Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size
От | wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size |
Дата | |
Msg-id | m12PLXZ-0003kGC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size
Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> > > If you could keep the labels just for EXPLAIN, go for it. > > > > Not right now, put it onto TODO for after 7.0. > > But we just required initdb for lztext. If we need another initdb > later, maybe we should do it? LZTEXT was a fairly limited change, tested out before and just reapplied. This time you ask for mucking with thefamily of node-print and -read functions. Even if it's a limited area of code affected, I don't feel comfortabledoing it now. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #========================================= wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: