On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> OK, now I understand.
Thanks.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> And what, in your opinion, is the issue?
>
> The test does not match the comment above it. It looks like someone
> (possibly me) pasted one too many template queries, that were never
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> And what, in your opinion, is the issue?
The test does not match the comment above it. It looks like someone
(possibly me) pasted one too many template queries, that were never
appropriately modified to fit the area under consideration.
--
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Removing that test doesn't seem important to me. Why does it seem
>> important to you?
>
> It's a minor issue, but it's easily fixed.
And what, in your opinion, is the issue?
--
Ro
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Removing that test doesn't seem important to me. Why does it seem
> important to you?
It's a minor issue, but it's easily fixed.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> Here is another patch, this time removing a useless ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE
>> test.
>
> Can someone commit this, please?
Removing that test doesn't seem important to me. Why does
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Here is another patch, this time removing a useless ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE
> test.
Can someone commit this, please?
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscr
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> Attached patch adjusts BRIN regression tests to make a non-obvious
> dependency on tuple order explicit. Currently, an index-only scan plan
> is used by the query that I've adjusted. I'd rather be sure that that
> continues.
Applied with a correction: the ordering that w
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:35 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Attached patch adjusts BRIN regression tests to make a non-obvious
> dependency on tuple order explicit. Currently, an index-only scan plan
> is used by the query that I've adjusted. I'd rather be sure that that
> continues.
Here is another
Attached patch adjusts BRIN regression tests to make a non-obvious
dependency on tuple order explicit. Currently, an index-only scan plan
is used by the query that I've adjusted. I'd rather be sure that that
continues.
This was spotted while running the regression tests with the Postgres
default B
10 matches
Mail list logo
