On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Alexander Korotkov aekorot...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi!
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 17.2.2015 14:21, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Alexander Korotkov
aekorot...@gmail.com
On 03/28/2015 11:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
+ /*
+ * Macros for iterating through elements of a flat or expanded array.
+ * Use ARRAY_ITER ARRAY_ITER_VARS(name); to declare the local variables
+ * needed for an iterator (more than one set can be used in the same function,
+ * if they have
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 04:11:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
Of course after sending that it became obvious. The C function is not
getting called because the SQL function is marked as being strict, yet is
called with NULL arguments.
Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi writes:
On 03/28/2015 11:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
+ * Macros for iterating through elements of a flat or expanded array.
How about a struct instead?
struct ArrayIter {
Datum datumptr;
bool isnullptr;
char dataptr;
bits8
Hi all.
A long time ago in 04b31609b63ce77fb9273193f07cf21b2a7176af ONLY keyword was
added to all queries in src/backend/utils/adt/ri_triggers.c. Since that time
foreign keys do not work with inheritance trees and it is mentioned in the
documentation for all versions since at least 7.3.
I
On 2015-04-17 17:35:16 +0300, Vladimir Borodin wrote:
A long time ago in 04b31609b63ce77fb9273193f07cf21b2a7176af ONLY
keyword was added to all queries in
src/backend/utils/adt/ri_triggers.c. Since that time foreign keys do
not work with inheritance trees and it is mentioned in the
On 17 April 2015 at 09:54, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
Hrmpf. Says the person that used a lot of padding, without much
discussion, for the WAL level infrastructure making pg_rewind more
maintainable.
Sounds bad. What padding are we talking about?
--
Simon Riggs
Dean,
* Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote:
In all of this, I think we should try to keep things as simple as
possible, to give the end user a chance to understand it --- although
I'm not sure I've achieved that with my explanation :-)
Thanks a lot for this. It goes along with my
Zhang Zq zqzhangm...@163.com writes:
The implements of 'xidin' use only ¡®strtoul¡¯ to cast from string to
xid. So in some cases, may cause confusion, for example,
The sql 'select c1 from test where xmin='abc' can be executed. and sometimes
will make mistakes, I want to query select
I have just released version 4.15 of the PostgreSQL Buildfarm Client
http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/downloads/releases/build-farm-4_15.tgz. It
can be downloaded at
http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/downloads/releases/build-farm-4_15.tgz
Here's what's changed:
* support the new location for pg_upgrade
hi,
The implements of 'xidin' use only ‘strtoul’ to cast from string to xid. So
in some cases, may cause confusion, for example,
The sql 'select c1 from test where xmin='abc' can be executed. and sometimes
will make mistakes, I want to query select c1 from test where xmin='0x10'
,but write
On 04/17/2015 03:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi writes:
On 03/28/2015 11:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
+ * Macros for iterating through elements of a flat or expanded array.
How about a struct instead?
struct ArrayIter {
Datum datumptr;
bool
On 17 April 2015 at 19:18, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
To be honest, I'm not entirely sure what we're arguing over.
When arguing over something you consider small, it is customary to allow
the author precedence. We can't do things our own way all the time.
I didn't much like
On 17/04/15 22:36, Simon Riggs wrote:
I said that IMO the difference in WAL size is so small that we
should just use 4-byte OIDs for the replication identifiers, instead
of trying to make do with 2 bytes. Not because I find it too likely
that you'll run out of IDs (although it
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 17 April 2015 at 08:22, Michael Paquier wrote:
To committers, here are the patches that seem on top of the list:
I'm pretty sure Committers are the people to decide which patches can be
committed, but thanks for the opinion.
Note the
Hanada-san,
Thanks for your works. I have nothing to comment on any more (at this moment).
I hope committer review / comment on the couple of features.
Best regards,
--
NEC Business Creation Division / PG-Strom Project
KaiGai Kohei kai...@ak.jp.nec.com
-Original Message-
From:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:29:07PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
Of course after sending that it became obvious. The C function is not getting
called because the SQL function is marked as being strict, yet is called with
NULL arguments.
Trivial patch attached to unset strict flag in pg_proc.h.
17 matches
Mail list logo
