See attached diff which corrects a per-thread
memory leak in libecpg and changes the thread test program to create a user
defined number of threads. Also attached tar.gz adds an additional thread test,
which currently does NOT work as expected and is one of the cases Shridar and I
will be
Sorry guys, last diff wasn't a context one! diff -c attached this time
round...
L.
- Original Message -
From: Lee Kindness
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Bruce Momjian ; Lee Kindness ; Shridhar Daithankar
Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 3:07 PM
Subject: ECPG: Update tests memory leak fix
See
I've applied the two attached minor documentation patches to HEAD.
Each patch makes a few minor improvements to a particular section of
the docs (the discussion of IS NULL and the discussion of SET,
respectively).
Cheers,
Neil
Index: doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
On 3/6/04 11:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Uh, you get test failures on OS X 10.3.2? On my OS X machine with the
latest CVS HEAD code, the tests run without any failures.
I was wondering about that too. I get one failure --- a one-liner
zero-versus-minus-zero
John Siracusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I got the 5 failures with an unmodified CVS checkout earlier, I didn't
even bother to look at the diffs because I just accepted that as my baseline
(it is CVS, after all, and things are in flux).
Just for the record, we don't consider regression
John Siracusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How does this look? It seems to do what I want without horribly
breaking anything as far as I can tell.
Not a bad effort for a backend newbie ;-). It was lacking in comments,
and upon inspection I thought it could be generalized a little. I've
applied
John Siracusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
... Actually, I'm still not sure how you
can conclude that foo is not null simply by seeing func(..., foo, ...) where
func() is strict. Do strict functions and operators simply not allow null
args?
That was what the comments were about ;-). A strict
