On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Please review and fix this compiler warning:
>
> indexcmds.c: In function ‘CheckIndexCompatible’:
> indexcmds.c:126:15: warning: variable ‘amoptions’ set but not used
> [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
I have removed the offending variable.
On mån, 2011-07-18 at 11:05 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 03:06:46PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> >>> > Check
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 03:06:46PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>>> > CheckIndexCompatible() calls ComputeIndexAttrs() to resolve the new
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 03:06:46PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> > CheckIndexCompatible() calls ComputeIndexAttrs() to resolve the new
>> > operator
>> > classes, collations and exclusion oper
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 03:06:46PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > CheckIndexCompatible() calls ComputeIndexAttrs() to resolve the new operator
> > classes, collations and exclusion operators for each index column. It then
> > checks those against
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> CheckIndexCompatible() calls ComputeIndexAttrs() to resolve the new operator
> classes, collations and exclusion operators for each index column. It then
> checks those against the existing values for the same. I figured that was
> obvious enou
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 02:44:49PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> >> Drat; fixed in this version. My local branches contain a large test
> >> battery
> >> that I filter out of the diff before
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> Drat; fixed in this version. My local branches contain a large test battery
>> that I filter out of the diff before posting. This time, that filter also
>> removed an essential part of the
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> Drat; fixed in this version. My local branches contain a large test battery
> that I filter out of the diff before posting. This time, that filter also
> removed an essential part of the patch.
OK, I'm pretty happy with this version, with the
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 09:55:01AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On first blush, that looks a whole lot cleaner. ?I'll try to find some
> > time for a more detailed review soon.
>
> This seems not to compile for me:
>
> gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissin
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On first blush, that looks a whole lot cleaner. I'll try to find some
> time for a more detailed review soon.
This seems not to compile for me:
gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 09:42:06AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>
>> > Here's the call stack in question:
>> >
>> > ? ? ? ?RelationBuildLocalRelation
>> > ? ? ? ?heap_create
>> > ? ? ? ?index_
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 09:42:06AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > Here's the call stack in question:
> >
> > ? ? ? ?RelationBuildLocalRelation
> > ? ? ? ?heap_create
> > ? ? ? ?index_create
> > ? ? ? ?DefineIndex
> > ? ? ? ?ATExecAddIndex
> >
>
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 02:11:11PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 03:45:43PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> >
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 02:11:11PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 03:45:43PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> >> > [patch to avoid index rebuilds]
> >>
> >> With respect
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 03:45:43PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> > [patch to avoid index rebuilds]
>>
>> With respect to the documentation hunks, it seems to me that the first
>> hunk might
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 03:45:43PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > [patch to avoid index rebuilds]
>
> With respect to the documentation hunks, it seems to me that the first
> hunk might be made clearer by leaving the paragraph of which it is a
>
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> [patch to avoid index rebuilds]
With respect to the documentation hunks, it seems to me that the first
hunk might be made clearer by leaving the paragraph of which it is a
part as-is, and adding another paragraph afterwards beginning with the
w
Previous version (at7-alt-index-opfamily.patch):
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20110113230124.ga18...@tornado.gateway.2wire.net
Design:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20110524104029.gb18...@tornado.gateway.2wire.net
Patches committed in 2011CF1 allow ALTER TABLE ... ALTER ..
19 matches
Mail list logo
