On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
> >> Keep in mind that the datetime stuff was abandoned by the maintainer
> >> some years ago with quite some rough edges. Some of it has been fixed,
> >> but a
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> I've looked over the main code and it looks good. While I'm not totally
> conviced it has to be done as a seperate pass, this way is exceedingly
> readable and clear as to what is going on, which makes me much more
> confident of its correctness.
FWIW, I'm not at
On 20 March 2011 23:40, Jan Urbański wrote:
> I'll update the commitfest app for the 2011-Next commitfest, but if
> someone would like to pick this up and include it in the 9.1 PL/Python
> revamp pack, I'd be thrilled.
I would also be thrilled. I definitely share your sense of frustration
about t
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Yeb Havinga wrote:
> On 2011-03-20 05:44, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, I'm not going to be able to reproduce this here, and my test
>> setup didn't show a clear regression. I can try beating on it some
>> more, but... Any chance you could rerun your test with t
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 11:36:14AM +, Gianni Ciolli wrote:
> maybe we should change the "1000 digits" here:
>
>
> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/datatype-numeric.html#DATATYPE-NUMERIC-DECIMAL
>
> because ISTM that up to 2^17 digits are supported (which makes more
> sense t
>
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 15:11, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
>> Example #4: PK is period, FK is timestamp. FK must be contained in some
>> PK period.
>>
>> CREATE TABLE pk (a period PRIMARY KEY, ...);
>>
>> CREATE TABLE fk (x timestamp REFERENCES pk (a), ...);
>>
>> As above, we can probably arra
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 05:22:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Attached is a WIP patch to split the expression-tree representation of
> collations into separate fields for input and output collation, and to
> replace the parser's current method of assigning collations with a
> recursive post-pass. I
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:40:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> (2) Allow collations to propagate up through nodes that deliver
> noncollatable outputs.
I don't think this is the goal. Only strings types are collatable, as
you point out.
> * Something like
> row('a' collate "C", 'b' collate "en
2011/3/20 Nicolas Barbier :
> 2011/3/20 hom :
>
>> I trace into scan.c because I want to known how the paser tree is
>> built and I debug the source step by step.
>
> I suggest you learn how flex/bison work first. The contents of the *.c
> files generated by flex/bison are not generally supposed to
2011/3/20 Martijn van Oosterhout :
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 11:50:01AM +0800, hom wrote:
>> I trace into scan.c because I want to known how the paser tree is
>> built and I debug the source step by step.
>> Then the eclipse pick up the scan.I and the excute order does not
>> match the code.
>
> Um
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 15:11, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Example #4: PK is period, FK is timestamp. FK must be contained in some
> PK period.
>
> CREATE TABLE pk (a period PRIMARY KEY, ...);
>
> CREATE TABLE fk (x timestamp REFERENCES pk (a), ...);
>
> As above, we can probably arrange the opera
On 2011-03-20 05:44, Robert Haas wrote:
Hmm, I'm not going to be able to reproduce this here, and my test
setup didn't show a clear regression. I can try beating on it some
more, but... Any chance you could rerun your test with the latest
master-branch code, and perhaps also with the patch I p
On Mar 20, 2011, at 2:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Nikhil Sontakke
>> wrote:
>>> Not really a performance issue AFAICS. If the relcache init file exists,
>>> then the phase2 of the catalog cache which eventually calls the above code
>>> path i
2011/3/20 hom :
> I trace into scan.c because I want to known how the paser tree is
> built and I debug the source step by step.
I suggest you learn how flex/bison work first. The contents of the *.c
files generated by flex/bison are not generally supposed to be
interpreted by humans, rather you
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 11:50:01AM +0800, hom wrote:
> I trace into scan.c because I want to known how the paser tree is
> built and I debug the source step by step.
> Then the eclipse pick up the scan.I and the excute order does not
> match the code.
Umm, the scanners produced by flex and bison a
15 matches
Mail list logo
