From: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
Cc: | robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, sk(at)zsrv(dot)org, michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots |
Date: | 2018-01-16 09:04:51 |
Message-ID: | 20180116.180451.243269920.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I'm digressing...
At Mon, 15 Jan 2018 21:45:34 -0500, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote in <26718(dot)1516070734(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Since the "Stripping trailing CRs from patch" message is totally
> > harmless, I'm not sure why you should need to devote any effort to
> > avoiding it. Anyone who gets it should just ignore it.
I know that and totally agree to Robert but still I wonder why
(and am annoyed by) I sometimes receive such complain or even an
accusation that I sent an out-of-the-convention patch and I was
afraid that it is not actually common.
For thie reason I roughly counted up CT/CTE's that people here is
using for patches in my mail box this time and got the following
numbers. (Counted on attachments with a name "*.patch/diff".)
Rank : Freq : CT/CTE
1: 3308: application/octet-stream:base64
2: 1642: text/x-patch;charset=us-ascii:base64
3: 1286: text/x-diff;charset=us-ascii:7bit
* 4: 997: text/x-patch;charset=us-ascii:7bit
5: 497: text/x-diff;charset=us-ascii:base64
6: 406: text/x-diff:quoted-printable
7: 403: text/plain;charset=us-ascii:7bit
8: 389: text/x-diff:base64
9: 321: application/x-gzip:base64
10: 281: text/plain;charset=us-ascii:base64
<snip>
Total: attachments=11461 / mails=158121
The most common setting is application/octet-stream:base64 but
text/x-patch;charset=us-ascii:7bit is also one of ... the majority?
I'm convinced that my original setting is not so problematic so I
reverted it.
> Not sure, but that might be another situation in which "patch"
> works and "git apply" doesn't. (Feeling too lazy to test it...)
I was also afraid of that as I wrote upthread but it seems also a
needless fear.
regards,
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Prabhat Sahu | 2018-01-16 09:17:32 | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation) |
Previous Message | Jeevan Chalke | 2018-01-16 08:56:03 | Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise aggregation/grouping |