sage -
> From: "Joe Conway" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "Hackers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 11:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_reset() weirdnes
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> unique_oids script
Look in src/include/catalog. You'll find duplicate_oids & unused_oids
shell scripts.
Joe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
> Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I guess I should know better than to jump to a conclusion. But I *was*
> > under the impression we were supposed to use the unused_oids script to
> > get a unique oid for a new function.
unique_oids script
Chris
---(end
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I guess I should know better than to jump to a conclusion. But I *was*
> under the impression we were supposed to use the unused_oids script to
> get a unique oid for a new function.
Right, we do still insist that all hand-assigned OIDs be distinct, but
Tom Lane wrote:
> Unfortunately I don't believe Joe's theory --- an OID conflict between
> pg_proc and pg_type shouldn't matter, and in any case the particular
> sanity check that's failing is not looking at pg_type:
I guess I should know better than to jump to a conclusion. But I *was*
under th
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ah doh - I thought it was catching it returning a boolean. I'll fix and
> resubmit.
Unfortunately I don't believe Joe's theory --- an OID conflict between
pg_proc and pg_type shouldn't matter, and in any case the particular
sanity check tha
t;
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 11:26 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_reset() weirdness
> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > If you apply the pg_stat_reset() function patch you get this regression
> > failure. Is this because it's returni
m Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Hackers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_reset() weirdness
> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTEC
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> If you apply the pg_stat_reset() function patch you get this regression
> failure. Is this because it's returning a bool I guess? Shall I just fix
> the regression test to exclude this function?
> AND p1.proname != 'update_pg_pwd_and_pg_g
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you apply the pg_stat_reset() function patch you get this regression
> failure. Is this because it's returning a bool I guess? Shall I just fix
> the regression test to exclude this function?
No, you should fix the function definition.
Hi guys,
If you apply the pg_stat_reset() function patch you get this regression
failure. Is this because it's returning a bool I guess? Shall I just fix
the regression test to exclude this function?
Chris
*** ./expected/opr_sanity.out Fri Jul 19 07:11:32 2002
--- ./results/opr_sanity.out
11 matches
Mail list logo
