Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Tom Lane escribió:
>> I looked at that and decided it was OK as-is. How do you want to
>> change it?
> The reason that it doesn't need locks is not that there's no other
> process running, but that it was already initialized, in the case when
> found is false.
Mph. Th
Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > Itagaki Takahiro escribi�:
> >> Here is a patch to fix pg_stat_statements on Windows.
>
> > Hmm, it seems the comment just above the patched line needs to be fixed.
>
> I looked at that and decided it was OK as-is. How do you want to
> change it?
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Itagaki Takahiro escribió:
>> Here is a patch to fix pg_stat_statements on Windows.
> Hmm, it seems the comment just above the patched line needs to be fixed.
I looked at that and decided it was OK as-is. How do you want to
change it?
regards, t
Itagaki Takahiro writes:
> Here is a patch to fix pg_stat_statements on Windows.
Yeah, that looks about right to me. Committed.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.post
Itagaki Takahiro escribió:
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > > We should call [Read dumpfile] routine only once even on Windows.
> > Seems to me that you should simply do the load only when found is false.
>
> Here is a patch to fix pg_stat_statements on Windows.
Hmm, it seems the comment just above t
Tom Lane wrote:
> > We should call [Read dumpfile] routine only once even on Windows.
> Seems to me that you should simply do the load only when found is false.
Here is a patch to fix pg_stat_statements on Windows.
I see we don't need any locks because initialization is done in postmaster;
The
