Re: [PATCHES] BTree tid operators and opclass

2006-07-06 Thread Greg Stark
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Here's a small patch to add the full suite of btree operators for tids and > > the > > corresponding btree opclass. > > This has been proposed and rejected before, mainly on the basis that > there's no conceivable

Re: [PATCHES] BTree tid operators and opclass

2006-07-06 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Here's a small patch to add the full suite of btree operators for tids and the > corresponding btree opclass. This has been proposed and rejected before, mainly on the basis that there's no conceivable application for an index on TID. What's your use case?

Re: [PATCHES] BTree tid operators and opclass

2006-07-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Greg Stark wrote: > > Here's a small patch to add the full suite of btree operators for tids and the > corresponding btree opclass. This came up a while back on -hackers and a few > people were interested in it at the time. I just had a need for it again so I > added it. > > I'm not sure how to a

[PATCHES] BTree tid operators and opclass

2006-07-06 Thread Greg Stark
Here's a small patch to add the full suite of btree operators for tids and the corresponding btree opclass. This came up a while back on -hackers and a few people were interested in it at the time. I just had a need for it again so I added it. I'm not sure how to allocate OIDs. I just looked for

Re: [PATCHES] Client build of MSVC6+ patch

2006-07-06 Thread Petr Jelinek
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Does the detection work at runtime, or is it static? IIRC we found that static detection broke the binary portability on Windows. It's runtime just like ours. -- Regards Petr Jelinek (PJMODOS) ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP

Re: [PATCHES] Client build of MSVC6+ patch

2006-07-06 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Petr Jelinek said: > Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> >> I'm still not very happy - we never got a reply about why the >> reordering was needed at all. Referring in some way to FBSD doesn't >> really answer for Windows. I am currently without a Windows box I can >> use, so I am dependent on asking quest

Re: [PATCHES] Client build of MSVC6+ patch

2006-07-06 Thread Petr Jelinek
Andrew Dunstan wrote: I'm still not very happy - we never got a reply about why the reordering was needed at all. Referring in some way to FBSD doesn't really answer for Windows. I am currently without a Windows box I can use, so I am dependent on asking questions. Well, in MSVC addrinfo is

Re: [PATCHES] Client build of MSVC6+ patch

2006-07-06 Thread Andrew Dunstan
I'm still not very happy - we never got a reply about why the reordering was needed at all. Referring in some way to FBSD doesn't really answer for Windows. I am currently without a Windows box I can use, so I am dependent on asking questions. cheers andrew Bruce Momjian wrote: Patch ap