Thread

Commits

  1. Remove extra semicolon in postgres_fdw tests.

  1. extra semicolon in postgres_fdw test cases

    Suraj Kharage <suraj.kharage@enterprisedb.com> — 2021-03-30T09:51:24Z

    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 & Regards,
    Suraj kharage,
    
    
    
    edbpostgres.com
    
  2. Re: extra semicolon in postgres_fdw test cases

    Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> — 2021-03-30T11:19:49Z

    On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:21 PM Suraj Kharage
    <suraj.kharage@enterprisedb.com> 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 can be backported.
    
    With Regards,
    Bharath Rupireddy.
    EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
    
    
    
    
  3. Re: extra semicolon in postgres_fdw test cases

    Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> — 2021-03-30T11:30:53Z

    On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 4:50 PM Bharath Rupireddy
    <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:21 PM Suraj Kharage
    > <suraj.kharage@enterprisedb.com> 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 can be backported.
    >
    
    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.
    
    -- 
    With Regards,
    Amit Kapila.
    
    
    
    
  4. Re: extra semicolon in postgres_fdw test cases

    vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> — 2021-03-31T03:38:25Z

    On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:21 PM Suraj Kharage
    <suraj.kharage@enterprisedb.com> 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 look fine to me.
    
    Regards,
    Vignesh
    
    
    
    
  5. Re: extra semicolon in postgres_fdw test cases

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2021-03-31T04:05:03Z

    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, but if
    you feel that this is better, of course feel free.
    --
    Michael
    
  6. Re: extra semicolon in postgres_fdw test cases

    Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> — 2021-03-31T04:17:15Z

    On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:35 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> 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.
    >
    > FWIW, I would not bother with the back branches for just that, but if
    > you feel that this is better, of course feel free.
    >
    
    Fair enough. I'll push this just for HEAD.
    
    -- 
    With Regards,
    Amit Kapila.
    
    
    
    
  7. Re: extra semicolon in postgres_fdw test cases

    Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> — 2021-03-31T05:57:46Z

    On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:47 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:35 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> 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.
    > >
    > > FWIW, I would not bother with the back branches for just that, but if
    > > you feel that this is better, of course feel free.
    > >
    >
    > Fair enough. I'll push this just for HEAD.
    >
    
    Pushed!
    
    -- 
    With Regards,
    Amit Kapila.