Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Not sure why Peter didn't continue working on it.
> I'm still working on the postmaster/postgres merge. But the behavior of
> postmaster -o is not going to be removed. That TODO item might be
> appropriate in a release or three
Hi,
I'm developing an object persistency framework for which I'd love to
have
better support for inheritance in PostgreSQL. I could already map subclasses
with the current inheritance facilities, but the problem is with Primary and
Foreign Keys.
There's a TODO for implementing Ind
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The mention of the changes to the btree scan code in the latest weekly
> news got me curious so I started looking at the 'executive summary'
> (read as: README) of the patch changes for both the scan patch and the
> btbulkdelete patch. If my understandin
The mention of the changes to the btree scan code in the latest weekly
news got me curious so I started looking at the 'executive summary'
(read as: README) of the patch changes for both the scan patch and the
btbulkdelete patch. If my understanding is correct, vacuum will only see
a speed improvem
Tom Lane wrote:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-01/msg00239.php
>
> Not sure why Peter didn't continue working on it.
I'm still working on the postmaster/postgres merge. But the behavior of
postmaster -o is not going to be removed. That TODO item might be
appropriate in a r
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 07:31:14PM +0200, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Would it be hard to enforce a real check? The implementation could use
GUC settings like 'enforce_array_dimensions' and 'enforce_array_lengths'
that could be set to false for the legacy implementat
Tom Lane wrote:
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Would it be hard to enforce a real check? The implementation could use
GUC settings like 'enforce_array_dimensions' and 'enforce_array_lengths'
that could be set to false for the legacy implementations that rely on
the current beha
> > It will work just fine when you don't, as long as you include the
> > directory where the lib file is in your LIB path. Which is the same
> > way the linker commandline option works. I don't see how
> that makes it
> > useless, though.
>
> If you have to include (the equivalent of) -L in y
"Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It will work just fine when you don't, as long as you include the
> directory where the lib file is in your LIB path. Which is the same way
> the linker commandline option works. I don't see how that makes it
> useless, though.
If you have to include
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Would it be hard to enforce a real check? The implementation could use
> GUC settings like 'enforce_array_dimensions' and 'enforce_array_lengths'
> that could be set to false for the legacy implementations that rely on
> the current behavior.
The fa
I'll see what I can do about expanding my requirements/test
cases. Casting was not in my original test cases.
What else have I missed? Copy domain gripes to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--elein
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 10:19:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Th
On Mon, 08 May 2006 19:08:59 +0100
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 16:00 -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
> > On Tue, 02 May 2006 10:52:38 +0100
> > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 22:14 -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
> > > > I would have gott
On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 16:00 -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
> On Tue, 02 May 2006 10:52:38 +0100
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 22:14 -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
> > > I would have gotten this out sooner but I'm having trouble with our
> > > infrastructure. Here's a link
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 07:31:14PM +0200, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Would it be hard to enforce a real check? The implementation could use
> GUC settings like 'enforce_array_dimensions' and 'enforce_array_lengths'
> that could be set to false for the legacy implementations that rely on
> the curr
> thhal=# CREATE DOMAIN twodims as int[][];
> CREATE DOMAIN
While still not perfect, you can use a CHECK constraint on the domain to
enforce dimension.
It's not perfect because domain constraints are not enforced in all
locations in versions earlier than 8.2. Adding extra explicit casts can
often
> > For VC++ you can add a #pragma directive to the header
> files to direct
> > the compiler/linker to link with a specific library.
>
> Count on Microsoft to invent stupid "features" :-(.
I guess stupid is a relative matter - I find it quite handy.
> If the directive includes a full path t
"Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For VC++ you can add a #pragma directive to the header files to direct
> the compiler/linker to link with a specific library.
Count on Microsoft to invent stupid "features" :-(. If the directive
includes a full path then we can't put it in our stand
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> I can create a function that takes a two dimension int array:
>
> CREATE FUNCTION twodims(int[][]) RETURNS void AS ...
>
> but there's nothing stopping me from calling this function with an
> arbitrary number of dimensions on the array.
>
> I'd like to map a parameter l
When working through my cleanup of the vc++ build scripts, I came across
a handy feature. I originally thought it'd cut down the size of my
scripts, and it does - but not very much. However, it might be handy
elsewhere. I have no idea if this feature is available for other
platforms/compilers.
Fo
Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
while it would be nice to improve that - it is actually documented quite
clearly.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/arrays.html has:
"However, the current implementation does not enforce the array size
limits — the behavior is the same as for arrays of un
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Only allow arrays with one dimension unless the parameter is of a domain
> type (domains are apparently stored with the actual number of
> dimensions).
No, they don't enforce dimensionality any more than ordinary array
columns do. typndims and attnd
I can create a function that takes a two dimension int array:
CREATE FUNCTION twodims(int[][]) RETURNS void AS ...
but there's nothing stopping me from calling this function with an
arbitrary number of dimensions on the array.
I'd like to map a parameter like the one above to a corresponding
22 matches
Mail list logo
