Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2006-09-04 at 15:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> AFAICT it's just junk. It happens to be the input times
>> MAX_RANDOM_VALUE, but what use is that? I wonder if we shouldn't
>> change the function to return VOID
> I agree. Given how soon we want to get an 8.2 beta out the door, perhaps
> this change would be best postponed to 8.3 (unless there's another
> outstanding 8.2 patch that requires initdb?).
Nothing outstanding at the moment.
Although this is surely a small change, it's also pretty low-priority,
so I'd counsel leaving it for 8.3 rather than trying to cram it in now.
We have more important things to be worrying about ...
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jie Zhang||Date: 2006-09-20 16:03:20|
|Subject: Re: Bitmap index status|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2006-09-20 15:46:24|
|Subject: Release Notes: Major Changes in 8.2|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Mark Cave-Ayland||Date: 2006-09-20 19:43:38|
|Subject: WIP: Hierarchical Queries - stage 1|
|Previous:||From: Neil Conway||Date: 2006-09-20 15:10:15|
|Subject: Re: setseed() doc|