On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 8:54 PM John Naylor
wrote:
>
> > nul-terminate -> null-terminate
>
> NUL is a common abbreviation for the zero byte (but not for zero
> pointers). See the ascii manpage.
>
> --
> John Naylor
> EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
> Ah.
`nul-terminated` does appear in the
On Sun, Dec 18, 2022 at 10:28 AM Ted Yu wrote:
> It seems the `else` is not needed (since when the if branch is taken, we
return from the func).
By that same logic, this review comment is not needed, since compiler
vendors don't charge license fees by the number of keywords. ;-)
Joking aside,
On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 7:14 PM Jeff Davis wrote:
> Attached is a new patch series. I think there are enough changes that
> this has become more of a "rework" of the collation code rather than
> just a refactoring. This is a continuation of some prior work[1][2] in
> a new thread given its new
On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 2:34 PM Joseph Koshakow wrote:
>
> Hi Ashutosh,
>
> I've added tests for all the operators and functions involving
> intervals and what I think the expected behaviors to be. The
> formatting might be slightly off and I've left the contents of the
> error messages as TODOs.
001: still refers to "gzip", which is correct for -Fp and -Fd but not
for -Fc, for which it's more correct to say "zlib". That affects the
name of the function, structures, comments, etc. I'm not sure if it's
an issue to re-use the basebackup compression routines here. Maybe we
should accept
On 2022-12-15 Th 09:12, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 6:24 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> I've gone through these now and revised/pushed most of them.
> Tom, I just want to extend huge thanks to you for working on this
> infrastructure. jsonpath aside, I think this is going to pay
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 3:22 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> ... If you're worried that the bugs might
> come back, then the test is insufficient: modern versions of both OSes
> have strxfrm_l(), which we aren't checking.
With my garbage collector hat on, that made me wonder if there was
some more
Hi Ashutosh,
I've added tests for all the operators and functions involving
intervals and what I think the expected behaviors to be. The
formatting might be slightly off and I've left the contents of the
error messages as TODOs. Hopefully it's a good reference for the
implementation.
> Adding
Hello Paul,
My 0.02€ about the patch:
Patch did not apply with "git apply", I had to "patch -p1 <" and there was
a bunch of warnings.
Patches compile and make check is okay.
The first patch adds empty lines at the end of "sql/random.sql", I think
that it should not.
# About
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:18:58PM +0400, Ilya Gladyshev wrote:
> > > I actually think that the progress view would be better off without
> > > the total number of partitions,
> >
> > Just curious - why ?
>
> We don't really know how many indexes we are going to create, unless we
> have some
On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 10:04 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 10:10:43AM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > The proposal to skip privilege checks for partitions would be
> > consistent with INSERT, SELECT, REINDEX that flow through to the
> > underlying partitions regardless of
On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 3:46 AM Mikhail Gribkov wrote:
> Hi Nikita,
>
> > Mikhail, I've checked the patch and previous discussion,
> > the condition mentioned earlier is still actual:
>
> Thanks for pointing this out! My bad, I forgot to fix the documentation
> example.
> Attached v34 has this
On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 4:34 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 2:47 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > > ---
> > > + active_workers = list_copy(ParallelApplyWorkerPool);
> > > +
> > > + foreach(lc, active_workers)
> > > + {
> > > + int
Hi Nikita,
> Mikhail, I've checked the patch and previous discussion,
> the condition mentioned earlier is still actual:
Thanks for pointing this out! My bad, I forgot to fix the documentation
example.
Attached v34 has this issue fixed, as well as a couple other problems with
the example code.
14 matches
Mail list logo
