2009/8/6 Tom Lane :
> Pavel Stehule writes:
>> There is fixed patch. Please, Jaime, can you look on it?
>
> Applied with significant revisions. I really wanted this code factored
> out, because we'd otherwise end up duplicating it in other PLs (and it
> was already duplicative of execQual.c). So
Pavel Stehule writes:
> There is fixed patch. Please, Jaime, can you look on it?
Applied with significant revisions. I really wanted this code factored
out, because we'd otherwise end up duplicating it in other PLs (and it
was already duplicative of execQual.c). So I pushed the support code
int
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 4:30 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> forward patch to pg_hackers
>
> There is fixed patch. Please, Jaime, can you look on it?
>
this one passed regression tests and my personal test script (of
course it passed the script the last time too)... i'm doing a lot of
alter table [add|d
forward patch to pg_hackers
There is fixed patch. Please, Jaime, can you look on it?
Thank You
Pavel
2009/7/30 Tom Lane :
> Jaime Casanova writes:
>>> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Alvaro
Getting rid of the check on natts was "ungood" ... it needs to compare
the number of undroppe
