Re: pg_stat_reset() weirdness

From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_stat_reset() weirdness
Date: 2002-08-10 09:50:39
Message-ID: 009e01c24053$6376aba0$0200a8c0@SOL
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hang on - I _can't_ fix the function defiition - it returns a bool and
that's why it's failing. I can't have it returning a void because it's not
possible. Check list of all other excluded functions as well...

Chris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_reset() weirdness

> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > If you apply the pg_stat_reset() function patch you get this regression
> > failure. Is this because it's returning a bool I guess? Shall I just
fix
> > the regression test to exclude this function?
>
> No, you should fix the function definition. The sanity checks are there
> for a reason.
>
> regards, tom lane
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2002-08-10 09:52:47 Re: pg_stat_reset() weirdness
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2002-08-10 06:51:26 Re: [GENERAL] workaround for lack of REPLACE() function