Ühel kenal päeval, E, 2007-04-02 kell 19:36, kirjutas Joshua D. Drake:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> Added to TODO:
> >>> * Add idle_timeout GUC so locks are not held for log periods of time
> >
> >> That should actually be tran
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 10:01:44PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> So, hum, what happened to the idea of creating the array types only
>> on demand?
> Scotched, as far as I could tell,
More like "you submitted a patch that entirely ignores multiple peopl
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> it's problem. You cannot do it now. One year ago I sent patch
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-03/msg00196.php
The only comments to that were that no one knew what it was good for.
But now we know, so I think we should add your patch.
--
Peter Eisent
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 10:01:44PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list
> > at:
> >
> > http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
> >
> > It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL commit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes:
> Chris Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes:
>>> ... tuning the TOAST parameters seems like
>>> something we understand well enough already, we just need to put some
>>> cycles into testing different alternatives. I would h
Jeff,
Your conclusions sound great - can you perhaps put the timings in a column
in your table so we can confirm them?
- Luke
On 4/2/07 4:14 PM, "Jeff Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I posted some fairly detailed benchmark results for my Synchronized Scan
> patch and it's interactions with
I wrote:
> ... should we revel
> in configurability, and allow CREATE TABLE/ALTER TABLE behavior to vary
> depending on the current threshold setting? We'd have to fix the
> toaster routines to not try to push stuff out-of-line when there is no
> out-of-line to push to ... but I think we probably
I wrote:
> Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Is there any reason to experiment with this? I would have thought we would
>> divorce TOAST_MAX_CHUNK_SIZE from TOAST_THRESHOLD and hard code it as the
>> same
>> expression that's there now. Ie, the largest size that can fit in a page.
> No
TODO updated:
* Add idle_in_transaction_timeout GUC so locks are not held for long
periods of time
---
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
I will write a technical document about Sigres in a week.
Hideyuki
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I am still unclear why sigres is better than a temporary file system. I
relize your patch is faster, but what is about your patch that makes it
faster.
And if we were going to add such capability, we would
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Added to TODO:
> * Add idle_timeout GUC so locks are not held for log periods of time
BTW, before I forget it: there's a non-obvious consideration here, which
is not breaking the query protocol. I suspect that we cannot send an
unsolicited ERROR m
Tom Lane wrote:
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Added to TODO:
* Add idle_timeout GUC so locks are not held for log periods of time
That should actually be transaction_idle_timeout. It is o.k. for us to
be IDLE... it is not o.k. for us to be IDLE in Transac
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Added to TODO:
>> * Add idle_timeout GUC so locks are not held for log periods of time
> That should actually be transaction_idle_timeout. It is o.k. for us to
> be IDLE... it is not o.k. for us to be IDLE in Transaction
Or
Chris Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes:
>> ... tuning the TOAST parameters seems like
>> something we understand well enough already, we just need to put some
>> cycles into testing different alternatives. I would have no objection
>> to someone working on t
Fixed.
---
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Added to TODO:
> >
> > * Add idle_timeout GUC so locks are not held for log periods of time
> >
> >
> >
>
> ITYM long periods.
>
>
> cheers
>
>
> andrew
fixed.
---
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Added to TODO:
> >
> > * Add idle_timeout GUC so locks are not held for log periods of time
> >
>
> That should actually be transaction_idle_timeout. It is
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Added to TODO:
* Add idle_timeout GUC so locks are not held for log periods of time
ITYM long periods.
cheers
andrew
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
>
> http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
>
> It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
> and approves it.
>
So, hum, what happened to the idea of creati
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Added to TODO:
* Add idle_timeout GUC so locks are not held for log periods of time
That should actually be transaction_idle_timeout. It is o.k. for us to
be IDLE... it is not o.k. for us to be IDLE in Transaction
Joshua D. Drake
-
Added to TODO:
* Allow all data types to cast to and from TEXT
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg00017.php
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The attached patch
Added to TODO:
* Add idle_timeout GUC so locks are not held for log periods of time
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Russell Smith wrote:
> >> I agree with this, it reduces th
ITAGAKI Takahiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It looks like the bgwriter gets starved waiting on the
>> CheckpointStartLock. The CheckpointStartLock is held in shared mode over
>> an XLogFlush when committing, which on an extremely busy system lik
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom, are you going to do this for 8.3?
Right, I promised to do that --- will work on it now.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL p
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.
