> Bruce Momjian writes:
>
> > Seems I am no longer capable of understanding the affects of such
> > changes as this:
> >
> > ! override CPPFLAGS := -I$(srcdir) $(CPPFLAGS) -DPGSQL71
> >
> > ! override CPPFLAGS += -I$(srcdir) -DPGSQL71
> >
> > Having $(srcdir) before $(CPPFLAGS) must be si
Sorry, I have again messed up this Makefile, and I am glad Tom has put
things back.
Seems I am no longer capable of understanding the affects of such
changes as this:
! override CPPFLAGS := -I$(srcdir) $(CPPFLAGS) -DPGSQL71
! override CPPFLAGS += -I$(srcdir) -DPG
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Seems I am no longer capable of understanding the affects of such
> changes as this:
>
> ! override CPPFLAGS := -I$(srcdir) $(CPPFLAGS) -DPGSQL71
>
> ! override CPPFLAGS += -I$(srcdir) -DPGSQL71
>
> Having $(srcdir) before $(CPPFLAGS) must be significant.
The
Hi,
New version of contrib-intarray is available from
http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/gist/code/7.1/contrib-intarray.tar.gz
>From README.intarray:
March 19, 2001
1. Added support for toastable keys
2. Improved split algorithm for intbig (selection speedup is about 30%)
Reg
I just returned from vacation and identified the problem.
We'll fix it.
Regards,
Oleg
On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I did this, also reinstalled the include-file changes I had made, and
> > then spent several fruitless hours trying to find why the "i
I wrote:
> I did this, also reinstalled the include-file changes I had made, and
> then spent several fruitless hours trying to find why the "intbig" index
> operators fail selftest here (on HP-PA). I suppose it's a portability
> problem, since presumably they pass for Oleg ... but I don't see it
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I only saw that the Makefile is back to how it looked at rev 1.1 before I
> did some work on it. AFAICT the Makefile should be reverted back to the
> previous revision, since the code change does not require any changes to
> the Makefile.
I did this
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I see change of += in CFLAGS (harmless),
Not.
> movement of #include
> , and removal of // comments, which don't appear anymore in
> the code.
I only saw that the Makefile is back to how it looked at rev 1.1 before I
did some work on it. AFAICT the Makefile should be r
I checked README.intarray to see what the most recent date was, and it
was Jan 10, so I knew that this version was newer. I then did a diff -c
against the current CVS and I didn't see anything unusual in the
changes.
Attached is the CVS diff command line showing me all the changes made:
cvs
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Installed in CVS. Thanks.
You overwrote the changes that other people have made meanwhile.
>
> > Mark,
> >
> > we prepared new version of contrib-intarray -
> > index support for 1-D integer arrays using GiST.
> >
> > Changes:
> >
> >
> > - Improved regression test
> >
Installed in CVS. Thanks.
> Mark,
>
> we prepared new version of contrib-intarray -
> index support for 1-D integer arrays using GiST.
>
> Changes:
>
>
> - Improved regression test
> - Current implementation provides index support for one-dimensional
>array of int4's - gist__int_ops, s
Seems we have an older version in CVS. I will update it now. I assume
/contrib is available for changes up until release, as usual.
> Mark,
>
> we prepared new version of contrib-intarray -
> index support for 1-D integer arrays using GiST.
>
> Changes:
>
>
> - Improved regression test
> -
Oleg Bartunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> gist__int_ops| 1007
> gist__intbig_ops | 1007
> we want gist__int_ops to be default index opclass.
> If we delete gist__intbig_ops entry from opclass, then we couldn't use
> gist__intbig_ops !
Put in gist__intbig_ops with zero for the
On Sat, 27 Jan 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Oleg Bartunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > btw, is there way to specify default ops for index ?
>
> Sure, that's what pg_opclass is for. Just insert the opclass name
> and the OID of the type you want it to be the default index opclass
> for.
Tom, we al
Oleg Bartunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> btw, is there way to specify default ops for index ?
Sure, that's what pg_opclass is for. Just insert the opclass name
and the OID of the type you want it to be the default index opclass
for.
regards, tom lane
On Sat, 27 Jan 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Oleg, do you want this in /contrib for 7.1?
yes, if it's possible.
btw, is there way to specify default ops for index ?
We have two methods of index creation for intarrays and
would like to define which should be used by default
>
> > Mark,
> >
> >
Oleg, do you want this in /contrib for 7.1?
> Mark,
>
> we prepared new version of contrib-intarray -
> index support for 1-D integer arrays using GiST.
>
> Changes:
>
>
> - Improved regression test
> - Current implementation provides index support for one-dimensional
>array of int4's
Mark,
we prepared new version of contrib-intarray -
index support for 1-D integer arrays using GiST.
Changes:
- Improved regression test
- Current implementation provides index support for one-dimensional
array of int4's - gist__int_ops, suitable for small and medium size
of arrays, an
18 matches
Mail list logo
