On Sat, 21 Jun 2025 at 18:09, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> While looking at those comments, I also noted that there is a
> strange inconsistency between width_bucket_array and
> width_bucket_float8/width_bucket_numeric. Namely, the latter
> two reject an "operand" that is NaN, while width_bucket_array
> g
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 at 22:19, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> So concretely, how about the attached?
>
LGTM (though I'm not sure it really needs the word "therefore" in the
first hunk).
There are also a couple of code comments that need fixing --
width_bucket_float8() comes with the following comment:
* '
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 at 07:40, David Rowley wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 at 17:18, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Yeah. I've found this new feature useful multiple times already,
> > but the '#' icon is as non-mnemonic and unobvious as could possibly
> > be. OTOH, I don't know of a standard icon for this
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 03:03, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> On 10/11/18 3:01 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 06:49, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> >> For example, attached are screenshots taken from my Android tablet
> >
> > For the record, that was a Sam
On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 06:49, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> For example, attached are screenshots taken from my Android tablet
For the record, that was a Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 8.0, with a screen
resolution of 2048x1536 and a device pixel ratio of 2.0, I think. So
the logical resolution is 1024x768,
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 at 16:50, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> As part of the effort to modernize the look and feel of PostgreSQL.org
> and associated web projects, Sarah & I have worked on applying the new
> styles to the documentation.
>
> We are looking for feedback in the following areas:
>
> - Things
On 5 August 2018 at 23:57, Tom Lane wrote:
> Anyway, I'd like to propose a compromise position that I don't think
> has been discussed before: let's drop release notes for branches
> that were already EOL when a given branch was released.
WFM. +1
Regards,
Dean
