| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: operator exclusion constraints |
| Date: | 2009-11-07 18:46:33 |
| Message-ID: | 1257619593.27737.583.camel@jdavis |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 21:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > bison -v doesn't show anything useful beyond saying that there is one
> > shift/reduce conflict. The gram.output is 10MB, which doesn't help me
> > much (I'm still trying to make sense of it).
>
> Well, you need to learn a bit more about bison I think.
Yes, I do. Thank you very much for the detailed explanation; it was very
informative.
I have made the suggested changes, and now it works easily with
EXCLUSION, EXCLUDING, EXCLUSIVE, or EXCLUDE. I have also merged with the
latest changes, and I did another cleanup pass on the patch.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| operator-exclusion-constraints-20091107.context.patch | text/x-patch | 101.3 KB |
| operator-exclusion-constraints-20091107.patch.gz | application/x-gzip | 24.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2009-11-07 18:56:39 | Re: operator exclusion constraints |
| Previous Message | Sergio A. Kessler | 2009-11-07 17:29:54 | Re: Specific names for plpgsql variable-resolution control options? |