---
Ch
Tom, are you going to do this for 8.3?
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> In another thread I wrote:
> > ... One thing I was just thinking about is that it's silly to have
> > the threshold constrained so strongly by a desire that tuples
On 2007-04-02, Mark Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's the code for the new chr() function:
>
> if (pg_database_encoding_max_length() > 1 && !lc_ctype_is_c())
Clearly wrong - this allows returning invalid UTF8 data in locale C, which
is not an uncommon setting to use.
Treating the pa
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It looks like the bgwriter gets starved waiting on the
> CheckpointStartLock. The CheckpointStartLock is held in shared mode over
> an XLogFlush when committing, which on an extremely busy system like a
> benchmark is always long enough to have a
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.
---
Da
Mark Dilger wrote:
Since chr() is defined in oracle_compat.c, I decided to look at what
Oracle might do. See
http://download-west.oracle.com/docs/cd/B10501_01/server.920/a96540/functions18a.htm
It looks to me like they are doing the same thing that I did, though I
don't have Oracle instal
I am currently finishing off an improved VACUUM implementation for
bitmaps. The rest of the patch is ready for review.
I will try and post a patch within 24 hours.
Gavin
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Where are we on this?
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Pavan Deolasee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On 3/28/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> It seems a bit brute-force. Why didn't you use SearchSysCache(INDEXRELID)
> >
I posted some fairly detailed benchmark results for my Synchronized Scan
patch and it's interactions with Simon Riggs' Recycle Buffers patch
here:
http://j-davis.com/postgresql/patch15-results.html
The results are in the form of log files that contain lots of useful
debugging info:
* log_executo
As you can see from my email traffic today, we have a significant number
of patches that were never completed by the authors, or were completed
but not adjusted and resubmitted based on community feedback. I feel
we have more this release than usual. I warned about this last week.
Not sure what
Mark Dilger wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Mark Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
pgsql=# select chr(14989485);
chr
-
ä¸
(1 row)
Is there a principled rationale for this particular behavior as
opposed to any other?
In particular, in UTF8 land I'd have expected the argument of chr()
to be inter
"test" version, but I am putting in the queue so we can track it there.
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.
---
Where is this patch?
---
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 11:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 11:15 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> It strikes me tha
Mark Dilger wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Mark Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
pgsql=# select chr(14989485);
chr
-
ä¸
(1 row)
Is there a principled rationale for this particular behavior as
opposed to any other?
In particular, in UTF8 land I'd have expected the argument of chr()
to be inter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes:
> "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Well it certainly seems worth separating them. It does seem possible
>> that recursive toasting effected some of the earlier results we looked
>> at.
>
>> Would you like me to do this, or will you?
>
> I'm willing t
Tom Lane wrote:
Mark Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
pgsql=# select chr(14989485);
chr
-
ä¸
(1 row)
Is there a principled rationale for this particular behavior as
opposed to any other?
In particular, in UTF8 land I'd have expected the argument of chr()
to be interpreted as a Unicode
Where are we on Python 2.5?
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> No, it just looks like a Python API 2.5 change to me
>
> > Attached is a patch that fixes the warnings. Unfortunately, it seems
Added to TODO:
o Have timestamp subtraction not call justify_hours()?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-sql/2006-10/msg00059.php
---
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Yes, but if it was '2004-01-02 01:00:00'-'200
Mark Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> pgsql=# select chr(14989485);
>> chr
>> -
>> ä¸
>> (1 row)
Is there a principled rationale for this particular behavior as
opposed to any other?
In particular, in UTF8 land I'd have expected the argument of chr()
to be interpreted as a Unicode code
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 13:29 -0500, Doug Knight wrote:
>
> > I would preserve the existing trigger function as little t "-t", and
> > maybe implement a catchup trigger function as big t "-T"? Set it up so
> > that if the first attempt to find the WAL file postgres is currently
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.
---
He
PG Hackers,
We've had a proposal to work on Async I/O for Google SoC, and it's a great
looking proposal. However, none of the current SoC mentors feels up to
taking it on; is there any hacker who can do it?
I'd hate to drop this proposal just because we can't mentor it. Anyone?
--
--Josh
Mark Dilger wrote:
Andrew - Supernews wrote:
On 2007-04-01, Mark Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do any of the string functions (see
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/functions-string.html)
run the risk of generating invalid utf8 encoded strings? Do I need
to add checks?
Are
Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Just to distinguish postmasters from standalone backends in the error
>> messages. I think that's still useful.
