does seem to be an new bug in previously working code. While any >> solution that fixes the problem is good, it might pay to look the code >> that worked before. As reported, it worked for ecpg (PostgreSQL 8.3.8) >> 4.4.1. > > You seem to be answering to an email that I didn't see and couldn't find in > the archive either. Was it send in private or to the list? If it went to the > list I might be lagging behind.
I didn't get it either. The original report was posted to pgsql-bugs on October 10. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
