Hi Peter,
On Sunday, December 04, 2011 08:01:34 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On Sunday, December 04, 2011 05:34:44 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > > I have two questions now:
> > >
> > > First, does anybody think it would be worth getting rid of the
> > > duplication from OpenInto
On 10 December 2011 13:56, Greg Smith wrote:
> I heard about some bitrot creeping in here too, but it seems gone now; I had
> no problem merging Peter's development branch against master. I've attached
> a newer patch of the main code, which fixes most of the earlier issues there
> were disclaime
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 12/09/2011 06:27 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> I am not against shipping a dynamic libpgport, but I will just point out
>> that this was never intended or anticipated. Are there any symbols in
>> there that might conflict with other software?
> Possibly. Below is a list
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Julien Tachoires wrote:
> Hi Jaime,
>
> Please find a new version.
>
cool
>> 2) after CLUSTER the index of the toast table gets moved to the same
>> tablespace as the main table
>
there is still a variant of this one, i created 3 tablespaces (datos_tblspc):
"""
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 16:50, Greg Smith wrote:
> Or should we wait for a new update based on the
> feedback that Heikki and Tom have already provided first, perhaps one that
> proposes fixes for these two test cases?
Yes, I will post and updated and rebased version tomorrow.
> Now that you're
On 12/10/2011 12:58 PM, Brar Piening wrote:
I'm currently trying to find some time window in my before chrismas
schedule but it seems like I can't guarantee anything.
Anyhow I'll try to make it happen within "this year".
That's fair, and Andrew or something else may get an itch to just plow
All of the information on the CommitFest app is as accurate as I could
make it now, I made a pass over every open thread there to look for
major changes that hadn't gotten message ID archive links. Since the
official start 13 patches have been committed and 6 bounced out.
Reminder notes have
On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 10:22:54 -0500 Greg Smith
wrote:
> Tom's concerns about the grammar rewrite and way parsing is handled
> here seem the worst blockers for committing this, and I can't imagine
> how those could be resolved before this CommitFest is over. I'm
> going to mark this one as returne
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
In the absence of reaction to this I've marked the patch as "waiting
on author", but if/when I have time I'll work on rearranging things as
above.
Sorry for my non-reaction.
I'm currently trying to find some time window in my before chrismas
schedule but it seems like
2011/12/9 Robert Haas :
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>> My first impression remind me an idea that I proposed before, even
>> though it got negative response due to user visible changes.
>> It requires superuser privilege to create new operators, since we
>> assume superus
On fre, 2011-12-09 at 13:44 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > The problem is, this breaks the regression tests, because first the
> > actual output changes, and second the line numbers get included, which
> > will create a mess every time you edit a test. Not sure whether we c
On 10/02/2011 05:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I'm with Noah on this. If allowing same-user cancels is enough to solve
95% or 99% of the real-world use cases, let's just do that.
And we're back full circle. This is basically where Josh Kuperschmidt
started in early 2010:
http://archives.postgresql
On 12/09/2011 06:27 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
In the Fedora world, a static lib would go in postgresql-devel, but a
dynamic lib would go in postgresql-libs, which is also where libpq is
shipped.
I am not against shipping a dynamic libpgport, but I will just point out
that this was never intende
On mån, 2011-12-05 at 13:12 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Jan Urbański wrote:
> > On 05/12/11 18:58, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > On ons, 2011-11-23 at 19:58 +0100, Jan Urba?ski wrote:
> > >> On 20/11/11 19:14, Steve Singer wrote:
> > >> Responding now to all questions and attaching a revised patc
2011/12/10 Greg Smith :
> On 11/30/2011 10:42 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>
>> Regress tests are really large - it is question if about 900 lines is
>> necessary - should be more compact
>>
>
>
> Can't recall the last time I heard a complaint about having too many
> regression tests for new code. We
I wrote:
> ... the leaf tuple datatype is hard-wired to be
> the same as the indexed column's type. Why is that? It seems to me
> to be both confusing and restrictive. For instance, if you'd designed
> the suffix tree opclass just a little differently, it would be wanting
> to store "char" not t
On 11/30/2011 10:42 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Regress tests are really large - it is question if about 900 lines is
necessary - should be more compact
Can't recall the last time I heard a complaint about having too many
regression tests for new code. We've got some bit rot, code convention
On 2011-12-07 19:59, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Two excellent finds. Here is an updated patch with fixes.
Thanks.. I'm sorry I cannot yet provide a complete review, but since the
end of the commitfest is near, I decided to mail them anyway instead of
everything on dec 15.
* ExecGrant_type() pr
On 12/07/2011 04:58 PM, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
PS: I forgot to mention that 2 test cases covering the two above query
types are deliberately left failing in the v4-wip patch.
It's not completely clear what happens next with this. Are you hoping
code churn here has calmed down enough for Ja
On 12/02/2011 06:48 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
Rebased with head.
Could you comment a little more on what changed? There were a couple of
areas Tom commented on:
-General code fixes
-"pull out and apply the changes related to the RANGE_CONTAIN_EMPTY
flag, and also remove the <> opclass
On 10/02/2011 07:10 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
Your proposals involve sending additional information from the master to
the slave, but the slave already knows both its WAL position and the
timestamp of the transaction it has most recently replayed, because
the startup process on the slave tracks that
Hi Noah,
thanks for your feedback.
Il 20/11/11 14:05, Noah Misch ha scritto:
What about making ON UPDATE CASCADE an error? That way, we can say that ARRAY
always applies to array elements, and plain always applies to
entire rows.
SET DEFAULT should now be fine to allow. It's ARRAY SET DEF
22 matches
Mail list logo
