From: Heikki Linnakangas [heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2012 1:54 AM
On 30.06.2012 10:11, Amit kapila wrote:
>> 3. General observation, not related to your changes
>> XLogInsert(RmgrId rmid, uint8 info, XLogRecData *rdata)
>>.
>>.
>> if (freespace == 0)
>>
Hello,
I tried to perform a submission review of your relation metapages patch,
but it does not apply cleanly to the current master (fa188b5). I've
attached the rejects file for your review.
Regards,
Albert
gist.c.rej
Description: application/reject
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing lis
Hello,
I tried to perform a submission review of your relation metapages patch,
but it does not apply cleanly to the current master (fa188b5). I've
attached the rejects file for your review.
Regards,
Albert
gist.c.rej
Description: application/reject
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing li
On 30/06/2012 04:16, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
>
> Hi, I've been reviewing this patch.
>
> Good documentation, and regression tests. The code looked fine but I
> didn't care for the code duplication between array_replace and
> array_remove so I merged those into a helper function,
> array_replace_int
On lör, 2012-06-30 at 11:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> It'd be better to put a disclaimer at the front pointing out that some
> of these items are unfinished because of lack of consensus, not just
> lack of code.
There is a fairly extensive disclaimer at the top of the wiki page.
Maybe it was added
On 30.06.2012 10:11, Amit kapila wrote:
ReadRecord(XLogRecPtr *RecPtr, int emode, bool fetching_ckpt)
+ /*
+ * If we got the whole header already, validate it immediately. Otherwise
+ * we validate it after reading the rest of the header from the next page.
+ */
+ if (targetRecOff<= XLOG_BLCKS
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 02:59:07PM +0200, Rikard Pavelic wrote:
> How hard would it be to rewrite table content on composite attribute type
> change?
I wouldn't anticipate especially-thorny challenges.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your
Markus Wanner writes:
> To me, it looks like TODO is just a misnomer. The file should be named
> TODISCUSS, IDEAS, or something. But the current file name implies consensus.
> Wouldn't renaming solve that kind of misunderstanding?
I think there are enough references to "the TODO list" in our arc
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> But my point was, there aren't any unused code warnings. None of the
> commonly used compilers issue any. I'd be interested to know if there
> is any recent C compiler supported by PostgreSQL that issues some kind
> of unused code warning under any circumstances, and s
Em 29/06/2012 20:36, Edson Richter escreveu:
I've tried to compile ODBC fdw on Win64 with all sort of compilers
without success (MingGW, gcc-win32, MS C++2005 32 and 64).
I think I'm getting too old for this so many switches, too many
dependencies.
Could a gently soul help me get back on track,
How hard would it be to rewrite table content on composite attribute type
change?
For simple use cases:
create type complex as (i int, j int);
create table numbers (c complex);
insert into numbers values(row(1,2));
I can work around
alter complex from int to bigint
"fairly" easy with
alter type
Le samedi 30 juin 2012 11:39:09, Markus Wanner a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> On 06/22/2012 05:38 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > I think the real problem with the TODO list is that some people see it
> > as some sort of official roadmap, and it really isn't. Neither is there
> > anything else that is.
>
> To
On fre, 2012-06-29 at 17:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yes. The problem with trying to change that is that it's damned if
> you do and damned if you don't: compilers that are aware that abort()
> doesn't return will complain about unreachable code if we keep those
> extra variable initializations, w
On 28 June 2012 14:02, Rob Wultsch wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 8:16 AM, David E. Wheeler
> wrote:
>> I'm particularly intrigued by "covering indexes". For example:
>>
>> CREATE INDEX cover1 ON table1(a,b) COVERING(c,d);
>
> IRC MS SQL also allow unindexed columns in the index.
For what
Hi,
Currently its possible to cause transactions to fail with ALTER ENUM ADD
AFTER/BEFORE:
psql 1:
CREATE TYPE enumcrash AS ENUM('a', 'b');
CREATE FUNCTION randenum() RETURNS enumcrash LANGUAGE sql AS $$SELECT * FROM
unnest(enum_range('a'::enumcrash)) ORDER BY random() LIMIT 1$$;
CREATE TABLE
Hi,
On 06/22/2012 05:38 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I think the real problem with the TODO list is that some people see it
> as some sort of official roadmap, and it really isn't. Neither is there
> anything else that is.
To me, it looks like TODO is just a misnomer. The file should be named
TODI
While reading patch-3 (3-allow-wal-record-header-to-be-split.patch) of
WAL Format
Changes(http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4fda5136.6080...@enterprisedb.com),
I had few observations which are summarized below:
1.
ReadRecord(XLogRecPtr *RecPtr, int emode, bool fetching_ckpt)
+ /*
+ * If
17 matches
Mail list logo
