Hello Amit,
sh> pgbench -T 10
...
partitions: 0
I am not sure how many users would be able to make out that it is a
run where actual partitions are not present unless they beforehand
know and detect such a condition in their scripts.
What is the use of such a run which completes
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 1:18 PM Fabien COELHO wrote:
> > Yes, this code is correct. I am not sure if you understood the point,
> > so let me try again. I am bothered about below code in the patch:
> > + /* only print partitioning information if some partitioning was detected
> > */
> > + if (par
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 2019-09-20 01:14, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Sure. But we also modeled those features on the same language that the
>> committee is looking at (or at least I sure hope we did). So it's
>> reasonable to assume that they would come out at the same spot without
>> any promptin
On 2019-09-21 22:30, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut writes:
Here is a draft patch.
>
>> Where are we on pushing that? I'm starting to get antsy about the
>> amount of time remaining before rc1. It's a low-risk fix, but still,
>> it'd be best to have a complete buildfarm cyc
I wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>>> Here is a draft patch.
> Where are we on pushing that? I'm starting to get antsy about the
> amount of time remaining before rc1. It's a low-risk fix, but still,
> it'd be best to have a complete buildfarm cycle on it before Monday's
> wrap.
Since time i
I've pushed some release note adjustments responding to your points
about the GSSAPI and name-collation entries. I see the LDAP text
is fixed already.
regards, tom lane
pá 20. 9. 2019 v 5:10 odesílatel Thomas Munro
napsal:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 6:44 AM Pavel Stehule
> wrote:
> > I am sending updated version
>
> +appendPQExpBuffer(&sql, "DROP DATABASE %s%s%s;",
> + (force ? " (FORCE) " : ""),
>
> An extra space before (FORCE) caused
pá 20. 9. 2019 v 7:58 odesílatel Dilip Kumar napsal:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 12:14 AM Pavel Stehule
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > I am sending updated version - the changes against last patch are two. I
> use pg_terminate_backed for killing other terminates like Tom proposed. I
> am not sure if
The step to reproduce this issue.
1. Create a table
create table gist_point_tbl(id int4, p point);
create index gist_pointidx on gist_point_tbl using gist(p);
2. Insert data
insert into gist_point_tbl (id, p) select g,point(g*10, g*10) from
generate_series(1, 100) g;
3. Del
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 5:18 AM David Fetter wrote:
> It's not done by pull request at this time. Instead, it is done by sending
> patches to this mailing list.
Dear all
You will find enclosed the patch that extends the range type operators so
they cope with elements.
Any comments most welcome.
On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 12:03 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> Since the previous version patch conflicts with current HEAD, I've
> attached the updated version patches.
>
Review comments:
--
*
indexes on the relation which further limited by
+ .
/which further
Hello
Thank you for review! Can you please also check v4 version? v5 implements
design suggested by Kyotaro Horiguchi-san, while v4 has another design. Which
one do you prefer? Or are both wrong?
> I can't parse that comment. What does "skipping to starting" mean? I
> assume it's just about avo
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 03:43:54PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2019-09-19 22:18:57 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > While working on this I evolved the node string format a bit:
> >
> > 1) Node types start with the their "normal" name, rather than
> >uppercase. There seems little
Hello Amit,
Yes, this code is correct. I am not sure if you understood the point,
so let me try again. I am bothered about below code in the patch:
+ /* only print partitioning information if some partitioning was detected */
+ if (partition_method != PART_NONE)
This is the only place now whe
14 matches
Mail list logo
