On 01/05/2016 09:07 AM, Vitaly Burovoy wrote: > On 1/4/16, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> It seems we got majority approval on the design of this patch, and no >> disagreement; the last submitted version appears to implement that. >> There's no documentation change in the patch though. I'm marking it as >> Waiting on Author; please resubmit with necessary doc changes. > > Thank you! > Version 3 of the patch with touched documentation in the attachment. > > I decided to mark it as a note, because that separation > (monotonic/oscillation fields) is not obvious and for most values the > function "extract" works as expected (e.g. does not give an error) > until special values are (casually?) passed.
I have reviewed this patch. It applies and compiles cleanly and implements the behavior reached by consensus. The documentation is a little light, but I don't see what else needs to be said. The code is clean and well commented. All extraction options are supported. Regression tests are present and seemingly complete. I looked around for other places where this code should be used and didn't find any. I am marking this patch Ready for Committer. -- Vik Fearing +33 6 46 75 15 36 http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
