Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
>
> This patch seems to still be under active discussion. Would you refrain
> from giving the impression that it's going to be applied as-is?
He submitted a new version based on Neil'
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
This patch seems to still be under active discussion. Would you refrain
from giving the impression that it's going to be applied as-is?
regards, tom lane
Agreed, these seem to be of general interest and have been requested in
the past. I will clean up the docs a little.
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
Dear Bruce,
> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > What does this patch have to do with ACLs? Wasn't that Fabien's
> > previous patch?
>
> I thought it was used to read them somehow.
Yes, as for bit_* aggregates are concerned. However I still need them,
and they also have been asked for in the pa
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> What does this patch have to do with ACLs? Wasn't that Fabien's
> previous patch?
I thought it was used to read them somehow.
--
Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001
+ If your l
What does this patch have to do with ACLs? Wasn't that Fabien's
previous patch?
Chris
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Where are on this? Without a user-visible way of seeing the acl values,
is this still useful?
---
Fabien COELHO wrot
Where are on this? Without a user-visible way of seeing the acl values,
is this still useful?
---
Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Dear patchers,
>
> please find attached a small patch for adding new aggregate functions:
>
> (1)
Dear Jan,
> > You may also notice that the impact in close to void, there are two lines
> > added for each of these bit_* functions. I'm not going to develop an
> > external package for 16 lines of code.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but what is wrong with installing these
> functions on deman
Fabien COELHO wrote:
Dear Alvaro,
> (2) bitwise integer aggregates named bit_and and bit_or for
> int2, int4, int8 and bit types. They are not standard,
> however they exist in other db (eg mysql), and I needed them
> for some other stuff.
I'm sure people won't like to add functions jus
Dear Peter,
> We are not going to accept any functions that are primarily intended to
> access the internals aclitem data. You need to think of a high-level
> description of your problem and implement functions for that.
I already have what I juge a "high level description" of the problem,
than
Fabien COELHO wrote:
> I develop them because I NEEDED them, NOT because they are available
> in mysql and I would want compatibility. I needed them for some
> queries over pg_catalog, as acl are encoded as bitfields.
We are not going to accept any functions that are primarily intended to
access
> (1) boolean-and and boolean-or aggregates named bool_and and bool_or.
> they correspond to standard sql every and some/any aggregates.
They do not, sorry. I'll resubmit.
--
Fabien Coelho
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: don't forget to incre
Dear Alvaro,
> > (2) bitwise integer aggregates named bit_and and bit_or for
> > int2, int4, int8 and bit types. They are not standard,
> > however they exist in other db (eg mysql), and I needed them
> > for some other stuff.
>
> I'm sure people won't like to add functions just becau
On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 04:21:21PM +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> (2) bitwise integer aggregates named bit_and and bit_or for
> int2, int4, int8 and bit types. They are not standard,
> however they exist in other db (eg mysql), and I needed them
> for some other stuff.
I'm sure people
Dear patchers,
please find attached a small patch for adding new aggregate functions:
(1) boolean-and and boolean-or aggregates named bool_and and bool_or.
they correspond to standard sql every and some/any aggregates.
they do not have the right name as there is a problem with
the st
15 matches
Mail list logo
