On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 07:40:31AM -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
> >That we're in the position of having prevN_wd for N = 1..5 as the
> >current code exists is a sign that we need to refactor the whole
> >thing, as you've suggested before.
> >
> >I'll work up a design and prototype
David Fetter wrote:
That we're in the position of having prevN_wd for N = 1..5 as the
current code exists is a sign that we need to refactor the whole
thing, as you've suggested before.
I'll work up a design and prototype for this by this weekend.
Great. I don't think issues around tab com
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:48:54PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 9:15 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> >> Patch attached. If you think my changes are ok,
> >> please change the patch status to "Ready for Committer".
> >
> > Done :)
>
> I have committed part of this patch.
Great!
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 9:15 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>> Patch attached. If you think my changes are ok,
>> please change the patch status to "Ready for Committer".
>
> Done :)
I have committed part of this patch. The rest is attached. I don't
know that there's any problem with it, but I ran out
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 08:13:37PM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 18:18, David Fetter wrote:
> >> It expands all tables (and views) in tab-completion after INSERT,
> >> UPDATE, and DELETE FROM. Is it an intended change?
>
> I found it was a simple bug; we need ( ) aroun
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 18:18, David Fetter wrote:
>> It expands all tables (and views) in tab-completion after INSERT,
>> UPDATE, and DELETE FROM. Is it an intended change?
I found it was a simple bug; we need ( ) around selcondition.
In addition, I modified your patch a bit:
* I added a sepa
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 05:48:04PM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 12:21, David Fetter wrote:
> > Please find attached a patch changing both this and "updateable" to
> > "updatable," also per the very handy git grep I just learned about :)
>
> I think the patch has two is
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 12:21, David Fetter wrote:
> Please find attached a patch changing both this and "updateable" to
> "updatable," also per the very handy git grep I just learned about :)
I think the patch has two issues to be fixed.
It expands all tables (and views) in tab-completion after
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 11:01:28PM -0500, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:21 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> > Please find attached a patch changing both this and "updateable" to
> > "updatable," also per the very handy git grep I just learned about :)
>
> I looked a little more at
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:21 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> Please find attached a patch changing both this and "updateable" to
> "updatable," also per the very handy git grep I just learned about :)
I looked a little more at this patch today. I didn't find any serious
problems, though it would have
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 09:37:57PM -0500, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:33 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> > That seems like a matter for a separate patch. Looking this over, I
> > found I'd created a query that can never get used, so please find
> > enclosed the next version of
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:33 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> That seems like a matter for a separate patch. Looking this over, I
> found I'd created a query that can never get used, so please find
> enclosed the next version of the patch :)
I like "deletables" better than "deleteables" for
Query_for_
Excerpts from David Fetter's message of dom nov 21 21:17:12 -0300 2010:
> Given its small and isolated nature, I was hoping we could get this in
> sooner rather than later. As I understand it, CFs are there to review
> patches that take significant effort for even a committer to
> understand, so
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 08:27:34PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 7:17 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 07:09:08PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 4:05 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> >> >> > Could someone please commit this? :)
> >> >>
> >
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 7:17 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 07:09:08PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 4:05 PM, David Fetter wrote:
>> >> > Could someone please commit this? :)
>> >>
>> >> Eh... was there some reason you didn't add it to the CommitFest app?
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 07:09:08PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 4:05 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> >> > Could someone please commit this? :)
> >>
> >> Eh... was there some reason you didn't add it to the CommitFest app?
> >
> > I forgot.
>
> A fair excuse. :-)
>
> >> Because
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 4:05 PM, David Fetter wrote:
>> > Could someone please commit this? :)
>>
>> Eh... was there some reason you didn't add it to the CommitFest app?
>
> I forgot.
A fair excuse. :-)
>> Because that's what I work from.
>
> It's pretty trivial, but I don't feel comfortable ad
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 03:36:58PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 1:07 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 08:33:00AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:55:07AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Davi
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 1:07 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 08:33:00AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:55:07AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:34 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>> > >> Do we need to 'add' it?
>> > > Possibly. My
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 08:33:00AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:55:07AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:34 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> > >> Do we need to 'add' it?
> > > Possibly. My understanding is that it couldn't really replace it.
> >
>
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:55:07AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:34 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> >> Do we need to 'add' it?
> > Possibly. My understanding is that it couldn't really replace it.
>
> Ah, I see. I was wrong. We can have modification privileges for
> vie
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:35:13PM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On 25 October 2010 21:01, David Fetter wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > Please find attached patch for $subject :)
> >
>
> Thanks for looking at this. I forgot about tab completion.
>
> I think that the change to ALTER TRIGGER is not neces
On 25 October 2010 21:01, David Fetter wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Please find attached patch for $subject :)
>
Thanks for looking at this. I forgot about tab completion.
I think that the change to ALTER TRIGGER is not necessary. AFAICT it
works OK unmodified. In fact, the modified code here:
*** 971,9
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:34 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>> Do we need to 'add' it?
> Possibly. My understanding is that it couldn't really replace it.
Ah, I see. I was wrong. We can have modification privileges for views
even if they have no INSTEAD OF triggers.
So, I think your original patch is
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:10:53AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:53 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> >> How about has_table_privilege() to filter candidate relations
> >
> > That's orthogonal to tgtype (snip) Shall I send a new patch with
> > that added?
>
> Do we need to '
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:53 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>> How about has_table_privilege() to filter candidate relations
>
> That's orthogonal to tgtype (snip)
> Shall I send a new patch with that added?
Do we need to 'add' it? I intended to replace the JOIN with pg_trigger
to has_table_privilege()
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:30:49AM +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:01 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> > Please find attached patch for $subject :)
>
> Thank you for maintaining psql tab completion, but I'm not sure
> whether tgtype is the best column for the purpose. How abo
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:01 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> Please find attached patch for $subject :)
Thank you for maintaining psql tab completion,
but I'm not sure whether tgtype is the best column for the purpose.
How about has_table_privilege() to filter candidate relations
in Query_for_list_of_i
28 matches
Mail list logo
