On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 05:34:50PM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
The program logic shouldn't change at all. He meant that extra coding effort
is needed if you want manual caching. It requires 2 loops instead of 1 if you
use
FETCH N (N1).
Ah, thanks for the explanation.
Michael
--
On 20.02.2012 08:00, Amit Kapila wrote:
I was trying to understand this patch and had few doubts:
1. In PerformXLogInsert(), why there is need to check freespace when
already during ReserveXLogInsertLocation(), the space is reserved. Is
it possible that the record size is more than actually
(2012/02/21 20:25), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Please find attached an updated version of the patch.
This v2 patch can be applied on HEAD cleanly. Compile completed with
only one expected warning of scan.c, and all regression tests for both
core and contrib modules passed.
This patch allows FDWs to
On 5 March 2012 17:23, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
This is different from what Perl does, but I think Perl's behavior
here is batty: given a+|a+b+ and the string aaabbb, it picks the first
branch and matches only aaa.
Yeah, this is sometimes referred to as ordered alternation,
Tom, agreed - it looks like we dug the hole and got ourselves into it.
But I still want to understand why.
It looks like we have rather small table on the host where I see the
slowness. And all other tables have triggers that will update one row
in that small table. The small table contains
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Checksums patch isn't sucking much attention at all but admittedly
there are some people opposed to the patch that want to draw out the
(2012/03/05 18:21), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
(2012/02/21 20:25), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Please find attached an updated version of the patch.
This v2 patch can be applied on HEAD cleanly. Compile completed with
only one expected warning of scan.c, and all regression tests for both
core and
(2012/03/05 21:00), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
(2012/03/05 18:21), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
(2012/02/21 20:25), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Please find attached an updated version of the patch.
This v2 patch can be applied on HEAD cleanly. Compile completed with
only one expected warning of scan.c, and all
(2012/03/05 21:05), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
(2012/03/05 21:00), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
create_index_path builds multiple index paths for a plain relation. How
about renaming the function to create_foreign_paths?
I meant create_foreignscan_paths. I'm sorry about that.
Perhaps you are confusing
On 03/05/2012 05:12 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Simon Riggssi...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Checksums patch isn't sucking much attention at all but admittedly
there are some people opposed to
Hello
2012/3/5 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of dom mar 04 16:33:08 -0300 2012:
Hello
2012/3/4 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
CHECK FUNCTION
-
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 1:11 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
BTW, one other thing about the count histogram: seems like we are
frequently generating uselessly large ones. For instance, do ANALYZE
in the regression database and then run
select tablename,attname,elem_count_histogram
Gregg Jaskiewicz wrote:
Also, on the subject of prepared transactions (2PC), the select *
from pg_prepared_xacts ; query simply does not reveal anything,
despite the fact that I know that there should be at least two of
those open.
Unless it only list saved transactions, not a transaction
To avoid any confusion as to where this proposed feature is now, I'd
like to summarise my understanding, make proposals and also request
clear feedback on them.
Checksums have a number of objections to them outstanding.
1. We don't need them because there will be something better in a
later
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Hmm, I think I see how that can happen:
0. A heap page has its bit set in visibility map to begin with
1. A heap tuple is inserted/updated/deleted. This clears the VM bit.
2. time passes, and more
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
I'm just looking at this patch, and I agree, it should be testable. I'm
wondering if it wouldn't be a good idea to have a module or set of modules
for demonstrating and testing bits of the API that we expose.
small fix of CheckFunctionById function
Regards
p.s. Alvaro, please, send your patch and I'll merge it
/*
* Connect to SPI manager
*/
if (SPI_connect() != SPI_OK_CONNECT)
elog(ERROR, SPI_connect failed);
values[0] = ObjectIdGetDatum(funcOid);
values[1] =
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Uh! Now that I read this I realize that what you're supposed to give to
CHECK TRIGGER is the trigger name, not the function name! In that
light, using CHECK FUNCTION for this doesn't make a lot of sense.
Okay,
2012/3/5 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Uh! Now that I read this I realize that what you're supposed to give to
CHECK TRIGGER is the trigger name, not the function name! In that
light, using CHECK FUNCTION
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I think the right way to imagine this is as though the regular
expression were being matched to the source text in left-to-right
fashion.
No, it isn't. You are headed down the garden path that leads to a
Perl-style definition-by-implementation, and in
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Marti, please review this latest version which has new isolation tests added.
This does both TRUNCATE and CREATE TABLE.
I don't see any need for a GUC to control this behavior. The current
behavior is wrong, so if we're
On 21.02.2012 13:19, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Attached is a new version, fixing that, and off-by-one bug you pointed out
in the slot wraparound handling. I also moved code around a bit, I think
this new
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I confess to some bafflement about why we need dedicated syntax for
this, or even any kind of core support at all. What would be wrong
with defining a function that takes regprocedure as an argument and
does whatever? Sure, it's nicer syntax, but
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Marti, please review this latest version which has new isolation tests added.
This does both TRUNCATE and CREATE TABLE.
I don't see any need for
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
I'm just looking at this patch, and I agree, it should be testable. I'm
wondering if it wouldn't be a good idea to have a module or set of modules
for demonstrating and testing
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
On 21.02.2012 13:19, Fujii Masao wrote:
In some places, the spinlock insertpos_lck is taken while another
spinlock info_lck is being held. Is this OK? What if unfortunately
inner spinlock takes long to be taken?
Hmm, that's only
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Does this patch have any user-visible effect? I thought it would make
pg_last_xact_replay_timestamp() advance, but it does not seem to. I
looked through the source a bit, and as best I can tell this only sets
some
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I think the right way to imagine this is as though the regular
expression were being matched to the source text in left-to-right
fashion.
No, it isn't. You are headed down the
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
It does not seem right that the logic for detecting the serialization
error is in heap_beginscan_internal(). Surely this is just as much of
a problem for an index-scan or index-only-scan.
err, very good point. Doh.
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I agree behaviour is wrong, the only question is whether our users
rely in some way on that behaviour. Given the long discussion on that
point earlier I thought it best to add a GUC. Easy to remove, now or
later.
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
It does not seem right that the logic for detecting the serialization
error is in heap_beginscan_internal(). Surely this is just as much of
a
On 03/05/2012 12:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Andrew Dunstanand...@dunslane.net wrote:
I'm just looking at this patch, and I agree, it should be testable. I'm
wondering if it wouldn't be a good idea to have a module or set
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I confess to some bafflement about why we need dedicated syntax for
this, or even any kind of core support at all. What would be wrong
with defining a function that takes regprocedure
Shigeru Hanada shigeru.han...@gmail.com writes:
So, just renaming create_foreignscan_path to plural form seems missing
the point.
I agree that that wouldn't be an improvement. What bothers me about the
patch's version of this function is that it just creates a content-free
Path node and leaves
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
The latest version of this patch looks sound to me. We haven't
insisted on having even a sample application for every hook before,
let alone a regression test, so I don't think this patch needs one
either.
What we've
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 12:20 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
One annoying thing about that is that it will reduce the usefulness of
add_path_precheck, because that's called before we compute the rowcount
estimates (and indeed not having to make
2012/3/5 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I confess to some bafflement about why we need dedicated syntax for
this, or even any kind of core support at all. What would be wrong
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of lun mar 05 13:02:50 -0300 2012:
small fix of CheckFunctionById function
Regards
p.s. Alvaro, please, send your patch and I'll merge it
Here it is, with your changes already merged. I also added back the
new reference doc files which were dropped
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
But it's nervous-making to be making
decisions like that on the basis of rather small sets of queries.
I heartily agree.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
I'd like to see a spec for exactly which fields of ErrorData the hook is
allowed to change, and some rationale.
Good question. I'd somewhat be inclined to say that it should
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Ants Aasma ants.aa...@eesti.ee wrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
... After that I think maybe some testing of the
remaining CommitFest
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
This
seems like a horrid mess that's going to be unsustainable both from a
complexity and a performance standpoint. The only reason
Excerpts from Simon Riggs's message of lun mar 05 15:28:59 -0300 2012:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
From a performance standpoint, we really need to think not only about
the cases where the patch wins, but also, and maybe more importantly,
On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 05:16:06PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 11:41:05AM -0500, Noah Misch wrote:
I suggest enabling the feature by default but drastically reducing the
default
readahead chunk size from 256 to, say, 5. That still reduces the FETCH
round
trip
On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 04:33:32PM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
2012-03-02 17:41 keltez?ssel, Noah Misch ?rta:
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:46:23AM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
I suggest enabling the feature by default but drastically reducing the
default
readahead chunk size from
Dear Developers,
I am looking for elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a
database or cluster - for now I can not find that solution.
