Hi David (and others),
David Rowley wrote:
Hi,
Starting a new thread which continues on from
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/caaphdvoec8ygwoahvsri-84en2k0tnh6gpxp1k59y9juc1w...@mail.gmail.com
To give a brief summary for any new readers:
The attached patch allows for INNER JOINed
On 30 November 2014 at 23:19, Mart Kelder m...@kelder31.nl wrote:
I think performance can be greatly improved if the planner is able to use
information based on the current data. I think these patches are just two
examples of where assumptions during planning are usefull. I think there
are
On 11/26/2014 11:48 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 11/26/2014 11:19 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
bo...@edookit.com writes:
The hstore_to_json_loose(hstore) produces an invalid JSON in the
following
case:
SELECT hstore_to_json_loose(hstore(ARRAY ['name'], ARRAY ['1.'] :: TEXT
[]))
Output: {name: 1.}
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
what do you want to do about this? In the back branches, exposing a
function like this would be an API change, wouldn't it? Perhaps there we
just need to pick up the 100 lines or so involved from json.c and copy
them into hstore_io.c, suitably
David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com writes:
I see this is quite a fundamental change to how things currently work and
it could cause planning to take place during the execution of PREPAREd
statements, which might not impress people too much, but it would certainly
fix the weird anomalies that
Hi Craig
Is there agreement on proposed syntax ROW(x AS something, y AS
somethingelse) ?
I can start work on this topic this week.
Regards
Pavel
2014-11-25 2:33 GMT+01:00 Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com:
ROW(x AS something, y AS somethingelse)
Apologies, it looks like Pavel
On 1 December 2014 at 06:51, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com writes:
I see this is quite a fundamental change to how things currently work and
it could cause planning to take place during the execution of PREPAREd
statements, which might not impress
On 11/30/2014 11:45 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
what do you want to do about this? In the back branches, exposing a
function like this would be an API change, wouldn't it? Perhaps there we
just need to pick up the 100 lines or so involved from json.c and copy
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
OK, here's the patch.
Can we make IsValidJsonNumber() take a const char *? Also its
comment should specify that it doesn't require nul-terminated
input, if indeed it doesn't. Otherwise +1.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via
On 11/30/2014 04:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
OK, here's the patch.
Can we make IsValidJsonNumber() take a const char *? Also its
comment should specify that it doesn't require nul-terminated
input, if indeed it doesn't. Otherwise +1.
Emre Hasegeli e...@hasegeli.com writes:
Thanks. Overall, my impression of this patch is that it works very
well. But damned if I understood *how* it works :-). There's a lot
of statistics involved, and it's not easy to see why something is
multiplied by something else. I'm adding comments as I
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
If I don't hear anything in the next day or two,
I'll more or less preserve aliases-related aspects of the patch.
FYI, I didn't go ahead and work on this, because I thought that the
thanksgiving holiday in the US probably
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
All of the MSVC critters are failing at make check.
Yeah, I noticed that, thanks. As far as I can see the only way to fix
it is to install dummy_seclabel to run the core seclabel test. That
doesn't seem smart; I think it'd be
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com wrote:
I can also just move isReset there, and keep mem_allocated as a uint64.
That way, if I find later that I want to track the aggregated value for
the child contexts as well, I can split it into two uint32s. I'll hold
off any
On 11/10/14, 7:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
On the whole, I'm +1 for just logging the events and seeing what we learn
that way. That seems like an appropriate amount of effort for finding out
whether there is really an issue.
Attached is a patch that does this.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue
On 24 November 2014 11:29, Amit Kapila Wrote,
I think still some of the comments given upthread are not handled:
a. About cancel handling
Your Actual comment was --
One other related point is that I think still cancel handling mechanism
is not completely right, code is doing that when there
Hi all
Currently the client must know the size of a large lob/clob field, like
a 'bytea' or 'text' field, in order to send it to the server. This can
force the client to buffer all the data before sending it to the server.
It would be helpful if the v4 protocol permitted the client to specify
17 matches
Mail list logo
