| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: count_nulls(VARIADIC "any") |
| Date: | 2016-01-25 18:57:21 |
| Message-ID: | CAFj8pRA1pUSYOE+Nrcixw6PJ8Gss7cvWhh84pcwHnRafdXGoAg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2016-01-22 13:34 GMT+01:00 Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>:
> On 1/21/16 1:48 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>> the form of regress tests is not pretty significant issue. Jim's
>> design is little bit transparent, Marko's is maybe little bit
>> practical. Both has sense from my opinion, and any hasn't
>> significant advantage against other.
>>
>>
>> any possible agreement, how these tests should be designed?
>>
>> simple patch, simple regress tests, so there are no reason for long
>> waiting.
>>
>
> I don't really see how individual tests are more practical (you can still
> cut and paste a table...), but since there's no strong consensus either way
> I'd say it's up to you as author.
Marco is a author of this patch, so - Marco, please, send final version of
this patch
Regards
Pavel
>
> --
> Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
> Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
> Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-01-25 18:57:40 | Re: 2016-01 Commitfest |
| Previous Message | Corey Huinker | 2016-01-25 18:21:20 | Re: [POC] FETCH limited by bytes. |