> I'm not sure what you mean. It is used only in CreatePidFile function
> and I think that if directory is locked by some
Andrew - Supernews wrote:
On 2007-04-01, Mark Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do any of the string functions (see
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/functions-string.html) run the
risk of generating invalid utf8 encoded strings? Do I need to add checks?
Are there known bugs with
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> > FYI, I am ready to move uncompleted patches into the 8.4 hold queue when
> > we are ready.
>
> What about the patches for which the submitters are waiting for other
> pending patches? Some of the patches in your "uncomplete" list match that
> description ...
Bruce,
> FYI, I am ready to move uncompleted patches into the 8.4 hold queue when
> we are ready.
What about the patches for which the submitters are waiting for other
pending patches? Some of the patches in your "uncomplete" list match that
description ...
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> What sort of "wait for finish" mechanism do you have in mind?
> I was thinking of XactLockTableWait.
Ugh. I don't think the bgwriter can participate in heavyweight-lockmgr
operations, or should become able to.
Nor will that wor
Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IIRC there's something odd about the scope of the declared struct label.
> Something like it previously extended to the end of the file but post-ANSI was
> limited to the scope it's declared in (including very limited scopes where it
> would be useless s
Because this patch was not completed, I have added it to the TODO list:
* Fix to_date()-related functions to consistently issue errors
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg00915.php
---
Brendan Jurd w
Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >>> Can I declare a struct in a function's declaration section?
> >
> >> It works fine with Sun Studio 11.
> >
> > AFAICT it's required by the original K&R C b
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> (PS: Is standalone backend same as --single switch?)
Yes.
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.
---
Ko
Added to TODO:
o Allow PL/Python to return boolean rather than 1/0
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-01/msg00596$
---
Guido Goldstein wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Guido Goldstein w
Tom Lane wrote:
Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
1) Is there still some reason have negative value in postmaster.pid?
Just to distinguish postmasters from standalone backends in the error
messages. I think that's still useful.
I'm not sure what you mean. It is used only in CreatePi
Actually, can we now say we only support OS/X 10.3 and later. If so, we
can use the patch unchanged.
---
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Ah, I already had this on the TODO list with URLs, so I will not put it
> in the hold queue.
Ah, I already had this on the TODO list with URLs, so I will not put it
in the hold queue.
---
Chris Campbell wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2006, at 14:29, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Looks good, but I don't think we want to abandon OSX 10.
Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
As a proposed fix, instead of acquiring the CheckpointStartLock in
RecordTransactionCommit, we set a flag in MyProc saying "commit in
progress". Checkpoint will scan through the procarray and make note of
any commit in progress tra
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Can I declare a struct in a function's declaration section?
>
>> It works fine with Sun Studio 11.
>
> AFAICT it's required by the original K&R C book.
IIRC there's something odd about
Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Can I declare a struct in a function's declaration section?
> It works fine with Sun Studio 11.
AFAICT it's required by the original K&R C book.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broa
With no new version from the author and no working version for all
supported OS/X version, I am saving this patch for 8.4.
This has been saved for the 8.4 release:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold
--
Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1) Is there still some reason have negative value in postmaster.pid?
Just to distinguish postmasters from standalone backends in the error
messages. I think that's still useful.
> 2) Why 100? What race condition should happen? This piece of code looks
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 05:08:42PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > After several rounds of patches, it appears that it might be easier to
> > create a new typtype entry, which I'll tentatively call 'a' because it
> > seems a little fragile and a lot inelegant a
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Should we announce? There is some web work etc.. to be done.
Sure. I don't remember us doing anything special to annouce feature
freeze, but if there is something, please go ahead.
FYI, I am ready to move uncompleted patches into the 8.4 hold queue when
we ar
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Can I declare a struct in a function's declaration section? Something
like this:
static void
foobar(void)
{
struct foo {
Oid foo;
int bar;
};
struct foo baz;
baz.foo = InvalidOid;
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As a proposed fix, instead of acquiring the CheckpointStartLock in
> RecordTransactionCommit, we set a flag in MyProc saying "commit in
> progress". Checkpoint will scan through the procarray and make note of
> any commit in progress transactions,
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Can I declare a struct in a function's declaration section? Something
> like this:
>
> static void
> foobar(void)
> {
> struct foo {
> Oid foo;
> int bar;
> };
>
> struct foo baz;
>
> baz.foo = I
Can I declare a struct in a function's declaration section? Something
like this:
static void
foobar(void)
{
struct foo {
Oid foo;
int bar;
};
struct foo baz;
baz.foo = InvalidOid;
baz.bar = 42;
}
I
Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
Related to this, when are we going to get the Japanese po files in the
core distribution?
