Re: Identifying no-op length coercions

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Identifying no-op length coercions
Date: 2011-06-19 03:06:25
Message-ID: 20110619030624.GB14646@tornado.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 10:57:13PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> > Sounds good. ?Updated patch attached, incorporating your ideas. ?Before applying
> > it, run this command to update the uninvolved pg_proc.h DATA entries:
> > ?perl -pi -e 's/PGUID(\s+\d+){4}/$& 0/' src/include/catalog/pg_proc.h
>
> This doesn't quite apply any more. I think the pgindent run broke it slightly.

Hmm, I just get two one-line offsets when applying it to current master. Note
that you need to run the perl invocation before applying the patch. Could you
provide full output of your `patch' invocation, along with any reject files?

Thanks,
nm

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-06-19 03:09:18 Re: plpgsql performance - SearchCatCache issue
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-06-19 03:05:14 Re: patch: Allow \dd to show constraint comments