Chris Browne wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Conway) writes:
> > On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 17:22 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> I wouldn't know how to look for other variadic functions using NULL
> >> sentinels though.
> >
> > You would need something with more knowledge of C than "grep" has, at
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Conway) writes:
> On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 17:22 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I wouldn't know how to look for other variadic functions using NULL
>> sentinels though.
>
> You would need something with more knowledge of C than "grep" has, at
> any rate. Perhaps you could teac
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 17:22 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I wouldn't know how to look for other variadic functions using NULL
> sentinels though.
You would need something with more knowledge of C than "grep" has, at
any rate. Perhaps you could teach sparse to do this analysis, if it
can't do it a
Neil Conway wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 16:59 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > It might be good to check the actual definition of NULL in this case,
> > however,
> > before wondering further.
>
> Well, the existing coding is plainly wrong, regardless of the NULL
> implementation used on any
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 16:59 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> It might be good to check the actual definition of NULL in this case,
> however,
> before wondering further.
Well, the existing coding is plainly wrong, regardless of the NULL
implementation used on any given machine (although it will
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 12:04 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > OK. Will do, thanks.
>
> Make sure to remove the bogus comment about "pgstat considers our data
> as gone" in walwriter.c as well (in the sigjmp block)
Thanks, its gone in v23.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB
Simon Riggs wrote:
> OK. Will do, thanks.
Make sure to remove the bogus comment about "pgstat considers our data
as gone" in walwriter.c as well (in the sigjmp block)
--
Alvaro Herrera Developer, http://www.PostgreSQL.org/
"Those who use electric razors are infidels des
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 16:44 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > Here's the latest version. I've reviewed this to check that this does
> > what I want it to do, re-written various comments and changed a few
> > minor points in the code.
> >
> > I've also added a chunk to trans
Simon Riggs wrote:
> Here's the latest version. I've reviewed this to check that this does
> what I want it to do, re-written various comments and changed a few
> minor points in the code.
>
> I've also added a chunk to transam/README that describes the workings of
> the patch from a high level.
>
Am Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2007 17:16 schrieb Alvaro Herrera:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2007 16:16 schrieb Tom Lane:
> > > You should *not* have to inform the machine that NULL is a pointer.
> >
> > For variadic functions, that expectation is invalid, AFAIK.
>
> No, what's inva
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2007 16:16 schrieb Tom Lane:
> > You should *not* have to inform the machine that NULL is a pointer.
>
> For variadic functions, that expectation is invalid, AFAIK.
No, what's invalid is that using an unadorned 0 is understood as a "null
pointer" by
ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
>
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Patch applied. Thanks. Your documentation changes can be viewed in
> > five minutes using links on the developer's page,
> > http://www.postgresql.org/developer/testing.
>
> Thanks. Don't we need to backport it to 8.1 a
Am Mittwoch, 18. Juli 2007 16:16 schrieb Tom Lane:
> You should *not* have to inform the machine that NULL is a pointer.
For variadic functions, that expectation is invalid, AFAIK.
It might be good to check the actual definition of NULL in this case, however,
before wondering further.
--
Peter
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> It's too bad that gcc doesn't have a
>> -Wno-snarkiness-about-system-headers-thank-you switch.
> It does have a switch to *add* snarkiness about system headers, but does
> not do it by default.
> The problem in this case is that a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Any objections to changing the name of "RedirectDead"? A RedirectDead
> ItemId is not really redirected, it's just a stub representing a dead
> tuple (the space for that tuple has been reused but an index entry may
> still point to the ItemId).
>
> How about "stub" or
Attached is the patch to support SSPI authentication in libpq. With this
patch, I can authenticate windows clients against a linux server using
kerberos *without* reqiring setting up MIT kerberos on the windows side.
Protocol has not changed at all.
For now, it's implemented as mutually exclusive
Am Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007 20:31 schrieb Simon Riggs:
> Here's the latest version. I've reviewed this to check that this does
> what I want it to do, re-written various comments and changed a few
> minor points in the code.
>
> I've also added a chunk to transam/README that describes the workings o
17 matches
Mail list logo
