Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions
Date: 2005-12-01 17:18:09
Message-ID: 12164.1133457489@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Don't worry about that, I'll take care of it. I prefer committing all
>> the branches at once when doing a multi-branch fix (less clutter in
>> the CVS logs).

> How do you do that? I have multiple checked-out trees, I assume you do
> the same and just handle the simultaneous-ness by hand?

Well, they're not *exactly* simultaneous of course. I set up the
modified files in each tree and then commit, commit, commit (the -F
option helps if the commit message is long). I use cvs2cl to extract
CVS history, and it will fold together commits in different branches
if they have the same commit message and are within some time delta
of each other ... I think it's 5 minutes or so.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Qingqing Zhou 2005-12-01 17:52:48 Re: [PATCHES] A couple of proposed pgbench changes
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-12-01 17:12:11 Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions