Re: Greatest Common Divisor

From: Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Greatest Common Divisor
Date: 2020-01-20 08:03:50
Message-ID: ae1921f8-0f92-50ff-b8f4-89749b49d845@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 20/01/2020 08:44, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 12:31, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> Do we actually need the smallint versions of these functions?
>> Doubt it. It'd be fairly hard even to call those, since e.g. "42"
>> is an int not a smallint.
>>
> I see this has been marked RFC. I'll take it,

Thanks!

> and barring objections,
> I'll start by ripping out the smallint code.

No strong objection.

--

Vik Fearing

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2020-01-20 08:09:26 Re: Allow 'sslkey' and 'sslcert' in postgres_fdw user mappings
Previous Message Yugo NAGATA 2020-01-20 07:57:58 Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance