On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:47 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:35 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 05:00:53PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > Looks good to me as well but I think one can choose not to backpatch
> > > as there is no functional impact but
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:35 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 05:00:53PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Looks good to me as well but I think one can choose not to backpatch
> > as there is no functional impact but OTOH, there is some value in
> > keeping tests/code consistent.
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 05:00:53PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Looks good to me as well but I think one can choose not to backpatch
> as there is no functional impact but OTOH, there is some value in
> keeping tests/code consistent.
FWIW, I would not bother with the back branches for just that, bu
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:21 PM Suraj Kharage
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Noticed that an extra semicolon in a couple of test cases related to
> postgres_fdw. Removed that in the attached patch. It can be backported till
> v11 where we added those test cases.
>
Thanks for identifying this, the changes l
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 4:50 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:21 PM Suraj Kharage
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Noticed that an extra semicolon in a couple of test cases related to
> > postgres_fdw. Removed that in the attached patch. It can be backported till
> > v11 wh
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:21 PM Suraj Kharage
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Noticed that an extra semicolon in a couple of test cases related to
> postgres_fdw. Removed that in the attached patch. It can be backported till
> v11 where we added those test cases.
+1 for the change. It looks like a typo and
