From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index |
Date: | 2010-10-09 18:46:20 |
Message-ID: | 4CB0B87C.3040802@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/09/2010 02:19 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com
> <mailto:singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
>
> This is a continuation from this thread:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-09/msg02153.php
>
> The attached patch allows creating a primary key using an existing
> index.
>
> I have attached two versions of the patch: one is context diff,
> and the other is the same except ignoring whitespace changes.
>
>
> Attached are gzip'd patches for archives. Archive shows the previous
> mail attachments all inline... horrible.
>
I wish we could get the archive processor to provide access to the
attachments even if they have a MIME type of text/whatever. That's a
horrid inefficiency. Maybe we could restrict it to text attachments that
have a Content-Type with a name attribute that contains the string
'patch', or a similar Content-Disposition filename attribute.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-10-09 19:30:19 | archives, attachments, etc (was: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index) |
Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2010-10-09 18:19:26 | Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index |