On 24 September 2015 at 11:33, Gavin Flower
wrote:
> An example from a book on PostgreSQL server programming that I'm working
> through (Note that it is obviously awkward to write with gender pronouns
> when gender is irrelevant, note the "he she" in one place and
On 24/09/15 22:41, Geoff Winkless wrote:
On 24 September 2015 at 11:33, Gavin Flower
>wrote:
An example from a book on PostgreSQL server programming that I'm
working through (Note that it is obviously awkward to
An example from a book on PostgreSQL server programming that I'm working
through (Note that it is obviously awkward to write with gender pronouns
when gender is irrelevant, note the "he she" in one place and "he/she"
in another!):
"If the user is a superuser, then he she has permission
Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values.
The old minimum values are rather large, making it time consuming to
test related behaviour. Additionally the current limits, especially for
multixacts, can be problematic in space-constrained systems. 1000
multixacts can contain a lot of members.
Since
Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values.
The old minimum values are rather large, making it time consuming to
test related behaviour. Additionally the current limits, especially for
multixacts, can be problematic in space-constrained systems. 1000
multixacts can contain a lot of members.
Since
Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values.
The old minimum values are rather large, making it time consuming to
test related behaviour. Additionally the current limits, especially for
multixacts, can be problematic in space-constrained systems. 1000
multixacts can contain a lot of members.
Since
Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values.
The old minimum values are rather large, making it time consuming to
test related behaviour. Additionally the current limits, especially for
multixacts, can be problematic in space-constrained systems. 1000
multixacts can contain a lot of members.
Since
Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values.
The old minimum values are rather large, making it time consuming to
test related behaviour. Additionally the current limits, especially for
multixacts, can be problematic in space-constrained systems. 1000
multixacts can contain a lot of members.
Since
Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values.
The old minimum values are rather large, making it time consuming to
test related behaviour. Additionally the current limits, especially for
multixacts, can be problematic in space-constrained systems. 1000
multixacts can contain a lot of members.
Since
Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values.
The old minimum values are rather large, making it time consuming to
test related behaviour. Additionally the current limits, especially for
multixacts, can be problematic in space-constrained systems. 1000
multixacts can contain a lot of members.
Since
Andres Freund writes:
> Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values.
Should this patch not have also touched the per-table limits in
reloptions.c?
Also, I went looking for documentation about the minimum allowed values,
and I found places in create_table.sgml that claim these
Make pg_controldata report newest XID with valid commit timestamp
Previously pg_controldata didn't report newestCommitTs and this was
an oversight in commit 73c986a.
Also this patch changes pg_resetxlog so that it uses the same sentences
as pg_controldata does, regarding oldestCommitTs and
Make pg_controldata report newest XID with valid commit timestamp
Previously pg_controldata didn't report newestCommitTs and this was
an oversight in commit 73c986a.
Also this patch changes pg_resetxlog so that it uses the same sentences
as pg_controldata does, regarding oldestCommitTs and
On 2015-09-24 10:37:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > Lower *_freeze_max_age minimum values.
>
> Should this patch not have also touched the per-table limits in
> reloptions.c?
Hm. I guess that'd make sense. It's not really related to the goal of
making
Don't zero opfuncid when reading nodes.
The comments here stated that this was just in case we ever had an
ALTER OPERATOR command that could remap an operator to a different
function. But those comments have been here for a long time, and no
such command has come about. In the absence of such a
Improve handling of collations in contrib/postgres_fdw.
If we have a local Var of say varchar type with default collation, and
we apply a RelabelType to convert that to text with default collation, we
don't want to consider that as creating an FDW_COLLATE_UNSAFE situation.
It should be okay to
Improve handling of collations in contrib/postgres_fdw.
If we have a local Var of say varchar type with default collation, and
we apply a RelabelType to convert that to text with default collation, we
don't want to consider that as creating an FDW_COLLATE_UNSAFE situation.
It should be okay to
Improve handling of collations in contrib/postgres_fdw.
If we have a local Var of say varchar type with default collation, and
we apply a RelabelType to convert that to text with default collation, we
don't want to consider that as creating an FDW_COLLATE_UNSAFE situation.
