Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> BTW, there was some mention of changing the timestamp versions of
>> generate_series as well, but right offhand I'm not convinced that
>> those need any change. I think you'll get overflow detection there
>> automatically
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> So, I finally got around to look at this, and I think there is a
>> simpler solution. When an overflow occurs while calculating the next
>> value, that just means that the value we're about to return is the
>> last one tha
Robert Haas writes:
> So, I finally got around to look at this, and I think there is a
> simpler solution. When an overflow occurs while calculating the next
> value, that just means that the value we're about to return is the
> last one that should be generated. So we just need to frob the
> co
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:39 AM, David Johnston wrote:
> Tangential comment but have you considered emitting a warning (and/or log
> entry) when you are 10,000-50,000 away from issuing the last available
> number in the sequence so that some recognition exists that any code
> depending on the seq
>
> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> > On 9 February 2011 02:11, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan
> wrote:
> >>> Quite right, but the commitfest manager isn't meant to be a
> >>> substitute for one. Bug fixes aren't subject to the same re
On 17 June 2011 04:44, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 9 February 2011 02:11, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Quite right, but the commitfest manager isn't meant to be a substitute for
one. Bug f
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 9 February 2011 02:11, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> Quite right, but the commitfest manager isn't meant to be a substitute for
>>> one. Bug fixes aren't subject to the same restrictions of f
On 9 February 2011 02:11, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Quite right, but the commitfest manager isn't meant to be a substitute for
>> one. Bug fixes aren't subject to the same restrictions of feature changes.
>
> Another option would be to add this
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Quite right, but the commitfest manager isn't meant to be a substitute for
> one. Bug fixes aren't subject to the same restrictions of feature changes.
Another option would be to add this here:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.1
On 02/08/2011 08:19 PM, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 10:17, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Isn't this all really a bug fix that should be backpatched, rather than a
commitfest item?
Sure, but we don't have any bug trackers...
Quite right, but the commitfest manager isn't meant to
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 10:17, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Isn't this all really a bug fix that should be backpatched, rather than a
> commitfest item?
Sure, but we don't have any bug trackers...
--
Itagaki Takahiro
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make chan
On 02/07/2011 06:38 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
On 7 February 2011 09:04, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 21:32, Thom Brown wrote:
The issue is that generate_series will not return if the series hits
either the upper or lower boundary during increment, or goes beyond
it. The attac
On 8 February 2011 09:22, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 20:38, Thom Brown wrote:
>> Yes, of course, int8 functions are separate. I attach an updated
>> patch, although I still think there's a better way of doing this.
>
> Thanks. Please add the patch to the *current* commitfes
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 20:38, Thom Brown wrote:
> Yes, of course, int8 functions are separate. I attach an updated
> patch, although I still think there's a better way of doing this.
Thanks. Please add the patch to the *current* commitfest
because it's a bugfix.
https://commitfest.postgresql.org
On 7 February 2011 09:04, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 21:32, Thom Brown wrote:
>> The issue is that generate_series will not return if the series hits
>> either the upper or lower boundary during increment, or goes beyond
>> it. The attached patch fixes this behaviour, but s
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 21:32, Thom Brown wrote:
> The issue is that generate_series will not return if the series hits
> either the upper or lower boundary during increment, or goes beyond
> it. The attached patch fixes this behaviour, but should probably be
> done a better way. The first 3 exam
On 3 February 2011 13:58, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 3 February 2011 13:32, Thom Brown wrote:
>> Actually, further testing indicates this causes other problems:
>>
>> postgres=# SELECT x FROM generate_series(1, 9,-1) AS a(x);
>> x
>> ---
>> 1
>> (1 row)
>>
>> Should return no rows.
>>
>> postgres=#
17 matches
Mail list logo
