On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 06:42 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> internally is table functions implemenation identical with SRF.
It's not the internals that I'm concerned about.
> Semantically is far - user's doesn't specify return type (what is from
> PostgreSQL), but specifies return table, what is mo
Here is a WIP patch based on the discussions here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-05/msg00863.php
The attached WIP patch improves the LAZY VACUUM by limiting or
avoiding the second heap scan. This not only saves considerable time
in VACUUM, but also reduces the double-writes of
2008/6/10 Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 13:03 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> this patch add support of table functions syntax like ANSI SQL 2003.
>
> I'm not necessarily opposed to this, but I wonder if we really need
> *more* syntax variants for declaring set-returning f
2008/6/10 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 13:03 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>> this patch add support of table functions syntax like ANSI SQL 2003.
>
>> I'm not necessarily opposed to this, but I wonder if we really need
>> *more* sy
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane escribió:
>> (It's also worth asking where the import is coming from. Who implements
>> the spec syntax anyway? DB2 maybe, but when was the last time we heard
>> from anyone trying to migrate from DB2 to PG?)
> Sourceforge?
They gave up on u
Tom Lane escribió:
> (It's also worth asking where the import is coming from. Who implements
> the spec syntax anyway? DB2 maybe, but when was the last time we heard
> from anyone trying to migrate from DB2 to PG?)
Sourceforge?
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.Comma
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 13:03 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> this patch add support of table functions syntax like ANSI SQL 2003.
> I'm not necessarily opposed to this, but I wonder if we really need
> *more* syntax variants for declaring set-returning funct
There was some discussion a few days ago about making dependency.c emit
dependency reports in the same style that pg_shdepend.c does, viz
a lot of DETAIL lines on a single message instead of separate NOTICE
messages. Attached is a tentative patch that does that. See the
regression-test diffs for
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 13:03 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> this patch add support of table functions syntax like ANSI SQL 2003.
I'm not necessarily opposed to this, but I wonder if we really need
*more* syntax variants for declaring set-returning functions. The
existing patchwork of features is con
These should read TSQuery, not TSVector, no?
--
Jan Urbanski
GPG key ID: E583D7D2
ouden estin
*** src/include/tsearch/ts_type.h
--- src/include/tsearch/ts_type.h 2008-06-09 23:41:26.0 +0200
***
*** 239,248
*/
#define COMPUTESIZE(size, lenofoperand) ( HDRSIZETQ
Attached is a patch that makes some minor changes to the text emitted by
the new "help" command. Previous output:
postgres=# help
You are using psql, the command-line interface to PostgreSQL.
\? for psql help
\h or \help for SQL help
\g or ";" to execute a query
\
11 matches
Mail list logo