On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Asif Naeem anaeem...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry for being late. Thank you for sharing updated patch, sgml changes
seems not working i.e.
postgres=# select max('192.168.1.5', '192.168.1.4');
ERROR: function max(unknown, unknown) does not exist
LINE 1: select
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
Thanks for looking into this.
Is anyone going to look at this?
I attach a new revision. The only real change to the code is that I
fixed an open item concerning what to do on WIN32 with UTF-8, where
the UTF-16 hacks that we
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 2:35 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com writes:
In order to get my patch working with an Assert enabled build I've had to
apply the attached patch.
That patch is entirely bogus. What you should be asking is why
get_loop_count
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 4:49 AM, Thomas Munro mu...@ip9.org wrote:
Here is a new version of the patch with a single enum LockWaitPolicy
defined in utils/lockwaitpolicy.h.
That seems much cleaner
A few more comments:
You seem to have lost the comment which indicates that the values of the
Alvaro,
* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
Stephen Frost wrote:
Of course, we handle this in 'GRANT' with 'GRANT ON ALL TABLES', so why
not 'ALTER TABLE ON ALL TABLES IN TABLESPACE blah'? that does get
pretty darn verbose but is at least a bit more in-line with what
Hi,dear steven pgsql-hackers
I've encountered the similar phenonmenon with 9.4 .
1. environment
1.1 OS version
postgres@lhl-Latitude-E5420:~$ cat /etc/issue
Ubuntu 13.10 \n \l
postgres@lhl-Latitude-E5420:~$ uname -av
Linux lhl-Latitude-E5420 3.11.0-12-generic #19-Ubuntu SMP Wed Oct 9
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
What may be of more interest to reviewers is the revised AC_TRY_RUN
test program that configure consults.
I haven't looked yet. Can you describe what exactly the AC_TRY_RUN is
testing for?
If it's just whether the system
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
On 07/26/2014 06:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
Yes, I did that and generated a PDF, but I got an enormous number of
errors or warnings. See
https://www.dropbox.com/s/9n4hhijin3qn8mw/postgres-US.log for example.
David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 2:35 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
That patch is entirely bogus. What you should be asking is why
get_loop_count is being applied to a relation that's supposedly been
removed from the query.
hmm ok. After further
=?utf-8?B?5p2O5rW36b6Z?= hailong...@qunar.com writes:
I have a PostgreSQL datadir named /export/pg94beta1_data/ which was
initialized with PostgreSQL 9.4beta1,
[ and 9.4beta2 won't start with it ]
This is expected; you need to initdb. Or use pg_upgrade to upgrade
the cluster. We had to
Understand!
Before I wrote last email, I had initialized a new db with PostgreSQL
9.4beta2 and restored the pg_dumpall data of /export/pg94beta1_data/
Thanks
Best Regards!
at 2014-07-28 00:35 +08, Tom Lane wrote:
=?utf-8?B?5p2O5rW36b6Z?= hailong...@qunar.com writes:
I have a PostgreSQL
On 07/27/2014 09:35 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
=?utf-8?B?5p2O5rW36b6Z?= hailong...@qunar.com writes:
I have a PostgreSQL datadir named /export/pg94beta1_data/ which was
initialized with PostgreSQL 9.4beta1,
[ and 9.4beta2 won't start with it ]
This is expected; you need to initdb. Or use
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
I haven't looked yet. Can you describe what exactly the AC_TRY_RUN is
testing for?
It's more or less testing for a primary weight level (i.e. the first
part of the blob) that is no larger than the original characters of
the
On 27 July 2014 14:31, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 4:49 AM, Thomas Munro mu...@ip9.org wrote:
Here is a new version of the patch with a single enum LockWaitPolicy
defined in utils/lockwaitpolicy.h.
That seems much cleaner
A few more comments:
You seem
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 1:13 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Joe Conway m...@joeconway.com wrote:
No. If we change it to PGC_SIGHUP, SHOW command does display
the changed value after a reload. It's the same behavior as other
PGC_SIGHUP parameters
15 matches
Mail list logo
