On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Monday, January 21, 2013 6:22 PM Magnus Hagander
>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 4:02 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> >> On 07.01.2013 16:23, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
>> >> > Si
On Monday, January 21, 2013 6:22 PM Magnus Hagander
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 4:02 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> On 07.01.2013 16:23, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
> >> > Since my other patch against pg_basebackup is now committed,
>
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 4:02 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> On 07.01.2013 16:23, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
>> > Since my other patch against pg_basebackup is now committed,
>> > this patch doesn't apply cleanly, patch rejects 2 hunks.
>
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 4:02 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 07.01.2013 16:23, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
> > Since my other patch against pg_basebackup is now committed,
> > this patch doesn't apply cleanly, patch rejects 2 hunks.
> > The fixed up patch is attached.
>
> Now that I look at
On 07.01.2013 16:23, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
Since my other patch against pg_basebackup is now committed,
this patch doesn't apply cleanly, patch rejects 2 hunks.
The fixed up patch is attached.
Now that I look at this a high-level perspective, why are we only
worried about timeouts in the C
On January 07, 2013 7:53 PM Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
>Since my other patch against pg_basebackup is now committed,
>this patch doesn't apply cleanly, patch rejects 2 hunks.
>The fixed up patch is attached.
Patch is verified. Thanks for rebasing the patch.
Regards,
Hari babu.
--
Sent via pg
2013-01-04 13:43 keltezéssel, Hari Babu írta:
On January 02, 2013 12:41 PM Hari Babu wrote:
On January 01, 2013 10:19 PM Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
I am reviewing your patch.
• Is the patch in context diff format?
Yes.
Thanks for reviewing the patch.
• Does it apply cleanly to the current git
On January 02, 2013 12:41 PM Hari Babu wrote:
>On January 01, 2013 10:19 PM Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
>>I am reviewing your patch.
>> Is the patch in context diff format?
>>Yes.
>
>Thanks for reviewing the patch.
>
>> Does it apply cleanly to the current git master?
>>Not quite cleanly but it d
On January 01, 2013 10:19 PM Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
>I am reviewing your patch.
> Is the patch in context diff format?
>Yes.
Thanks for reviewing the patch.
> Does it apply cleanly to the current git master?
>Not quite cleanly but it doesn't produce rejects or fuzz, only offset
warnings:
W
Hi,
2012-11-15 14:59 keltezéssel, Amit kapila írta:
On Monday, November 12, 2012 8:23 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Thursday, November 08, 2012 10:42 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Amit Kapila
wrote:
On Thursday, November
10 matches
Mail list logo