Remove useless const qualifier
Claiming that the typevar argument to DefineCompositeType() is const
was a plain lie. A similar case in DefineVirtualRelation() was
already changed in passing in commit 1575fbcb. Also clean up the now
unnecessary casts that used to cast away the const.
Branch
Remove useless cast
Branch
--
master
Details
---
http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/b5c077c3685c1b122c10c7ef03ff4c07abe786a3
Modified Files
--
src/backend/libpq/crypt.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
--
Sent via pgsql-committers mailing lis
Fix some more bugs in GIN's WAL replay logic.
In commit 4016bdef8aded77b4903c457050622a5a1815c16 I fixed a bunch of
ginxlog.c bugs having to do with not handling XLogReadBuffer failures
correctly. However, in ginRedoUpdateMetapage and ginRedoDeleteListPages,
I unaccountably thought that failure t
Fix some more bugs in GIN's WAL replay logic.
In commit 4016bdef8aded77b4903c457050622a5a1815c16 I fixed a bunch of
ginxlog.c bugs having to do with not handling XLogReadBuffer failures
correctly. However, in ginRedoUpdateMetapage and ginRedoDeleteListPages,
I unaccountably thought that failure t
Fix some more bugs in GIN's WAL replay logic.
In commit 4016bdef8aded77b4903c457050622a5a1815c16 I fixed a bunch of
ginxlog.c bugs having to do with not handling XLogReadBuffer failures
correctly. However, in ginRedoUpdateMetapage and ginRedoDeleteListPages,
I unaccountably thought that failure t
Fix some more bugs in GIN's WAL replay logic.
In commit 4016bdef8aded77b4903c457050622a5a1815c16 I fixed a bunch of
ginxlog.c bugs having to do with not handling XLogReadBuffer failures
correctly. However, in ginRedoUpdateMetapage and ginRedoDeleteListPages,
I unaccountably thought that failure t
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> Don't install hstore--1.0.sql any more.
>> Since the current version is 1.1, the 1.0 file isn't really needed. We do
>> need the 1.0--1.1 upgrade file, so people on 1.0 can upgrade.
>
> Shouldn't this commit have removed
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Shouldn't this commit have removed the 1.0 file from git altogether?
>> It's quite useless if it's not going to get installed.
> I left it for the possible documentation value thereof.
We do not keep around dead code in
