On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Yeah, the idea of replacing sum_grow with a boolean just occurred to me
>>> too. As is, I think the code is making some less-than-portable
>>> assumptions about what wi
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, the idea of replacing sum_grow with a boolean just occurred to me
>> too. As is, I think the code is making some less-than-portable
>> assumptions about what will happen if sum_grow overflows; which can
>> definitely
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> I noticed all that, but didn't feel like putting in the effort to make
>> it better. I would have been happy to have someone else pick up the
>> patch, but as it had been languishing I thought it would be better to
>> get
Robert Haas writes:
> I noticed all that, but didn't feel like putting in the effort to make
> it better. I would have been happy to have someone else pick up the
> patch, but as it had been languishing I thought it would be better to
> get it committed more or less as it was than to wait for som
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Should we backpatch that?
>
>> Arguably, yes. Does the patch look sane to you?
>
> I was afraid you'd ask that.
>
> [ studies code for awhile ... ]
>
> I think this fix
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Should we backpatch that?
> Arguably, yes. Does the patch look sane to you?
I was afraid you'd ask that.
[ studies code for awhile ... ]
I think this fixes the bug, but the function could really do with slightly
more i
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Alexander Korotkov
> wrote:
> > I found that code of gistchoose doesn't follow it's logic. Idea of
> > gistchoose is that first column penalty is more important than penalty of
> > second column. If we meet s
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Alexander Korotkov
>> wrote:
>>> I found that code of gistchoose doesn't follow it's logic. Idea of
>>> gistchoose is that first column penalty is more important than penalty of
>>> second
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Alexander Korotkov
> wrote:
>> I found that code of gistchoose doesn't follow it's logic. Idea of
>> gistchoose is that first column penalty is more important than penalty of
>> second column. If we meet same penalty values of first column t
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> I found that code of gistchoose doesn't follow it's logic. Idea of
> gistchoose is that first column penalty is more important than penalty of
> second column. If we meet same penalty values of first column then we choose
> minimal pena
10 matches
Mail list logo