No idea. In my understanding, current message translating system has
serious problem if wrong locale and encoding is provided(has this
issue been solved in 8.3?).
That's certainly true,
I'm seeing a problem on my benchmark machine: checkpoints stop happening
after the ramp-up period.
It looks like the bgwriter gets starved waiting on the
CheckpointStartLock. The CheckpointStartLock is held in shared mode over
an XLogFlush when committing, which on an extremely busy system lik
I'm looking on pid file creation code (src/backend/utils/init/miscinit.c
- CreateLockFile) and I have couple of questions:
1) Is there still some reason have negative value in postmaster.pid? It
happens only if backend runs in single mode. But I think now is not
necessary to use it. And there
On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 12:20 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ISTM we've just invented the concept of one-time plans to allow CREATE
> > INDEX to work effectively with HOT.
>
> > I'd like to extend that thought back over towards constraint exclusion.
> > Curren
Right, no updated patch submitted.
---
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 14:05 -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> > On 3/17/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > "Jaime Casanova" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 14:05 -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On 3/17/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Jaime Casanova" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > On 3/5/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> In the second place, it's a serious violation of what little modularity
> > >> and
Added to TODO:
o Add PQexecf() that allows complex parameter substitution
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg01803.php
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > That's exactly the approach I d
All,
> You can be as selective as you want about enforcing patents ---
> copyright/trademark enforcement does require consistent enforcement.
I'm not sure that's the case, actually. Of course, I'm not an attorney ...
but then, neither are you.
What is it about -hackers that people love to spec
Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
> On Sun, April 1, 2007 01:32, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > The idea of OIN is to have a large patent pool that can be
> > counter-asserted against anyone who doesn't want to play nice.
> > Mutual assured destruction in the patent sphere, if you will.
>
> And from the particip
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am Montag, 2. April 2007 09:17 schrieb Tom Lane:
>> The scheme that was in the back of my mind was to do this at the same
>> time as providing a general facility for casting *every* type to and
>> from text, by means of their I/O functions if no specia
Hello,
Should we announce? There is some web work etc.. to be done.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ISTM we've just invented the concept of one-time plans to allow CREATE
> INDEX to work effectively with HOT.
> I'd like to extend that thought back over towards constraint exclusion.
> Currently we don't allow STABLE functions to be used for constraint
>
Am Montag, 2. April 2007 09:17 schrieb Tom Lane:
> The scheme that was in the back of my mind was to do this at the same
> time as providing a general facility for casting *every* type to and
> from text, by means of their I/O functions if no specialized cast is
> provided in pg_cast. This would i
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 12:01:33PM -0400, Oscar Täckström wrote:
> I am working on a course project on implementing collection of statistics
> on views in pgsql. The statistics will be used in conjunction with view
> matching in the optimizer, to improve selectivity estimates.
Interesting idea...
ISTM we've just invented the concept of one-time plans to allow CREATE
INDEX to work effectively with HOT.
I'd like to extend that thought back over towards constraint exclusion.
Currently we don't allow STABLE functions to be used for constraint
exclusion because that mean plans were valid only i
Hi,
I am working on a course project on implementing collection of statistics
on views in pgsql. The statistics will be used in conjunction with view
matching in the optimizer, to improve selectivity estimates.
For this to be possible, I need to be able to execute view definitions
from within the
Please see the HOT version 6.3 patch posted on pgsql-patches.
I've implemented support for CREATE INDEX and CREATE INDEX
CONCURRENTLY based on the recent discussions. The implementation
is not yet complete and needs some more testing/work/discussion
before we can start considering it for review.
I'm informed that the last statement of a function that returns void cannot
be a SELECT. How else is one supposed to call another function which also
returns void?
E.g.,
CREATE FUNCTION foo (a int, b int) RETURNS void
LANGUAGE plpgsql
AS $$ do important things $$;
CREATE FUNC
On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 07:16:19PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >> It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release
> > >> that has it.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The attached patch changes all implicit casts to text to assignment and
> cleans up the associated regression test damage. This change has been
> discussed for the longest time; I propose that we bite the bullet and
> do it now.
[ I'm assuming thi
91 matches
Mail list logo
