On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> wrote:
> --On 28. März 2011 13:38:23 +0100 Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> wrote:
>>> But I think we can just call pg_table_size() regardless in 9.0+; I
>>> believe it'll return the same results as pg_relation_size() on
>>> non-tables. Anyone see a problem with that?
>> Hmm yeah, seems i was thinking too complicated...here is a cleaned up
>> of this idea.
> Do we consider this for 9.1 or should I add this to the CF-Next for 9.2?
Since there were quite a few votes for doing this in 9.1, no
dissenting votes, and it's a very small change, I went ahead and
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2011-04-08 19:56:49|
|Subject: Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters
by parameter name|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-04-08 19:43:39|
|Subject: Re: Typed-tables patch broke pg_upgrade|