OK if You say use cron or pgAgent I say I know that solutions, but
the are not effective and elegant. Compilation of pgAgent is a pain
(especially
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 09:29:56AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:46 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
I've yet to see an MVCC anomaly that one can reproduce at REPEATABLE READ
and
not at READ COMMITTED. ?They tend to be narrow race conditions at READ
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Simon Riggs's message of lun mar 05 15:28:59 -0300 2012:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
From a performance standpoint, we really need to think not only
2012/3/5 Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com
Dear Developers,
I am looking for elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a
database or cluster - for now I can not find that solution.
OK if You say use cron or pgAgent I say I know that solutions, but
the are not effective and elegant.
Excerpts from Simon Riggs's message of lun mar 05 16:34:10 -0300 2012:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
It does however, illustrate my next review comment which is that the
comments and README items are sorely lacking here. It's quite hard to
Excerpts from Artur Litwinowicz's message of lun mar 05 16:18:56 -0300 2012:
Dear Developers,
I am looking for elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a
database or cluster - for now I can not find that solution.
Yeah, it'd be good to have something. Many people say it's not
2012/3/5 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Uh! Now that I read this I realize that what you're supposed to give to
CHECK TRIGGER is the trigger name, not the function name! In that
light, using CHECK FUNCTION
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 11:28:24AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I think the right way to imagine this is as though the regular
expression were being matched to the source text in left-to-right
fashion.
No, it isn't. You are headed down the garden path
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, there's no point that I can see in having two checks. I just
dislike the idea that we have to remember to add this check for every
method of accessing the relation - doesn't seem terribly future-proof.
It gets
Hello
2012/3/5 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Artur Litwinowicz's message of lun mar 05 16:18:56 -0300 2012:
Dear Developers,
I am looking for elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a
database or cluster - for now I can not find that solution.
Yeah,
Martijn van Oosterhout klep...@svana.org writes:
On the otherhand, I think requiring an overall longest match makes
your implementation non-polynomial complexity.
Only if you don't know how to implement it -- a DFA-based implementation
doesn't have much trouble with this.
[ equivalence of
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
My other comments so far are
* some permutations commented out - no comments as to why
Something of a fault with the isolation tester that it just shows
output, there's no way to record expected output in the
Hi,
Thanks for the extensive testing. I'm adding your tests to the
regression suite, and keep wondering if you saw that lots of them were
already covered? Did you try make installcheck?
Thom Brown t...@linux.com writes:
Creating a command trigger using ANY COMMAND results in oid,
schemaname,
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 09:29:56AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:46 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
I've yet to see an MVCC anomaly that one can reproduce at REPEATABLE READ
and
not at READ
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
In any event, I think a pg_class.relvalidxmin is the right starting point.
One might imagine a family of relvalidxmin, convalidxmin, indcheckxmin
(already exists), inhvalidxmin, and attvalidxmin. relvalidxmin is like the
W dniu 2012-03-05 20:56, Alvaro Herrera pisze:
Excerpts from Artur Litwinowicz's message of lun mar 05 16:18:56 -0300 2012:
Dear Developers,
I am looking for elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a
database or cluster - for now I can not find that solution.
Yeah, it'd be
2012/3/5 Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com:
W dniu 2012-03-05 20:56, Alvaro Herrera pisze:
Excerpts from Artur Litwinowicz's message of lun mar 05 16:18:56 -0300 2012:
Dear Developers,
I am looking for elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a
database or cluster - for now I can
On Monday, March 05, 2012 09:42:00 PM Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
Still no command triggers firing for CREATE TABLE AS:
Yes, Andres made CTAS a utility command, he didn't add the code that
make them fire command triggers. I would expect his patch to get in
first, so I don't expect him to be
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Dimitri Fontaine dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Right. What I thought I was agreeing with was the notion that you
should need to specify more than the trigger name to drop the
trigger. Rather like how you can
I wrote:
I'm inclined to think that if we provide this function in core at all,
it should take a parameter list long enough to let it fill in the Path
completely. That would imply that any future changes in Path structs
would result in a change in the parameter list, which would break
W dniu 2012-03-05 22:09, Pavel Stehule pisze:
2012/3/5 Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com:
W dniu 2012-03-05 20:56, Alvaro Herrera pisze:
Excerpts from Artur Litwinowicz's message of lun mar 05 16:18:56 -0300 2012:
Dear Developers,
I am looking for elegant and effective way for running jobs
On 5 March 2012 20:42, Dimitri Fontaine dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for the extensive testing. I'm adding your tests to the
regression suite, and keep wondering if you saw that lots of them were
already covered? Did you try make installcheck?
Yes, but I felt it better that I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Is there any way to get more info out of CLUSTER VERBOSE so it says
what index it's working on AFTER the table re-write?
INFO: clustering public.values using sequential scan and sort
INFO: values: found 0 removable, 260953511 nonremovable row
Excerpts from Artur Litwinowicz's message of lun mar 05 18:32:44 -0300 2012:
Ouch... in next 2-4 years - it broke my heart like a bullet - You
should not write it... ;)
I feel that I need to set aside SQL, Python, PHP and so on and take to
my hands old book about C programming language from
W dniu 2012-03-05 22:44, Alvaro Herrera pisze:
Excerpts from Artur Litwinowicz's message of lun mar 05 18:32:44 -0300 2012:
Ouch... in next 2-4 years - it broke my heart like a bullet - You
should not write it... ;)
I feel that I need to set aside SQL, Python, PHP and so on and take to
my
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com wrote:
I understand it... (I meant if you wanna something... do it for your
self - it is the fastest way).
other way is to fund the work so someone can use his/her time to do it
Regarding a functional area I can help... but I
On 12.5.2011 08:54, Greg Smith wrote:
Tomas Vondra wrote:
The idea is that buildfarm systems that are known to have a) reasonable
hardware and b) no other concurrent work going on could also do
performance tests. The main benefit of this approach is it avoids
duplicating all of the system
W dniu 2012-03-05 23:09, Jaime Casanova pisze:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com wrote:
I understand it... (I meant if you wanna something... do it for your
self - it is the fastest way).
other way is to fund the work so someone can use his/her time to do it
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Artur Litwinowicz's message of lun mar 05 18:32:44 -0300 2012:
Ouch... in next 2-4 years - it broke my heart like a bullet - You
should not write it... ;)
I feel that I need to set aside SQL,
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello
2012/3/5 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Artur Litwinowicz's message of lun mar 05 16:18:56 -0300 2012:
Dear Developers,
I am looking for elegant and effective way for running
On ons, 2012-02-22 at 12:26 -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
I started collecting up all the variants that do work as an
initial shell script regression test, so that changes don't break
something that already works. Here are all the variations that
already work, setup so that a series of 1 outputs
Keep in mind that it's not about coding in C but mostly about figuring
out what a sane design out to look like.
While I can straddle the fence pretty my first reaction is that we are talking
about application functionality that falls outside what belongs in core
PostgreSQL. I'd
3. Pages with checksums set need to have a version marking to show
that they are a later version of the page layout. That version number
needs to be extensible to many later versions. Pages of multiple
versions need to exist within the server to allow simple upgrades and
migration.
This is
I have a report related to pg_upgrade where the user states that
dropping a PL language retains the PL support functions, and retains the
dependency on the PL library, which causes pg_upgrade to complain. The
exact case is that the user was using plpython2u in PG 9.0, but the PG
9.1 one-click
Hello, I'm sorry for the abesnce.
But it's broken in V3 protocol - getAnotherTuple() will be called
only if the packet is fully read. If the packet contents do not
agree with packet header, it's protocol error. Only valid EOF
return in V3 getAnotherTuple() is when row processor asks
for
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 09:45:41PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 02:15:30PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 01:24:45PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
Running this script will delete the old cluster's data files:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
By doing a DROP CASCADE on plpython2, you drop the user functions, but
not the support functions.
Well, yeah. The language depends on the support functions, not the
other way around.
This certainly looks like a bug. Should I work on a patch?
It's not
2012-03-05 19:56 keltezéssel, Noah Misch írta:
Having pondered the matter further, I now agree with Michael that the feature
should stay disabled by default. See my response to him for rationale.
Assuming that conclusion holds, we can recommended a higher value to users who
enable the
Hello
* I refreshed regress tests and appended tests for multi lines query
* There are enhanced checking of SELECT INTO statement
* I fixed showing details and hints
Regards
Pavel Stehule
2012/3/5 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of lun mar 05
84 matches
Mail list logo
