2009/3/2 Tom Lane :
> Pavel Stehule writes:
>> postgres=# create function dfunc(a int, b int = 1, c int) returns
>> table (a int, b int, c int) as $$
>> select $1, $2, $3;
>> $$ language sql;
>
> The above is simply a horrid idea. It'll completely break any ability
> to resolve ambiguous functi
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> We're using SIGQUIT to signal immediate shutdown request. Upon receiving
> SIGQUIT, postmaster in turn kills all the child processes with SIGQUIT and
> exits.
>
> This is a problem when child processes use system(3) to call other pr
yeah you are right. I did not know that you can pass space using double
quotes.
-Sushant.
On Sun, 2009-03-01 at 20:49 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Sushant Sinha writes:
> > FragmentDelimiter is an argument for ts_headline function to separates
> > different headline fragments. The default delimiter
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> While Simon stated it a bit strongly, I think it's important that you alert
> people if you think you have to remove existing features in order to make
> easy standby possible.
Now, I think that any existing capabilities don't need to be r
Pavel Stehule writes:
> postgres=# create function dfunc(a int, b int = 1, c int) returns
> table (a int, b int, c int) as $$
> select $1, $2, $3;
> $$ language sql;
The above is simply a horrid idea. It'll completely break any ability
to resolve ambiguous function calls in a sane way. What,
Sushant Sinha writes:
> FragmentDelimiter is an argument for ts_headline function to separates
> different headline fragments. The default delimiter is " ... ".
> Currently if someone specifies the delimiter as an option to the
> function, no extra space is added around the delimiter. However, it
Gregory Stark wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>
> > The standard represents multidimensional arrays as arrays of arrays (like
> > in
> > C).
>
> Uh, C doesn't represent multidimensional arrays as arrays of arrays so you've
> lost me already.
I think he meant to say C _can_ represent multidi
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> The standard represents multidimensional arrays as arrays of arrays (like in
> C).
Uh, C doesn't represent multidimensional arrays as arrays of arrays so you've
lost me already.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about En
Hannu Krosing wrote:
On Sun, 2009-03-01 at 10:13 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Hannu Krosing wrote:
Some of the functions, including some specified in the standard, produce
fragments. That's why we have the 'IS DOCUMENT' test.
But then you could use xmlfragments as the f
On Sun, 2009-03-01 at 10:13 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> Hannu Krosing wrote:
> >> Some of the functions, including some specified in the standard, produce
> >> fragments. That's why we have the 'IS DOCUMENT' test.
> >>
> >
> > But then you could use xmlfragments as the functions return
FragmentDelimiter is an argument for ts_headline function to separates
different headline fragments. The default delimiter is " ... ".
Currently if someone specifies the delimiter as an option to the
function, no extra space is added around the delimiter. However, it does
not look good without spac
On Sunday 01 March 2009 19:40:16 Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > The standard doesn't have multi-dimensional arrays, so it's entirely
> > possible that somewhere in it there is wording that makes cardinality()
> > equivalent to the length of the first dimension. But I concur with
> > Andrew that th
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > The standard doesn't have multi-dimensional arrays, so it's entirely
> > possible that somewhere in it there is wording that makes cardinality()
> > equivalent to the length of the first dimension. But I concur with
> > Andrew that this is flat w
Tom Lane wrote:
The REL7_4 members of the buildfarm are all red this morning,
with this symptom in initdb:
Oh dear. I must confess that I didn't test the 7.4 commit, because the
7.4 branch isn't compiling on my laptop for some reason. Seemed safe
enough since the changed codepath hadn't been
2009/3/1 Tom Lane :
> I wrote:
>> The standard doesn't have multi-dimensional arrays, so it's entirely
>> possible that somewhere in it there is wording that makes cardinality()
>> equivalent to the length of the first dimension. But I concur with
>> Andrew that this is flat wrong when extended to
I wrote:
> The standard doesn't have multi-dimensional arrays, so it's entirely
> possible that somewhere in it there is wording that makes cardinality()
> equivalent to the length of the first dimension. But I concur with
> Andrew that this is flat wrong when extended to m-d arrays.
I poked arou
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> Grzegorz Jaskiewicz wrote:
>> On 1 Mar 2009, at 00:52, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> We seem to have acquired a cardinality() function with almost no
>>> discussion, and it has semantics that are a bit surprising to me. I
>>> should have thought cardinality(array) would be t
Grzegorz Jaskiewicz wrote:
On 1 Mar 2009, at 00:52, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
We seem to have acquired a cardinality() function with almost no
discussion, and it has semantics that are a bit surprising to me. I
should have thought cardinality(array) would be the total number of
elements in t
Hannu Krosing wrote:
Some of the functions, including some specified in the standard, produce
fragments. That's why we have the 'IS DOCUMENT' test.
But then you could use xmlfragments as the functions return type, no ?
Does tha standard require that the same field type must store both
d
On 1 Mar 2009, at 00:52, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
We seem to have acquired a cardinality() function with almost no
discussion, and it has semantics that are a bit surprising to me. I
should have thought cardinality(array) would be the total number of
elements in the array. Instead, it seems
Fujii,
Again, I'm not planning to get rid of any existing capabilities
Good
unless necessary.
That is not a caveat I will accept, a priori.
While Simon stated it a bit strongly, I think it's important that you
alert people if you think you have to remove existing features in order
to m
Hi Teodor-san.
Sorry late reaction.
- Original Message -
From: "Teodor Sigaev"
If there's an effective function like pg_wchar2mb_with_len() which
converts wchar_t strings to server encoded strings, we had better
simply call it for char2wchar().
I don't see a way to produce correct
On Sat, 2009-02-28 at 23:21 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Fujii,
>
> >> Again, I'm not planning to get rid of any existing capabilities
> >
> > Good
> >
> >> unless necessary.
> >
> > That is not a caveat I will accept, a priori.
>
> While Simon stated it a bit strongly
My intention was only
23 matches
Mail list logo
