2012/2/2 Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>:
> On 02/02/2012 04:35 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
>> At 2012-02-01 18:48:28 -0500, andrew(dot)dunstan(at)pgexperts(dot)com wrote:
>>> For now I'm inclined not to proceed with that, and leave it as an
>>> optimization to be considered later if necessary. Thoughts?
>> I agree, there doesn't seem to be a pressing need to do it now.
> OK, here's my final version of the patch for constructor functions. If
> there's no further comment I'll go with this.
These function are super, Thank you
Do you plan to fix a issue with row attribute names in 9.2?
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-02-02 17:45:40|
|Subject: Re: heap_tuple_needs_freeze false positive|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-02-02 17:18:26|
|Subject: Re: spgist text_ops and LIKE |