On Mon, 7 Apr 2014 12:00:49 -0400
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
In other words, let's revert the whole refactoring of this file to
create reg*_guts functions, and instead just copy the relevant logic
for the name lookups into the new functions. For to_regproc(), for
example, it
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:01 AM, Yugo Nagata nag...@sraoss.co.jp wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2014 12:00:49 -0400
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
In other words, let's revert the whole refactoring of this file to
create reg*_guts functions, and instead just copy the relevant logic
for the
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Looks good, committed with a bit of further cleanup.
I had not actually paid attention to the non-regclass parts of this, and
now that I look, I've got to say that it seems borderline insane to have
chosen to implement regproc/regoper rather than
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Looks good, committed with a bit of further cleanup.
I had not actually paid attention to the non-regclass parts of this, and
now that I look, I've got to say that it seems borderline
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Looks good, committed with a bit of further cleanup.
I had not actually paid attention to the non-regclass
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 1:10 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
The reason of this behavior is that in out functions (regclassout), we return
the OID as it is incase it doesn't exist. One way to fix this is incase of
OID input parameters, we check if the passed OID exists in to_*
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
In other words, let's revert the whole refactoring of this file to
create reg*_guts functions, and instead just copy the relevant logic
for the name lookups into the new functions.
The main discomfort I'd had with this patch was the amount of
On 2014-04-04 11:18:10 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 11:27 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, it will get reset in error. However still we need to free for
missing_ok
case and when it is successful in getting typeid. So don't you think it is
better
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
There's actually another good reason to not copy regclass's behaviour:
postgres=# CREATE TABLE 123();
CREATE TABLE
postgres=# SELECT '123'::regclass;
regclass
--
123
(1 row)
I don't think that's fixable for ::regclass, but we
On 2014-04-07 12:59:36 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
There's actually another good reason to not copy regclass's behaviour:
postgres=# CREATE TABLE 123();
CREATE TABLE
postgres=# SELECT '123'::regclass;
regclass
--
123
(1 row)
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:48 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I see. Here's an updated patch with a bit of minor refactoring to
clean that up, and some improvements to the documentation.
I was all ready to commit this when I got cold feet. What's bothering
me is that the patch,
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 1:41 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Yugo Nagata nag...@sraoss.co.jp wrote:
Hi Amit Kapila,
Thank you for your reviewing. I updated the patch to v5.
I have checked the latest version and found few minor improvements that
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 5:43 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 1:41 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Yugo Nagata nag...@sraoss.co.jp wrote:
Hi Amit Kapila,
Thank you for your reviewing. I updated the patch to v5.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Yugo Nagata nag...@sraoss.co.jp wrote:
Hi Amit Kapila,
Thank you for your reviewing. I updated the patch to v5.
I have checked the latest version and found few minor improvements that
are required:
1.
! if (!missing_ok)
! ereport(ERROR,
!
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Yugo Nagata nag...@sraoss.co.jp wrote:
Thanks for your a lot of comments. I revised the patch according to
comments from Robert Haas and Marti Raudsepp.
I have started looking into
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone has any objection for this behaviour difference between
usage of ::regclass and to_regclass()?
No, I think that makes a lot of sense given the behavior -- if the
object is not there, to_regclass() just returns
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Yugo Nagata nag...@sraoss.co.jp wrote:
Thanks for your a lot of comments. I revised the patch according to
comments from Robert Haas and Marti Raudsepp.
I have started looking into this patch and below are my
initial findings:
1. Dependency is not recorded
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Yugo Nagata nag...@sraoss.co.jp wrote:
Thanks for your a lot of comments. I revised the patch according to
comments from Robert Haas and Marti Raudsepp.
I have started looking into
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Yugo Nagata nag...@sraoss.co.jp wrote:
I revised the patch. Could you please review this?
I didn't test the patch due to the duplicate OID compilation error.
But a few things stuck out from the diffs:
* You added some unnecessary spaces at the beginning of the
There are duplicate oids in pg_proc.h :
make[3]: Entering directory `/tmp/git-pg/src/backend/catalog'
cd ../../../src/include/catalog '/usr/bin/X11/perl' ./duplicate_oids
3180
3195
3196
3197
-
There is a whitespace diff in regoperatorin and regprocedurein() definition.
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Yugo Nagata nag...@sraoss.co.jp wrote:
Hi Amit,
Thanks for your reviewing. I updated the patch.
I fixed the oids and removed the witespace.
This patch contains several whitespace-only hunks. Please revert them.
I don't like the changes to
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:19:37 +0200
Marti Raudsepp ma...@juffo.org wrote:
Resending to Tatsuo Ishii and Yugo Nagata, your email server was
having problems yesterday:
Thanks for resending!
This is the mail system at host sraigw2.sra.co.jp.
yug...@sranhm.sra.co.jp: mail for
22 matches
Mail list logo
