"Darren King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How about creating an SQL statement that will make the change and
> putting a blurb about it it in the README, INSTALL and/or FAQ?
In theory we could do that, but I doubt it's worth the trouble.
Hash on macaddr has never worked (until my upcoming commit
"Mikheev, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
hashable. Either change will not take effect without an initdb,
however, and I'm loath to force one now that we've started beta.
>>
>> If we're going to add CRC to log then we need
>> in beta anyway...
> Ops - we need in INITDB...
Not to m
> We could fix this either by adding a new hash function to support
> macaddr, or by removing the pg_amXXX entries that claim macaddr is
> hashable. Either change will not take effect without an initdb,
> however, and I'm loath to force one now that we've started beta.
How about creating an SQL
> > We could fix this either by adding a new hash function to support
> > macaddr, or by removing the pg_amXXX entries that claim macaddr is
> > hashable. Either change will not take effect without an initdb,
> > however, and I'm loath to force one now that we've started beta.
>
> If we're going
> We could fix this either by adding a new hash function to support
> macaddr, or by removing the pg_amXXX entries that claim macaddr is
> hashable. Either change will not take effect without an initdb,
> however, and I'm loath to force one now that we've started beta.
If we're going to add CRC
