-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 03:16:05AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
[...]
> [...] But it sure cost me a few cycles to
> realize that the files I copied from my Windows host to my Fedora VM were
> just not the thing perl would like.
Had it been a Windows-
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 11:37 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:36:04PM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 2:06 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
> >
> > > About the comment in chomp: did you try to use different values of $/?
> > >
> > >
> > Well, now that I h
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:36:04PM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 2:06 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>
> > About the comment in chomp: did you try to use different values of $/?
> >
> >
> Well, now that I have tried it, yes, setting $/ to '\r\n' does give me what
> I expected.
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 2:06 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> About the comment in chomp: did you try to use different values of $/?
>
>
Well, now that I have tried it, yes, setting $/ to '\r\n' does give me what
I expected. Both expected and result files should have the same kind of line
endings thoug
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 2:06 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> About the comment in chomp: did you try to use different values of $/?
>
>
Nope.. I think my first mail in this thread declared me a noob in perl :).
So I'd appreciate if someone could improve it perl-wise.
Thanks and best regards,
--
Lets
About the comment in chomp: did you try to use different values of $/?
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subsc
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:00 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:34:38AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > David Fetter writes:
> > > * It's going to a lot of trouble to allow for the possibility of both
> > > unordered results and of duplicate lines. If we disallow duplicate
> > >
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:34:38AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter writes:
> > * It's going to a lot of trouble to allow for the possibility of both
> > unordered results and of duplicate lines. If we disallow duplicate
> > lines in unordered result sets, we can get a big speed gain by
David Fetter writes:
> * It's going to a lot of trouble to allow for the possibility of both
> unordered results and of duplicate lines. If we disallow duplicate
> lines in unordered result sets, we can get a big speed gain by using
> hash-based comparisons.
Why not just sort the lines and
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 07:41:29PM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> > > Greg Stark writes:
> > >> I'm not sure about that. It seems like race conditions with autovacuum
> > >> are a real potential bug that it would be nice to be testing for.
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Greg Stark writes:
> >> I'm not sure about that. It seems like race conditions with autovacuum
> >> are a real potential bug that it would be nice to be testing for.
> >
> > It's not a bug
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Stark writes:
>> I'm not sure about that. It seems like race conditions with autovacuum
>> are a real potential bug that it would be nice to be testing for.
>
> It's not a bug; it's a limitation of our testing framework that it sees
> this as
Greg Stark writes:
> I'm not sure about that. It seems like race conditions with autovacuum
> are a real potential bug that it would be nice to be testing for.
It's not a bug; it's a limitation of our testing framework that it sees
this as a failure. Serious testing for autovac race conditions
Sorry for top-posting -- stupid apple mail client...
I'm not sure about that. It seems like race conditions with autovacuum
are a real potential bug that it would be nice to be testing for.
Another solution would be adding an order by clause - effectively
trading coverage of unordered raw s
Every so often the buildfarm shows row-ordering differences in the copy2
test, for example
http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=jaguar&dt=2009-06-13%2003:00:02
("jaguar" seems particularly prone to this for some reason, but other
members have shown it too.) I believe what is happening
15 matches
Mail list logo
