From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(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 03:32:20 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTimFcSppy9O3-N=xdDYW6QArqU62pA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:06 PM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
>> 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?
>
> Ah, crap. You're right. I didn't follow your directions for how to
> apply the patch. Sorry.
I think you need to update the comment in simplify_function() to say
that we have three strategies, rather than two. I think it would also
be appropriate to add a longish comment just before the test that
calls protransform, explaining what the charter of that function is
and why the mechanism exists.
Documentation issues aside, I see very little not to like about this.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-06-19 03:53:17 | Re: creating CHECK constraints as NOT VALID |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-06-19 03:12:26 | Re: Identifying no-op length coercions |