Hi Noah,
thanks for your unvaluable review, rich of useful and thorough comments
and notes. Marco and myself will add your proposed tests as soon as
possible (most likely after the Italian PGDay which is this week).
However, given the feedback received from other developers too
(including
2011/11/18 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
CONTEXT: PL/pgSQL function assign_rslts line 50 at assignment (oid: 65903)
\sf+ 65903
I'm pretty unenthused by the idea of making OIDs more user-visible
than they
Hi Gabriele and Marco,
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 10:36:15AM +0100, Gabriele Bartolini wrote:
--- - -
| ON| ON|
Action | DELETE | UPDATE |
--- - -
CASCADE| Row | Element |
SET NULL |
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 10:36:15AM +0100, Gabriele Bartolini wrote:
I would agree with what Tom is saying here, given that SQL specs do not
say anything about this feature. We could leave standard REFERENCES
keyword handling the array value as it is now. If a user wants to take
advantage
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Updated patch is attached - adding to Nov commitfest.
Review of the v2 patch:
* Submission Review
Patch applies with some fuzz and builds without warnings. I noticed
some tab characters being used in psql-ref.sgml where
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm. There's obviously something that's different in your
environment or configuration from what I tested, but I don't know
what it is. The fact that your scale factor is larger than
shared_buffers might matter; or Intel vs. AMD. Or maybe you're
On 11-10-15 07:28 PM, Jan Urbański wrote:
Hi,
attached is a patch implementing the usage of SPI cursors in PL/Python.
Currently when trying to process a large table in PL/Python you have
slurp it all into memory (that's what plpy.execute does).
J
I found a few bugs (see my testing section
On 20/11/11 19:14, Steve Singer wrote:
On 11-10-15 07:28 PM, Jan Urbański wrote:
Hi,
attached is a patch implementing the usage of SPI cursors in PL/Python.
I found a few bugs (see my testing section below) that will need fixing
+ a few questions about the code
Hi Steve,
thanks a lot for
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I was actually thinking it would be interesting to oprofile the
read-only test; see if we can figure out where those slowdowns are
coming from.
CPU: Intel Core/i7, speed 2262 MHz (estimated)
Counted CPU_CLK_UNHALTED events (Clock cycles when not
Hi all,
FOSDEM 2012 - PostgreSQL Devroom: Call for Speakers
The PostgreSQL project will have a Devroom at FOSDEM 2012, which takes
place on February 4-5 in Brussels, Belgium. The Devroom will mainly
cover topics for PostgreSQL users, developers and contributors. For more
information about
Part of my problem with not producing specialisations that I really
neglected to complain about until now is the inconsistency between
types, and the need to deal with that.
We benefit from assuming in our specialisation that we're only dealing
with POD types, simply not considering things that
On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 15:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I'm hesitant to remove them because the alternative is significantly
more verbose:
numrange(1.0, 1.0, '[]');
Right. The question is, does the case occur in practice often enough
to justify a shorter notation? I'm not sure.
Well, if
Hi Hanada-san,
Thank you for your valuable comments. I will improve the items pointed
out by you at the next version of the patch, including documentation on
the purpose of AnalyzeForeignTable, how to write it, and so on. Here I
comment only one point:
- Why file_fdw skips sample tuples which
(2011/11/19 0:54), Robert Haas wrote:
2011/11/18 Shigeru Hanadashigeru.han...@gmail.com:
- I couldn't see the reason why file_fdw sets ctid of sample tuples,
though I guess it's for Vitter's random sampling algorithm. If every
FDW must set valid ctid to sample tuples, it should be mentioned in
14 matches
Mail list logo
