| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: RPM source files should be in CVS (was Re: psql -l) |
| Date: | 2001-07-20 20:33:17 |
| Message-ID: | 4845.995661197@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
> Oleg announced the new intarray in this message:
> http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=120655 and there was
> discussion following. But I don't see this version in CURRENT CVS???
I believe the state of play is that we have some catalog-changing work
to do to support GIST (ie, make "haskeytype" work cleanly), and merging
the updated intarray code is on hold until that gets done --- hopefully,
early next month. We're probably not exactly in sync with what Oleg
has, but I'm not worried about it until the GIST dust settles.
I dunno whether it makes sense to be shipping the updated intarray code
with 7.1; does it work properly in 7.1? Ask Oleg ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Travis Bauer | 2001-07-20 20:33:37 | Re: InputStream as parameter not supported |
| Previous Message | Patrick Macdonald | 2001-07-20 20:11:03 | Re: How Postgresql Compares For Query And Load Operations |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-07-20 21:14:44 | Re: RPM source files should be in CVS (was Re: psql -l) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-07-20 20:17:22 | Re: Large queries - again... |