Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Lost a function overloading capability in v6.3

From: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Michael Meskes <meskes(at)topsystem(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Lost a function overloading capability in v6.3
Date: 1998-03-03 16:12:01
Message-ID: 34FC2BD1.C4969623@alumni.caltech.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
> Oh! I only noticed the first one, which was the right answer. You are getting
> zero into the function in both cases, where for my machine I'm getting garbage
> which might be uninitialized stuff or a pointer.
>
> Neither are correct.
>
> Can someone speculate where this might be happening? I don't even know where to
> start looking :(

More information: my snapshots through 980112 work correctly, so the breakage
happened after that.

                                              - Tom

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Goran ThyniDate: 1998-03-03 16:28:58
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] text should be a blob field
Previous:From: Thomas G. LockhartDate: 1998-03-03 15:53:29
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] doc troubles.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2013 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group