| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: extend pgbench expressions with functions |
| Date: | 2016-02-14 12:06:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqT-P1XUzQXr4ZpO2jdj_4UpxEK9TVQoCVkuYE0TjpRCQg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
>
>> So I would be fine to do a portion of the legwork and extract from this
>> patch something smaller that adds only functions as a first step, with the
>> minimum set of functions I mentioned upthread. Robert, Alvaro, Fabien, does
>> that sound fine to you?
>
>
> Thanks, but this is my c*, I have a few hours of travelling this evening,
> I'll do it then.
>
> I'll be happy if you do the review of the resulting split.
OK, I am fine with this scenario as well. I have luckily done nothing yet.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Patric Bechtel | 2016-02-14 12:41:49 | Bool btree_gin index not chosen on equality contraint, but on greater/lower? |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2016-02-14 08:53:21 | Re: Removing Functionally Dependent GROUP BY Columns |