Attached is a patch adding a few examples for PREPARE/EXECUTE
Gavin
Index: doc/src/sgml/ref/execute.sgml
===
RCS file: /usr/local/cvsroot/pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml/ref/execute.sgml,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -2 -c -r1.7 execute.sg
Gavin Sherry wrote:
> The attached patch clarifies (or, rather, makes explicit) to readers
> how to handle memory management for char pointers returned by libpq
> functions. Although the sections on PQfinish(), PQclear() and
> PQfreemem() give an indication that all pointers returned by
> functions
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Please don't put tabs in SGML files.
That's a new one on me. Why should we avoid tabs? The existing files
are certainly full of them.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)--
Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Attached is a patch adding a few examples for PREPARE/EXECUTE
Patch applied, with a few fixes.
BTW, Bruce and I discussed whether it would be helpful for me to apply
any patches -- and if so, what the proper procedure for doing so
is. What we decided was
Jan Wieck wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Jan Wieck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> When assigning a tuple to an array, PL/Tcl creates one extra array
> >> element .tupno telling the SPI_tuptable index of the result tuple. I
> >> think I originally planned to have more of these critters ... but
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jan, if I understand correctly, I agree with Tom. It seems strange to
> add a restriction on indentifiers in pl/tcl that doesn't exist in any of
> the other interfaces.
It's already done --- CVS tip checks specifically for ".tupno" and not
for anything
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Please don't put tabs in SGML files.
>
> That's a new one on me. Why should we avoid tabs? The existing
> files are certainly full of them.
Those are just the files that I haven't edited recently and gave the old
"M-x untabify"
Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This patch replaces a bunch of call sites of appendStringInfo() with
> > appendStringInfoString().
>
> I doubt this saves enough cycles to be worth doing, but if it floats
> your boat ...
>
> When I'm tempted to make a dubious micro-op
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm not objecting to your doing it, exactly, just suggesting that there
>> are better things to spend your time on.
> Of course, if it makes the code clearer, that is a win in itself.
Sure, but I can't see that there's any gain in rea
Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The attached patch clarifies (or, rather, makes explicit) to readers how
> to handle memory management for char pointers returned by libpq
> functions.
Patch applied. I expanded the tabs in that file to 4 spaces, per the
discussion. I also noticed and fix
Patch applied. Thanks.
(No, no one calls SendPostmasterSignal that doesn't have the postmaster
as a parent.)
---
Claudio Natoli wrote:
>
> For application to HEAD, pending community review.
>
> Briefly,
>
> [all] Remove
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Attached is a patch that fixes some trivial typos and alignment. Please
> apply.
>
> --
> Alvaro Herrera ()
> "Siempre hay que alimentar a los dioses, aunque la tierra
Patch applied. Thanks.
The patch is quite small. I need the README because there were very
complex decisions made in choosing this route, and we need to document
that for later adjustment, if necessary.
I usually put things in a queue an apply after 1-2 days, but I am
leaving for Europe tomorr
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > In this way, no one ever has the rename file open while we are holding
> > > the locks, and we can loop without holding an exclusive lock on
> > > pg_shadow, and file writes remain in order.
> >
> > You're d
This patch makes some improvements to the SGML documentation for the
join_collapse_limit GUC var, as well as fixing two instances of some
missing SGML markup.
Any additional suggestions for improvement to the changes I've made
are welcome. I'm not entirely satisfied with the new text, but it's a
s
Mostly nit-picking, but for what it's worth:
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> !
> !
> ! The order of outer joins specified via the JOIN
> ! construct is never adjusted by the query planner; therefore,
> ! join_collapse_limit has no effect o
16 matches
Mail list logo
