Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Change FETCH/MOVE

2006-09-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: There is *no* credible use case for this (hint: MOVE FORWARD/BACKWARD ALL does not need this to work for 2G tables). Already done because of bad coding. You want the TODO item removed too? As I said, I see no

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Change FETCH/MOVE

2006-09-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This patch has broken half the buildfarm, and I've still not seen a rationale why we need to make such a change at all. Fixed with attached patch. The use case for this was not FETCH, but MOVE for 2gig tables. There is *no*

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Change FETCH/MOVE to use int8.

2006-09-02 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: There is *no* credible use case for this (hint: MOVE FORWARD/BACKWARD ALL does not need this to work for 2G tables). Already done because of bad coding. You want the TODO item removed too? As I said, I see no use case for it. Maybe if