Re: dlgOperator_patch
От | Dave Page |
---|---|
Тема | Re: dlgOperator_patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B844B5D4@mail.vale-housing.co.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | dlgOperator_patch ("Hiroshi Saito" <saito@inetrt.skcapi.co.jp>) |
Список | pgadmin-hackers |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Hiroshi Saito [mailto:saito@inetrt.skcapi.co.jp] > Sent: 10 September 2003 03:24 > To: Dave Page > Cc: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] dlgOperator_patch > > > > This is one that is not in pga2 - any ideas? > > MERGES is specified tacitly. > Default name in the preparation is put. > I don't think that it is a problem that it doesn't have > chkbox. I think it has as much right to be there as HASHES, however whilst there is a oprcanhash column in pg_operator, there is no oprcanmerge column. So what defines a mergeable operator? > However, are LTCMP, GTCMP necessary? Yes, I think so. You can specify them when you create an operator (they are shown as < operator and > operator btw.). Regards, Dave.
В списке pgadmin-hackers по дате отправления: