any interaction with user.
It does not create any backward compatibility issues.
Not does it have any performance impact.
regards
bogdan
>From 450c339b4284887782b30e154766a0ee90d6f7ee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Bogdan Pilch
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 19:42:29 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] BPI: Ad
y it
is now, then it would be worth considering?
Now I understand why it says that a discussion is recommended before
implementing and posting. ;-)
bogdan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
How about, the format of psql duration can be set via some ...
backslash command or commdn line switch? And the default of course
remains the current behavior?
bogdan
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2014-09-28 20:32:30 -0400, Gregory Smith wrote:
> >> On 9/28/14, 7:49 AM,
s not create any backward compatibility issues as the default
behavior remains unchanged.
regards
bogdan
>From e3ba6cda83b64246c2b4d3df01f62444f4b37c9d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Bogdan Pilch
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 18:59:12 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Implemented support for turning off/on tab co
issues if some SQL developers
assumed that the format is always ..
regards
bogdan
>From 25b2e3f9d888ecf0cc6fe0fbb569004cf9ce315b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Bogdan Pilch
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 23:20:18 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] BPI: Implemented enhancement f timing feature (displaying
time in a m
%d", arg_type);
PG_RETURN_NULL();
}
select myfunc(mytable) from mytable;
arg_type 65754
select 'mytable'::regclass::oid
65752
I expected them to be equal.
What gives?
For other table the results are 65783 vs 65785.
I'm running v 8.4.3
Thanks,
Bogdan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing l
ument? 8.4 is *already* late; arguing further about the terms of SE
>>> simply risk us being forced to reject it entirely.
>>>
>>
>> I absolutely agree. It nonsense open again and again closed question.
>
> I also agree. What we should do now is to make progress th
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 02:29:39PM +0200, BogDan Vatra wrote:
>> [..]
>> >> A message for postgresql decision board:
>> >>
>> >> Dear postgresql hackers, if I can do something to push row level
>> >> acl for 8.4 please tell me, I do an
hers ask me)
to push row level acl to vanilla 8.4, that why I don't think 2-3 more
weeks matter.
PLEASE try to push this patches to 8.4 (I don't see row level acl here:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/CommitFestInProgress).
Thanks,
BogDan,
[..]
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
riggers.
>
>For example, please consider when a user "kaigai" insert a tuple into
"customer_products", the "{rwd=kaigai}" is assigned to the tuple, but
the "{rwd=bogdan}" is assigned when a user "bogdan" do same thing.
>
> In this
level security, this seems to be very hard to do.
- the possibility to create "FOREIGN KEY"s who reference views or the
possibility to "CHECK" a cell of a row with a subquery in our example
something like this:"CHECK (id_customer IN (select id from view_customers))&qu
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Bogdan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I can't make configuration to get "filesystem blocks in/out"
> > to show valid data.
> > Im only getting "0/0" all the time.
> > Is that functionality available in postgres 7
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bogdan)
Newsgroups: comp.databases.postgresql.questions
Subject: help with I/O statistics in 7.3.1
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.98.224.90
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I can't make configuration to get "filesystem blocks in/out"
to show valid data.
Im o
13 matches
Mail list logo
