Re: [HACKERS] Add generate_series(date,date) and generate_series(date,date,integer)

On 26.01.2016 13:53, Michael Paquier wrote: Imagine for example a script that in some rare cases passes happens to pass infinity into generate_series() - in that case I'd much rather error out than wait till the end of the universe. So +1 from me to checking for infinity. +1 ERROR infinite

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing in September

On 20.01.2016 22:37, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 1/20/16 1:44 PM, Robert Haas wrote: And, you know, I did my time fighting major wars to try to compress the release schedule, and honestly, it wasn't that much fun. The process we have now is imperfect in many ways, but I no longer have abuse

Re: [HACKERS] Batch update of indexes

On 21.01.2016 18:47, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote: On 21.01.2016 19:09, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote: What I meant is more like a BRIN-like combination of an index scan and heap scan. Maybe it could be called "deferred inserts" or "temporary read-only index" Maybe it's similar with mysql insert

Re: [HACKERS] Extracting fields from 'infinity'::TIMESTAMP[TZ]

On 17.11.2015 09:09, Vitaly Burovoy wrote: I suppose behavior of monotonic values (julian, century, decade, isoyear, millennium and year) should be the same as for epoch (which obviously also monotonic value). Proposed patch has that behavior: +/-infinity for epoch, julian, century, decade,

Re: [HACKERS] can we add SKIP LOCKED to UPDATE?

On 10.11.2015 07:23, Craig Ringer wrote: On 10 November 2015 at 01:38, Jeff Janes wrote: this would be handy in conjunction with LIMIT (which also doesn't exist for UPDATE right now). ... and, in turn, UPDATE ... ORDER BY ..., since LIMIT without ORDER BY is usually

Re: [HACKERS] September 2015 Commitfest

Hello, +1. FWIW, I'm willing to review some patches for this CommitFest, but if the committers have to do first-round review as well as committer-review of every patch in the CommitFest, this is going to be long, ugly, and painful. We need to have a substantial pool of non-committers involved

Re: [HACKERS] Freeze avoidance of very large table.

On 21.10.2015 02:05, Masahiko Sawada wrote: On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Andres Freund wrote: I don't see the problem? I mean catversion will reliably tell you which format the vm is in?