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

Re: Window Functions: patch for CommitFest:Nov.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "Hitoshi Harada" <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Window Functions: patch for CommitFest:Nov.
Date: 2008-10-31 17:43:11
Message-ID: 6278.1225474991@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> "Hitoshi Harada" <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> 2008/11/1 David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>:
>> I've ever sent a patch over 100k and failed. Actually how much is the
>> limitation of the patch size? And if the patch is too huge, is it
>> better to split the patch than send an external link?

I'd suggest splitting the patch into sections if necessary.  A patch
that's over 100K zipped is likely to be unmanageable from a reviewing
standpoint anyhow --- it would be better to think about how to factor
it into separate patches ...

But in any case, Alvaro is correct to complain about external links.
We want the patch to be in the list archives.

> Isn't this like the third time we've run into this and said we were going to
> raise/erase the limit?

Uh, we did.  You'll notice David's 140K email got through.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hitoshi HaradaDate: 2008-10-31 17:53:47
Subject: Re: Window Functions: patch for CommitFest:Nov.
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2008-10-31 17:40:12
Subject: Re: pre-MED

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