Hi Tim,
you correctly assumed I was just trying to clean up the code. There was no
reason to change the behavior, so please ignore my change to the patch.
Aron
On 26.07.2011, at 15:44, Tim Lewis wrote:
> Hi Aron,
>
> Thanks for the input. The "small change" you suggest would change the
> be
Hi Tim,
I have to correct my previous answer, my change does not alter the behavior of
your patch significantly.
> The difference:
> In your version of the patch vacuumlo will stop after N lo_unlink(OID)
> attempts.
> The previous behavior of the patch is that vacuumlo will stop after N
> succ
> Excerpts from Aron's message of mar jul 26 04:18:55 -0400 2011:
>> Here's another small change to the patch, it works fine for me and it quite
>> saved my day.
>>
>> I try to submit the patch by email.
>
> There's a problem with this patch: long lines are being wrapped by
> your email client, w
