On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 4/17/17 16:19, Keith Fiske wrote:
> > I've reached a roadblock in that bgw_main_arg can only accept a single
> > argument that must be passed by value for a dynamic bgw. I already
> > worked around t
On 4/17/17 16:19, Keith Fiske wrote:
> I've reached a roadblock in that bgw_main_arg can only accept a single
> argument that must be passed by value for a dynamic bgw. I already
> worked around this for passing the database name to the my existing use
> of a bgw with doing partition maintenance (p
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 5:40 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2017/04/18 18:12, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> > At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 16:19:13 -0400, Keith Fiske wrote:
> >> So after reading a recent thread on the steep learning curve for PG
> >> internals [1], I figured I'd share where I've gotten stuck
On 2017/04/18 18:12, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 16:19:13 -0400, Keith Fiske wrote:
>> So after reading a recent thread on the steep learning curve for PG
>> internals [1], I figured I'd share where I've gotten stuck with this in a
>> new thread vs hijacking that one.
>>
>> One o
Hello,
At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 16:19:13 -0400, Keith Fiske wrote in
> So after reading a recent thread on the steep learning curve for PG
> internals [1], I figured I'd share where I've gotten stuck with this in a
> new thread vs hijacking that one.
>
> One of the goals I had with pg_partman was t
So after reading a recent thread on the steep learning curve for PG
internals [1], I figured I'd share where I've gotten stuck with this in a
new thread vs hijacking that one.
One of the goals I had with pg_partman was to see if I could get the
partitioning python scripts redone as C functions usi
