gSoC - ADD MERGE COMMAND - code patch submission
in [PgSql]
|
Prev: Reworks of DML permission checks
Next: pgsql: Add support for TCPkeepalives on Windows, both for backend and
From: David Fetter on 10 Jul 2010 16:03 On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 01:53:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > David Fetter <david(a)fetter.org> writes: > > By the way, "make check" fails here with attached initdb.log: > > > creating system views ... FATAL: unrecognized token: "false" > > Hm, I'd suspect something fouled up in keyword recognition. Did you > do a "make clean" and rebuild? I did make maintainer-clean. > BTW, this patch is still a few bricks shy of a load, since there's > no kwlist.h change and so the new MERGE keyword couldn't possibly be > recognized. More generally, I'm wondering why the original .rar > submission was 300k (presumably compressed) and your diff is only > about 35k ... I'll look into that. From what you can see, is it worth trying to clean up, starting from base, or should we just wait for the next revision of the patch? Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <david(a)fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter(a)gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Tom Lane on 10 Jul 2010 16:26 David Fetter <david(a)fetter.org> writes: > On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 01:53:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> BTW, this patch is still a few bricks shy of a load, since there's >> no kwlist.h change and so the new MERGE keyword couldn't possibly be >> recognized. More generally, I'm wondering why the original .rar >> submission was 300k (presumably compressed) and your diff is only >> about 35k ... > I'll look into that. From what you can see, is it worth trying to > clean up, starting from base, or should we just wait for the next > revision of the patch? Well, rebasing against HEAD will presumably help the submitter (assuming that he takes the advice to work against HEAD not 8.4.x). But really what we need to see is design documentation, not code. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Tom Lane on 10 Jul 2010 18:30 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(a)gmx.net> writes: > On lör, 2010-07-10 at 12:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I believe the project standard is to make things readable >> in an 80-column window --- anyone have an objection to stating that >> explicitly? > Is that what pgindent reformats it to? pgindent tries to leave a character or two to spare, IIRC, so its target is probably 78 or thereabouts. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Peter Eisentraut on 10 Jul 2010 18:25 On lör, 2010-07-10 at 12:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I believe the project standard is to make things readable > in an 80-column window --- anyone have an objection to stating that > explicitly? Is that what pgindent reformats it to? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Andrew Dunstan on 10 Jul 2010 18:21
Tom Lane wrote: > BTW, I notice that that page fails to mention anything about preferred > window width. I believe the project standard is to make things readable > in an 80-column window --- anyone have an objection to stating that > explicitly? > > > No, on the contrary, I'm in favor of stating it. cheers andrew -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |