Re: [PATCHES] guc config_enum_entry add hidden field

Alex Hunsaker wrote: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am wondering if it's a good idea to hide the redundant entries to reduce clutter in the pg_settings display. (We could do this by adding a hidden boolean to struct config_enum_entry.) Thoughts? The Attached patch does just

[PATCHES] pg_lzcompress patch for 8.3, 8.2 branch

I attached backported pg_lzcompress patch which is already in head for version 8.2 and 8.3. Version 8.1 and prior contains more changes in decompress code and they does not contain any check. Shell I backported it as well or it will be better to keep it untouched? Zdenek

Re: [PATCHES] pg_lzcompress patch for 8.3, 8.2 branch

Zdenek Kotala [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I attached backported pg_lzcompress patch which is already in head for version 8.2 and 8.3. Version 8.1 and prior contains more changes in decompress code and they does not contain any check. Shell I backported it as well or it will be better to

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1

Tom, I think this patch is plenty complicated enough without adding useless restrictive options. +1 for no additonal GUC options. --Josh Berkus -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: