Hello,
While going through the TODO items on the wiki I have come across the
following proposal:
Provide a way to query the log collector subprocess to determine the
name of the currently active log file
Current log files when rotating?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2008-11/ms
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 15:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kerem Kat writes:
>> Corresponding is currently implemented in the parse/analyze phase. If
>> it were to be implemented in the planning phase, explain output would
>> likely be as you expect it to be.
>
> It's alre
s like it's now seeing the two tables as the 3rd and 4th
> tables, even though there are only 2 tables in total.
>
> --
> Thom Brown
> Twitter: @darkixion
> IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
> Registered Linux user: #516935
>
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
Regards,
Kerem KAT
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 23:20, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Kerem Kat writes:
>>> Union with NULL error persists without the corresponding patch. Here
>>> is the output from postgres without the patch:
>
>>> SELECT a FROM (SELECT 1 a) foo
>>&
parse_coerce.c:coerce_type method. I will try to dig
deep on it.
Regards,
Kerem KAT
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 15:45, Erik Rijkers wrote:
> (pgsql 9.2devel (25 oct) with your latest CORRESPONDING patch;
> linux x86_64 GNU/Linux 2.6.18-274.3.1.el5)
>
> Hi,
>
> here is another peculiarity, whic
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 20:52, Erik Rijkers wrote:
> On Wed, October 19, 2011 15:01, Kerem Kat wrote:
>> Adding CORRESPONDING to Set Operations
>> Initial patch, filename: corresponding_clause_v2.patch
>
> I had a quick look at the behaviour of this patch.
>
> Btw, the
i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux)
This patch includes documentation and add one regression file.
This patch addresses the following TODO item:
SQL Commands: Add CORRESPONDING BY to UNION/INTERSECT/EXCEPT
Best Regards,
Kerem KAT
*** a/doc/src/sgml/queries.sgml
--- b/doc/src/sg
g as a from clause. We do the same to op->rarg too.
There were no changes done in prepunion.c
There are documentation changes and one regression test in the patch.
Best Regards,
Kerem KAT
*** a/doc/src/sgml/queries.sgml
--- b/doc/src/sgml/queries.sgml
***
*** 1225,1230
---
; documentation available ?
>
> Regards,
> Aditi.
>
What kind of modifications do you want to do?
regards,
Kerem KAT
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 19:51, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kerem Kat writes:
>> In the parser while analyzing SetOperationStmt, larg and rarg needs to be
>> transformed as subqueries. SetOperationStmt can have two fields representing
>> larg and rarg with projected columns accor
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 18:49, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Kerem Kat writes:
> > There is a catch inserting subqueries for corresponding in the planner.
> > Parser expects to see equal number of columns in both sides of the
> > UNION query. If there is corresponding however
rting
subqueries in the planner but it leads to the previous problem of column
ordering and view definition mess-up, and it would be too much bloat
methinks.
I can guess what needs to be done in prepunion.c, but I need a waypointer
for the parser.
tom lane: Thanks for your description
regards
Kere
as if rtargetlist is never sorted.
Where the targetlist gets the column ordering? Apparently not while
targetlist is being lappend'ed (?).
regards,
Kerem KAT
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 17:03, Kerem Kat wrote:
> I delved into the code without waiting for comments from the list just to
> learn
) SELECT 4 a, 5 c
a c
--
1 3
4 5
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 16:20, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Kerem Kat wrote:
> > I am new to postgresql code, I would like to start implementing easyish
> TODO
> > items. I have read most of the developmen
ank you for your attention,
Any comments are welcome.
Kerem KAT
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 12:39, Kerem Kat wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am new to postgresql code, I would like to start implementing easyish
> TODO items. I have read most of the development guidelines, faqs, articles
> by G
[,col2,...]])] to INTERSECT and EXCEPT operators.
Can anyone comment on how much effort this item needs?
regards, kerem kat.
16 matches
Mail list logo
