| From: | Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Emmanuel Cecchet <Emmanuel(dot)Cecchet(at)asterdata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: COPY enhancements |
| Date: | 2009-09-10 16:06:36 |
| Message-ID: | 4AA9240C.3000301@asterdata.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi David,
> My C isn't all that great, to put it mildly, but I noticed C++-style
> //comments like this, which we don't use.
>
Ok, I will fix that.
> Are these dependent on each other, or could they be reviewed, etc.
> separately?
>
The code implementing the functionality are independent (separate
methods or files) but error logging also catches potential routing
problems and log faulty tuples (the call to routing is just basically in
the try/catch of error logging).
So, yes they can be reviewed separately, but if both are integrated it
makes sense to review them together.
Cheers
Emmanuel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2009-09-10 16:23:13 | Re: CommitFest 2009-09 Plans and Call for Reviewers |
| Previous Message | Sam Mason | 2009-09-10 15:51:16 | Re: Adding integers ( > 8 bytes) to an inet |