Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca" <movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca>
Cc: "Daniel Verite" <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "ashutosh(dot)bapat" <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string
Date: 2020-04-07 15:02:43
Message-ID: 9172.1586271763@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca" <movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca> writes:
> After several patch change by hacker's proposal, I think it's ready to
> commit, can we commit it before doing the code freeze for pg-13?

It would be easier to get this done if you had addressed any of the
objections to the patch as given. Integer-overflow handling is still
missing, and you still are assuming that it's okay to change catalog
entries in released branches.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2020-04-07 15:15:21 Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm for partition-wise join
Previous Message Juan José Santamaría Flecha 2020-04-07 15:00:18 Re: PG compilation error with Visual Studio 2015/2017/2019