On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 04:33:44PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> + DCH_I,
^^^
> DCH_,
> DCH_YYY,
> DCH_YY,
There is a bug.. it's wrong position. Please, add the "enum" of
DCH_I to same position as you have "I" in next array. It means
"enum"
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 11:41:18AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This patch allows you to use I as format specifier to get the
> > ISO year, the year correspondeing to the ISO week number (IW).
>
> The purpose of to_char() as I understand it is to be 100%
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 08:18:08PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> DCH_IW,
> + DCH_IYYY,
> + DCH_IYY,
> + DCH_IY,
> + DCH_I,
It's better :-) This patch is OK for me.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/
---(end o
Am Donnerstag, 18. Dezember 2003 21:45 schrieb Tom Lane:
> The aclchk change looks okay if that's the behavior you want, but I
> wonder why you don't just make it raise error in both the GRANT and
> REVOKE cases.
Yes, that seems better.
> The pg_dump change looks okay for the 7.4 branch. It will
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The minimal disturbance change might be to teach the parser to
distinguish between a quoted 'all' and an unquoted 'all', and forget the
'*' idea.
Probably we ought to go with that, on backwards-compatibility grounds.
OK, here
I wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The minimal disturbance change might be to teach the parser to
distinguish between a quoted 'all' and an unquoted 'all', and forget
the '*' idea.
Probably we ought to go with that, on backwards-compatibility grounds.
Karel Zak wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 08:18:08PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > DCH_IW,
> > + DCH_IYYY,
> > + DCH_IYY,
> > + DCH_IY,
> > + DCH_I,
>
> It's better :-) This patch is OK for me.
Which patch is OK? The one attached? You looked like you were making
changes to this pa
On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 07:14:53PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Which patch is OK? The one attached? You looked like you were making
> changes to this patch in your later emails.
That is the changed/good patch.
Kurt
---(end of broadcast)---
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.
---
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2003
That IPv6 cleanup is major!
> ! hostall all ::1
> :::::::trust
> ! hostall all ::1/128 trust
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
10 matches
Mail list logo