It should be okay to
Improve handling of collations in contrib/postgres_fdw.
If we have a local Var of say varchar type with default collation, and
we apply a RelabelType to convert that to text with default collation, we
don't want to consider that as creating an FDW_COLLATE_UNSAFE situation.
It should be okay to
Allow planner to use expression-index stats for function calls in WHERE.
Previously, a function call appearing at the top level of WHERE had a
hard-wired selectivity estimate of 0.333, a kludge conveniently dated
in the source code itself to July 1992. The expectation at the time was
that
Allow planner to use expression-index stats for function calls in WHERE.
Previously, a function call appearing at the top level of WHERE had a
hard-wired selectivity estimate of 0.333, a kludge conveniently dated
in the source code itself to July 1992. The expectation at the time was
that
Further fix for psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
On closer inspection, those seemingly redundant atoi() calls were not so
much inefficient as just plain wrong: the author of this code either had
not read, or had not understood, the POSIX specification for localeconv().
Further fix for psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
On closer inspection, those seemingly redundant atoi() calls were not so
much inefficient as just plain wrong: the author of this code either had
not read, or had not understood, the POSIX specification for localeconv().
Further fix for psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
On closer inspection, those seemingly redundant atoi() calls were not so
much inefficient as just plain wrong: the author of this code either had
not read, or had not understood, the POSIX specification for localeconv().
Further fix for psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
On closer inspection, those seemingly redundant atoi() calls were not so
much inefficient as just plain wrong: the author of this code either had
not read, or had not understood, the POSIX specification for localeconv().
Further fix for psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
On closer inspection, those seemingly redundant atoi() calls were not so
much inefficient as just plain wrong: the author of this code either had
not read, or had not understood, the POSIX specification for localeconv().
Further fix for psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
On closer inspection, those seemingly redundant atoi() calls were not so
much inefficient as just plain wrong: the author of this code either had
not read, or had not understood, the POSIX specification for localeconv().
Further fix for psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
On closer inspection, those seemingly redundant atoi() calls were not so
much inefficient as just plain wrong: the author of this code either had
not read, or had not understood, the POSIX specification for localeconv().
Fix psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
This code did the wrong thing entirely for numbers with an exponent
but no decimal point (e.g., '1e6'), as reported by Jeff Janes in
bug #13636. More generally, it made lots of unverified assumptions
about what the input string could
Fix psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
This code did the wrong thing entirely for numbers with an exponent
but no decimal point (e.g., '1e6'), as reported by Jeff Janes in
bug #13636. More generally, it made lots of unverified assumptions
about what the input string could
Fix psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
This code did the wrong thing entirely for numbers with an exponent
but no decimal point (e.g., '1e6'), as reported by Jeff Janes in
bug #13636. More generally, it made lots of unverified assumptions
about what the input string could
Fix psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
This code did the wrong thing entirely for numbers with an exponent
but no decimal point (e.g., '1e6'), as reported by Jeff Janes in
bug #13636. More generally, it made lots of unverified assumptions
about what the input string could
Fix psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
This code did the wrong thing entirely for numbers with an exponent
but no decimal point (e.g., '1e6'), as reported by Jeff Janes in
bug #13636. More generally, it made lots of unverified assumptions
about what the input string could
Tom, all,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> My vote would be to rename and reposition the field in HEAD and 9.5
> and accept the corresponding initdb. We already forced an initdb
> since alpha2, so it's basically free as far as testers are concerned,
> and keeping 9.5 in sync with HEAD in
Fix psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
This code did the wrong thing entirely for numbers with an exponent
but no decimal point (e.g., '1e6'), as reported by Jeff Janes in
bug #13636. More generally, it made lots of unverified assumptions
about what the input string could
Fix psql's code for locale-aware formatting of numeric output.
This code did the wrong thing entirely for numbers with an exponent
but no decimal point (e.g., '1e6'), as reported by Jeff Janes in
bug #13636. More generally, it made lots of unverified assumptions
about what the input string could
36 matches
Mail list logo