On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 10:27:31AM +, Georgios wrote:
> On Tuesday, 1 September 2020 07:41, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> Adding \dE as there are no foreign tables does not make much sense,
>> and also I wondered why \dt+ was not added.
>>
>> Does the attached look correct to you?
>
> You have
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, 1 September 2020 07:41, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 08:16:19AM +, Georgios wrote:
>
> > Please find version 7 attached which hopefully addresses the error along
> > with a proper
> > expansion of the test coverage and remov
On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 08:16:19AM +, Georgios wrote:
> Please find version 7 attached which hopefully addresses the error along with
> a proper
> expansion of the test coverage and removal of recently introduced
> whitespace warnings.
+CREATE ROLEconditional_tableam_display_role;
As a co
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Thursday, 20 August 2020 07:31, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 11:10:05PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 8:12 AM vignesh C vignes...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > > > +-- access method column should not be displayed for seque
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 11:10:05PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 8:12 AM vignesh C wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +-- access method column should not be displayed for sequences
> > > > +\ds+
> > > >
> > > > - List of relations
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Schema
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 8:12 AM vignesh C wrote:
> > >
> > > +-- access method column should not be displayed for sequences
> > > +\ds+
> > >
> > > - List of relations
> > >
> > >
> > > - Schema | Name | Type | Owner | Persistence | Size | Description
> > > ++
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 7:30 PM Georgios wrote:
>
>
> I'm having issues understanding where you are going with the reviews, can you
> fully describe
> what is it that you wish to be done?
>
I'm happy with the patch, that was the last of the comments that I had
from my side. Only idea here is to
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Saturday, July 25, 2020 2:41 AM, vignesh C wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 7:35 PM Georgios gkokola...@protonmail.com wrote:
>
> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > On Saturday, July 11, 2020 3:16 PM, vignesh C vignes...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 7:35 PM Georgios wrote:
>
>
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Saturday, July 11, 2020 3:16 PM, vignesh C wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 1:24 PM Georgios gkokola...@protonmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > > On Monday, July 6, 2020 3
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Saturday, July 11, 2020 3:16 PM, vignesh C wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 1:24 PM Georgios gkokola...@protonmail.com wrote:
>
> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > On Monday, July 6, 2020 3:12 AM, Michael Paquier mich...@paquier.xyz wrote:
> >
> > > On Su
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 1:24 PM Georgios wrote:
>
>
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Monday, July 6, 2020 3:12 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 07:13:10AM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not sure if we should include showViews, I had seen that the
> > > acces
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Monday, July 6, 2020 3:12 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 07:13:10AM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure if we should include showViews, I had seen that the
> > access method was not getting selected for view.
>
> +1. These have no
On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 07:13:10AM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> I'm not sure if we should include showViews, I had seen that the
> access method was not getting selected for view.
+1. These have no physical storage, so you are looking here for
relkinds that satisfy RELKIND_HAS_STORAGE().
--
Michael
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:53 PM Georgios wrote:
>
>
> As promised, I gladly ament upon your request. Also included a fix for
> a minor oversight in tests, they should now be stable. Finally in this
> version, I extended a bit the logic to only include the access method column
> if the relations di
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Saturday, June 20, 2020 3:15 PM, vignesh C wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 6:13 PM Georgios gkokola...@protonmail.com wrote:
>
> > > Few comments:
> > >
> > > - if (pset.sversion >= 12)
> > >
> > > - appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf,
> > >
> > > - "\n LEF
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 6:13 PM Georgios wrote:
> > Few comments:
> >
> > - if (pset.sversion >= 12)
> >
> > - appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf,
> >
> > - "\n LEFT JOIN pg_catalog.pg_am am ON am.oid = c.relam");
> >
> > Should we include pset.hide_tableam check along with the version check?
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Monday, June 15, 2020 3:20 AM, vignesh C wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 6:45 PM Georgios gkokola...@protonmail.com wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > Please add it to the commitfest at https://commitfest.postgresql.org/28/
> >
> > Thank you very much for your time. Added
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 6:45 PM Georgios wrote:
>
> > Please add it to the commitfest at https://commitfest.postgresql.org/28/
>
> Thank you very much for your time. Added to the commitfest as suggested.
Patch applies cleanly, make check & make check-world passes.
Few comments:
+ if (pset.sversi
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:34 PM, David Rowley wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 23:03, Georgios gkokola...@protonmail.com wrote:
>
> > A small patch is attached [1] to see if you think it makes sense. I have
> > not included any
> > differences in the tests outp
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 23:03, Georgios wrote:
> A small patch is attached [1] to see if you think it makes sense. I have not
> included any
> differences in the tests output yet, as the idea might get discarded. However
> if the patch is
> found useful. I shall ament the test results as needed.
20 matches
Mail list logo
