Mark Kirkwood wrote:
I have applied this to todays HEAD performed some quick tests - looks
good! I have to re-create a TPC-H dataset to test one of the previous
bugs, so I'll probably look at that tomorrow or so.
The TPC-H query query that previously produced a SIGSEGV now runs and
gives
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 2007-30-04 at 00:04 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm still not very comfortable with that. You're proposing to add a
>> pretty obvious failure mechanism --- any numeric-returning function
>> that failed to "normalize" its output would now create a sub
On Mon, 2007-30-04 at 00:04 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm still not very comfortable with that. You're proposing to add a
> pretty obvious failure mechanism --- any numeric-returning function
> that failed to "normalize" its output would now create a subtle,
> hard-to-find bug.
What about teaching
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is this better?
I suggest bytea -> bytea, otherwise seems fine.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Updated patch against cvs update in case it makes applying easier.
Applied with revisions --- notably, I avoided adding any overhead to
HEAPCOMPARE() by the expedient of reversing the logical sort order
before heapify'ing. We couldn't have done that bef
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
The attached docs patch makes clearer how arguments and return values in
pl/perl are escaped. This is to clarify the situation that Theo
Schlossnagle recently reported on -bugs.
I find the mix of arguments and results a bit confusing. May
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> The attached docs patch makes clearer how arguments and return values in
> pl/perl are escaped. This is to clarify the situation that Theo
> Schlossnagle recently reported on -bugs.
I find the mix of arguments and results a bit confusing. Maybe you
could put them in s
The attached docs patch makes clearer how arguments and return values in
pl/perl are escaped. This is to clarify the situation that Theo
Schlossnagle recently reported on -bugs.
If there's no objection I will apply this.
cheers
andrew
? plperldoc.patch
Index: plperl.sgml
===
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.
---
Ja
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.
---
Ga
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 05:25:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Given this, perhaps the proper approach should instead be to just check
> > the return value, and go from there? Should be a simple enough patch,
> > something like the attached.
>
> > Tom,
11 matches
Mail list logo