On 27/02/2015 20:01, Marc Cousin wrote:
On 27/02/2015 19:45, Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
I had actually thought that we'd fixed this type of problem in recent
versions, and that you should be able to get a plan that would look
like
Nestloop
- scan dim1
- Nestloop
- scan dim2
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
No, no. I meant that it is good the way your patch does it in
xactdesc.c, where both frontend and backend can reach it.
Agreed, that seems much better than duplicating it.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB:
Michael,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
So, basically, this feels like it's not really the right place
for these checks and if there is an existing problem then it's probably
with the grammar...
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
I'm trying to wrap my head around the reasoning for this also and not
sure I'm following. In general, I don't think we protect all that hard
against functions being called with tokens that aren't allowed by the
parse.
Michael, all,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 7:46 AM, Gilles Darold gilles.dar...@dalibo.com
wrote:
This is a far better patch and the test to export/import of the
postgis_topology extension works great for me.
Thanks for the work.
Michael,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
+ /*
+ * Query all the foreign key dependencies for all the
extension
+ * tables found previously. Only tables whose data need
to be
+ * have to
Peter,
* Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote:
On 2/25/15 10:05 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
Agreed, but I'd also like to get rid of any reason, beyond emergency
cases, for people to modify the catalog directly. There's a few places
which we aren't yet doing that, but I'd rather fix those
Here's a first cut at this. It includes the changes from your
standby_wal_archiving_v1.patch, so you get that behaviour if you set
archive_mode='always', and the new behaviour I wanted with
archive_mode='shared'. I wrote it on top of the other patch I posted
recently to not archive bogus
On 2/25/15 10:05 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote:
On 2/25/15 3:39 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
I'd get rid of that whole check, not just replace rolcatupdate by rolsuper.
Err, wouldn't this make it possible to grant normal users the ability to
modify system
* Fabien COELHO (coe...@cri.ensmp.fr) wrote:
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote:
Anyway, I suggest to keep that for another round and keep the Robert's
isofunctional patch as it is before extending.
+1. Let's please get the basic thing committed, and
Marc Cousin cousinm...@gmail.com writes:
I gave it another look this morning. It works very well with the initial test
schema. The situation is much improved for me.
I still have one issue: I've extended the test to more than 2 dimensions.
I tried your original test script with 3 dimension
Hackers:
The pgCon committee would like to have someone give some kind of Intro
to Hacking tutorial at pgCon this year, on the Advanced Tutorial
Saturday. Since there will be lots of power users and other potential
contributors at the conference, it seems like an opportunity not to be
missed.
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:27 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 2/23/15 1:27 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
I would like to have an extension in tree that also does this, so we
have a regression test of this functionality.
Thank you a lot for your feedback. I searched a lot about GEQO,
but I didn't find information about any earlier attempts.
I'm happy to know that this is important for Postgres.
I'm really interested in this project, so I just need to estimate if I can
handle it.
Now I will spend some time with
Adam,
* Adam Brightwell (adam.brightw...@crunchydatasolutions.com) wrote:
I have attached and updated patch for review.
Thanks! I've gone over this and made quite a few documentation and
comment updates, but not too much else, so I'm pretty happy with how
this is coming along. As mentioned
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-02-26 13:53:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
You're probably going to kill me because of the increased complexity,
but how about making typecache.c smarter, more in the vein of
relcache.c, and store the
We build static libraries with ar crs or ar cr. If the static library
already exists in the build directory, those commands will add new members and
replace existing members. They will not remove members present in the
existing library but not named on the ar command line. This matters when,
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
We build static libraries with ar crs or ar cr. If the static library
already exists in the build directory, those commands will add new members and
replace existing members. They will not remove members present in the
existing library but not named on
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Tom This is the first attempt at weaponizing the memory context
Tom reset/delete feature, and I'm fairly happy with it, except for one
Tom thing: I had to #include utils/memnodes.h into typcache.h in order
Tom to preserve the intended property that
19 matches
Mail list logo
