Re: [PATCHES] psql slash# command

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Sibte Abbas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > I wonder whether it wouldn't be safer and more convenient if we defined > > '\

Re: [PATCHES] Remove FATAL from pg_lzdecompress

Tom Lane napsal(a): Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I attach patch which adds boundaries check and memory overwriting protection when compressed data are corrupted. Good point. Is there plan to applied also on other branch? I wasn't planning to back-patch it. Given the lack of fi

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Including Snapshot Info with Indexes

I have added URLs to your patch to the TODO list: * Allow data to be pulled directly from indexes --- Gokulakannan Somasundaram wrote: > Hi, > I would like to present the first patch. It currently has the follow

Re: [PATCHES] Fix for win32 stat() problems

Magnus Hagander wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: > > Attached is a patch that attempts to fix the issues with stat() not > > properly updating st_size on win32, as reported in this thread: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg01181.php > > > > It has to have a chance to affec

Re: [PATCHES] Fix for win32 stat() problems

Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > A whole lot simpler patch :-) > > Seems like you no longer need the !defined(_DIRMOD_C) bit here? Correct. That wasn't the actual error, that was me misdiagnosing the situation. > Also please include a comment about why has to be

Re: [PATCHES] Fix for win32 stat() problems

Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> How about #defining safe_stat to be pg_win32_safe_stat on Windows and >> simply stat elsewhere? Then use safe_stat at the places you consider >> critical. > I would couple this with a pgwin32_unsafe_stat on Windows, which ch

Re: [PATCHES] Fix for win32 stat() problems

Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > A whole lot simpler patch :-) Seems like you no longer need the !defined(_DIRMOD_C) bit here? Also please include a comment about why has to be forcibly included. A more general question: can't we get rid of most of the #ifdef WIN32 cruft in include/

Re: [PATCHES] Fix for win32 stat() problems

Magnus Hagander wrote: > Attached is a patch that attempts to fix the issues with stat() not > properly updating st_size on win32, as reported in this thread: > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg01181.php > > It has to have a chance to affect things beyond just the > pg_relat

Re: [PATCHES] Fix for win32 stat() problems

Andrew Dunstan wrote: > How about #defining safe_stat to be pg_win32_safe_stat on Windows and > simply stat elsewhere? Then use safe_stat at the places you consider > critical. I would couple this with a pgwin32_unsafe_stat on Windows, which changes the size value to 0, so that if anyone gets

Re: [PATCHES] Partial match in GIN

How about forcing the use of a bitmap index scan, and modify the indexam API so that GIN could a return a lossy bitmap, and let the bitmap heap scan do the rechecking? Partial match might be used only for one search entry from many. In sext search example: 'a:* & qwertyuiop' - second lexeme ha

Re: [PATCHES] EXPLAIN progress info

"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I think a better way to get a real "percentage done" would be to add a method >> to each node which estimates its percentage done based on the percentage done >> its children report and its actual and expected ro