pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Steven Pousty <steve.pousty@gmail.com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Cc: Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>
Cc: Pierre Giraud <pierre.giraud@dalibo.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:26:20 -0400
Message-ID: <20585.1588217180@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c5f34a44-ccb9-c59e-ee5a-c8d97980df15@postgresql.org>
References: <20200423174343.GA16996@alvherre.pgsql>
	<19233.1587665407@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<5561.1587922854@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<13e5e408-bc59-e8ca-44f3-28a981b4fc7d@postgresql.org>
	<a47ea348-b9a0-02b7-5bcb-7a32143dd16f@postgresql.org>
	<11211.1587951842@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<58de9544-be5b-f325-b5cc-cce4e2dda7d9@postgresql.org>
	<5651.1587991781@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<b998a672-2525-1cba-ac64-b292f495919e@postgresql.org>
	<30469.1588087170@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<8682.1588202983@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<4894cde4-148d-f0cc-d6d8-182a46f13e1b@postgresql.org>
	<06f6b32d-a4cc-3723-5bc1-00fa674df961@postgresql.org>
	<11106.1588205727@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1c5ca197-f7f2-0300-46ce-4652c7f81d48@postgresql.org>
	<ab7803b4-f985-cf3d-267f-38b7311ca917@postgresql.org>
	<18310.1588214299@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<c5f34a44-ccb9-c59e-ee5a-c8d97980df15@postgresql.org>

"Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org> writes:
> Clearly I was caught doing a single browser test (Chrome).

Well, I've not tested anything but Safari, either ...

> Reverted back to the verbose way sans !important, attached, which
> appears to be the consensus. If you can ACK this, I'll commit.

This one works for me.

			regards, tom lane





view thread (113+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <20585.1588217180@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../20585.1588217180@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/20585.1588217180@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, jkatz@postgresql.org, peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com, bruce@momjian.us, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, steve.pousty@gmail.com, pavel.stehule@gmail.com, isaac.morland@gmail.com, pierre.giraud@dalibo.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
  Subject: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
  In-Reply-To: <20585.1588217180@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox