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

Re: [PATCH] Provide rowcount for utility SELECTs

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Hans-Juergen Schoenig <hs(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Provide rowcount for utility SELECTs
Date: 2010-02-11 19:50:42
Message-ID: 603c8f071002111150s9a87d4bk5d52d53c2804aa2c@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Robert Haas escribió:
>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> > Robert Haas escribió:
>> >
>> >> I was all prepared to admit that I hadn't actually looked at the patch
>> >> carefully enough, but I just looked at (and CVS HEAD) again and what
>> >> you've written here doesn't appear to describe what I'm seeing in the
>> >> code:
>> >>
>> >>                               if ((portal->strategy != PORTAL_ONE_SELECT) && (!portal->holdStore))
>> >>                                       FillPortalStore(portal, isTopLevel);
>> >>
>> >> So one of us is confused... it may well be me.
>> >
>> > Ah, it seems I misread it ... but then I don't quite see the point in
>> > that change.
>>
>> Well the point is just that Zoltan is adding some more code that
>> applies to both branches of the switch, so merging them saves some
>> duplication.
>
> But then there's no other branches, so why not just put it below the
> switch?

No, PORTAL_MULTI_QUERY is still separate.

>> > Well, not doing a full review anyway, so never mind me.
>>
>> Actually I was sort of hoping you (or someone other than me) would
>> pick this up for commit...
>
> Hmm ...

Maybe I came to the wrong place.  :-)

...Robert

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-02-11 19:58:01
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove old-style VACUUM FULL (which was known for a little while
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2010-02-11 19:47:26
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Provide rowcount for utility SELECTs

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group