On Wed, 2007-27-06 at 00:16 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> +1 as well but I'm wondering whether the output is too wide.
Well, the output of \df+ is already likely to be wider than 72
characters, so I'm not sure the patch would really make the situation
materially worse ("\df+ nextval" is 118 chara
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. changing SIGINT so that it cancels the current table instead of
> shutting down the entire worker.
>
> 2. changing DROP TABLE and TRUNCATE so that they cancel an autovac
> worker by sending SIGINT.
Quite so.
> 3. change the interrupt code so that
This is a request I posted in February. The thread was named "Writing
triggers in C++". However I did not supply a patch then, and some people
misunderstood my problem. I will try to explain it again:
My problem is, I wrote some triggers in C using the SPI-API. Those
triggers call some functions d
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's latest revision of Itagaki-sans Load Distributed Checkpoints patch:
Applied with some minor revisions to make some of the internal APIs a
bit cleaner; mostly, it seemed like a good idea to replace all those
bool parameters with a flag-bits ap
On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 00:43 +0200, Jacob Rief wrote:
> But the C++-compiler rejects to compile legal C code,
> because some of the included Postgres-headers, ie. postgres.h,
> executor/spi.h, commands/trigger.h, fmgr.h use a few C++ keywords to
> defined a some struct members and function arguments
Neil Conway wrote:
BTW, I notice the patch also adds 'extern "C" { ... }' statements to a
few random header files. Can't client programs do this before including
the headers, if necessary?
He's used the usual "#ifdef __cplusplus" wrapper - isn't that good enough?
cheers
andrew
--
On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 20:51 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> He's used the usual "#ifdef __cplusplus" wrapper - isn't that good enough?
Well, there's nothing wrong with it per se, I'm just wondering (1) what
the proper set of headers to add it to is -- the patch just does a
handful (2) whether we ne
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 20:51 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> He's used the usual "#ifdef __cplusplus" wrapper - isn't that good enough?
> Well, there's nothing wrong with it per se, I'm just wondering (1) what
> the proper set of headers to add it to is --
On Thu, 2007-28-06 at 01:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> The patch as given merely renames some random identifiers that happen to
> be keywords in some non-C language (thereby breaking not only a lot of
> core backend code, which we can fix, but who knows what other
> user-written extensions that we ca
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2007-28-06 at 01:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The patch as given merely renames some random identifiers that happen to
>> be keywords in some non-C language ...
> The fact is, any user-written extensions that depend on types defined in
> parsenodes
On Thu, 2007-28-06 at 02:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> It was already pointed out upthread that wrapping the inclusions in
> extern "C" {...} would fix the identifier part of the problem from
> the user side
No, my point about extern "C" was that I don't think we need to add it
to the Postgres heade
On Tue, 2007-26-06 at 15:10 -0700, Neil Conway wrote:
> Attached is a patch that adds information about function volatility to
> the output of psql's "\df+" slash command. I'll apply this to HEAD
> tomorrow, barring any objections.
Applied.
-Neil
---(end of broadcast)--
12 matches
Mail list logo
