From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Hitoshi Harada" <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Window Functions: patch for CommitFest:Nov. |
Date: | 2008-10-31 17:27:13 |
Message-ID: | 87y704fzf2.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Hitoshi Harada" <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2008/11/1 David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>:
>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 01:00:38PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Hitoshi Harada escribió:
>>>
>>> > [Patch itself]
>>> > http://umitanuki.net/pgsql/wfv08/window_functions.patch.20081031.gz
>>>
>>> Please send the patch to the pgsql-hackers list too. That way we will
>>> have the patch around, even if the site above goes away in a few years.
>>
>> Here's a bzip2 version, which I hope will get through, as it's over
>> 100kB.
>>
> I've ever sent a patch over 100k and failed. Actually how much is the
> limitation of the patch size? And if the patch is too huge, is it
> better to split the patch than send an external link?
I suppose you could upload the patch to the wiki which just gives a warning
but lets you go ahead.
Isn't this like the third time we've run into this and said we were going to
raise/erase the limit?
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2008-10-31 17:37:00 | Re: pre-MED |
Previous Message | Brad Nicholson | 2008-10-31 17:23:23 | Re: Enabling archive_mode without restart |