From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgbench MAX_ARGS |
Date: | 2019-03-11 15:59:50 |
Message-ID: | a65a7c22-01f1-4e7d-7af7-12b1901f56ea@2ndQuadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/11/19 6:07 AM, David Rowley wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 12:37, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
> <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org> wrote:
>> David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>> I think some comments in the area to explain the 0th is for the sql
>>> would be a good idea too, that might stop any confusion in the
>>> future. I see that's documented in the struct header comment, but
>>> maybe worth a small note around that error message just to confirm the
>>> - 1 is not a mistake, and neither is the >= MAX_ARGS.
>> I have done this in the updated version of the patch, attached.
>> Setting back to NR.
> The patch looks good to me. I'm happy for it to be marked as ready for
> committer. Fabien, do you want to have another look?
>
I think we've spent enough time on this. Committed with minor changes.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ramanarayana | 2019-03-11 16:24:45 | Unaccent extension python script Issue in Windows |
Previous Message | Michael Meskes | 2019-03-11 15:19:39 | Re: ECPG regression with DECLARE STATEMENT support |