Wietse Venema writes:
Unless I am mistaken, this implements the same functionality as the
pipemap table. It queries tables in sequence, not in parallel.
Attached is the new patch. Sorry about the confusion.
This one has some documentation changes as well.
Thanks,
Roel
Add support for joinmap
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 08:41:28AM +0200, Roel van Meer wrote:
> Attached is the new patch. Sorry about the confusion.
> This one has some documentation changes as well.
Have not read the patch in detail. Quick note though, in databases
"JOIN" is rather different from "UNION". The "pipemap" is
Viktor Dukhovni:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 08:41:28AM +0200, Roel van Meer wrote:
>
> > Attached is the new patch. Sorry about the confusion.
> > This one has some documentation changes as well.
>
> Have not read the patch in detail. Quick note though, in databases
> "JOIN" is rather different f
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:36:18AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Viktor Dukhovni:
> > On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 08:41:28AM +0200, Roel van Meer wrote:
> >
> > > Attached is the new patch. Sorry about the confusion.
> > > This one has some documentation changes as well.
> >
> > Have not read the pa
Viktor Dukhovni:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:36:18AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Viktor Dukhovni:
> > > On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 08:41:28AM +0200, Roel van Meer wrote:
> > >
> > > > Attached is the new patch. Sorry about the confusion.
> > > > This one has some documentation changes as well
Wietse Venema writes:
[join vs union]
I think there is something to be said for either name. It does not matter to
me, I think you should decide on a name, if you should choose to include
such functionality, to ensure it fits with Postfix's naming conventions
best.
That was a question
Roel van Meer:
> > That was a question that I had about the proposed implementation.
> > The current behavior loses information about which inputs do/don't
> > contribute to a result.
>
> In the proposed implementation, only the *original* input contributes to a
> result.
My question is no long
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:39:22AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> If someone specifies multiple maps, each map is given the same
> query. When only some of the maps produce a result, what should
> the final result be:
>
> - The result is "not found". This is may be desirable in some cases.
> Ri
Viktor Dukhovni writes:
> If someone specifies multiple maps, each map is given the same
> query. When only some of the maps produce a result, what should
> the final result be:
>
> - The result is "not found". This is may be desirable in some cases.
> Right now, the virtual(8) daemon queries
The unionmap is available as of postfix-2.12-20140923.
unionmap:{map1, .., mapN} sends each query to all specified lookup
tables and concatenates all found results, separated by comma.
At its core this does the same thing as Roel's patch, but the user
interface reflects some recent improvements
10 matches
Mail list logo
