pgsql-patches - December 2005

Obsolete list for posting patches to the PostgreSQL source code. Those must now be sent to pgsql-hackers.

Search the Archives

(enter a message-id to go directly to that message)
Advanced Search

Browse Archives

Prev | Next
Jump to day: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Dec. 1, 2005

Thread Author Time
Check for integer overflow in datetime functions 📎 Michael Fuhr 02:36
Re: A couple of proposed pgbench changes Tatsuo Ishii 07:13
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions Neil Conway 08:12
Re: aclchk.c refactor Alvaro Herrera 13:36
Allow an alias for the target table in UPDATE/DELETE 📎 Atsushi Ogawa 14:23
Re: [PATCHES] A couple of proposed pgbench changes Tom Lane 15:07
Re: [PATCHES] aclchk.c refactor Tom Lane 15:28
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions Tom Lane 15:38
Re: Allow an alias for the target table in UPDATE/DELETE Tom Lane 16:05
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions Tom Lane 16:54
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions Alvaro Herrera 17:12
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions Tom Lane 17:18
Re: [PATCHES] A couple of proposed pgbench changes Qingqing Zhou 17:52
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions Tom Lane 17:59
Re: Strange interval arithmetic Greg Stark 18:16
Re: Strange interval arithmetic Greg Stark 18:18
Fork-based version of pgbench 📎 Tom Lane 18:29
Re: [PATCHES] aclchk.c refactor Marc G. Fournier 19:09
Re: Strange interval arithmetic Greg Stark 20:31
Re: [HACKERS] Strange interval arithmetic 📎 Bruce Momjian 20:37
Re: Strange interval arithmetic Tom Lane 20:43
Re: Strange interval arithmetic Michael Fuhr 20:45
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions Magnus Hagander 20:49
Re: [HACKERS] Strange interval arithmetic Tom Lane 20:49
Re: [HACKERS] Strange interval arithmetic Bruce Momjian 20:50
Re: Case Conversion Fix for MB Chars Bruce Momjian 21:21
Re: Case Conversion Fix for MB Chars Devrim GUNDUZ 21:30
TODO-Item: include for guc 📎 Joachim Wieland 23:25

Dec. 2, 2005

Thread Author Time
Re: Fork-based version of pgbench Qingqing Zhou 00:09
Re: Fork-based version of pgbench Qingqing Zhou 01:07
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions Christopher Kings-Lynne 01:45
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? 📎 Bruce Momjian 02:44
Re: Fork-based version of pgbench Tom Lane 03:06
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Tom Lane 03:14
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Bruce Momjian 03:27
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Tom Lane 03:43
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Bruce Momjian 03:58
Re: [BUGS] BUG #2056: to_char no long takes time as input? 📎 Bruce Momjian 04:01
Re: BUG #2056: to_char no long takes time as input? Bruce Momjian 04:02
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Tom Lane 04:03
Re: BUG #2056: to_char no long takes time as input? Tom Lane 04:06
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 04:34
Re: TODO item -- Improve psql's handling of multi-line queries Bruce Momjian 04:40
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Peter Eisentraut 08:28
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Simon Riggs 08:57
Re: Case Conversion Fix for MB Chars Volkan YAZICI 10:20
Re: TODO item -- Improve psql's handling of multi-line queries Andreas Seltenreich 13:59
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Tom Lane 14:14
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Andrew Dunstan 15:02
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions Andrew Dunstan 15:55
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions Joshua D. Drake 16:17
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 16:47
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Chris Browne 17:14
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 17:17
Re: Case Conversion Fix for MB Chars Bruce Momjian 17:26
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Tom Lane 17:28
Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits Bruce Momjian 17:39
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 17:43
unsuscribe patches Julio César Elizondo 17:50
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 18:03
unsuscribe pgsql-patches Julio César Elizondo 18:19
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 18:21
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Bruce Momjian 18:23
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Tom Lane 18:32
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? 📎 Bruce Momjian 18:38
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Bruce Momjian 18:39
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 18:42
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Tom Lane 18:47
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Bruce Momjian 18:52
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 18:54
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Joshua D. Drake 19:01
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 19:09
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 19:53
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Alvaro Herrera 20:01
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 20:06
Re: Case Conversion Fix for MB Chars Volkan YAZICI 20:07
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Alvaro Herrera 20:12
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Bruce Momjian 20:12
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 20:14
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 20:15
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Alvaro Herrera 20:26
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Joshua D. Drake 20:27
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits Tom Lane 20:37
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 20:44
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 20:55
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 20:59
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Simon Riggs 21:01
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 21:05
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 21:10
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 21:19
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 21:30
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Michael Fuhr 22:04
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 22:11
Patch for gripe about pg_dump -C not dumping database privileges Tom Lane 22:14
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 22:20
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 22:23
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 22:26
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 22:29
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 22:38
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 22:39
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 22:41
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 22:49
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 23:38

Dec. 3, 2005

Thread Author Time
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits Tom Lane 00:37
Re: Allow an alias for the target table in UPDATE/DELETE 📎 Atsushi Ogawa 01:42
Re: Numeric 508 datatype 📎 Bruce Momjian 04:25
Add function to return the thread safety status of libpq Qingqing Zhou 05:22
Re: Add function to return the thread safety status of libpq Tom Lane 06:13
Re: Add function to return the thread safety status of libpq Qingqing Zhou 06:19
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Peter Eisentraut 11:11
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits Martijn van Oosterhout 11:17
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Bruce Momjian 13:01
snprintf() argument reordering not working under Windows in 8.1 Nicolai Tufar 13:18
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Peter Eisentraut 14:48
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Bruce Momjian 14:53
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Michael Paesold 15:14
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? 📎 Bruce Momjian 15:27
Re: [HACKERS] snprintf() argument reordering not working under Windows 📎 Bruce Momjian 16:16
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits Tom Lane 16:43
Re: BUG #2056: to_char no long takes time as input? Bruce Momjian 16:46
Re: [HACKERS] snprintf() argument reordering not working under Windows Tom Lane 17:00
Re: [HACKERS] snprintf() argument reordering not working under Bruce Momjian 17:19
Re: [HACKERS] snprintf() argument reordering not working under Windows in 8.1 Magnus Hagander 17:38
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 18:07
Re: [HACKERS] snprintf() argument reordering not working under Windows in 8.1 Nicolai Tufar 19:26
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits Bruno Wolff III 21:30

Dec. 4, 2005

Thread Author Time
date overflows Kris Jurka 00:53
Re: date overflows Michael Fuhr 01:06
Re: A couple of proposed pgbench changes Tatsuo Ishii 01:11
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 01:14
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Tom Lane 02:17
Re: Numeric 508 datatype Bruce Momjian 02:38
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working under Bruce Momjian 03:45
Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline? Bruce Momjian 03:52
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working under Tom Lane 04:05
Re: return can contains any row or record functions Bruce Momjian 04:10
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Andrew Dunstan 16:09
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Andrew Dunstan 18:53
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 18:57
Re: TODO item -- Improve psql's handling of multi-line 📎 Sergey E. Koposov 19:17
French po files 📎 Guillaume LELARGE 19:18
Re: French po files Alvaro Herrera 19:59
Re: French po files Peter Eisentraut 20:57
Re: French po files Guillaume LELARGE 21:30
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Bruce Momjian 22:09
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working 📎 Andrew Dunstan 23:08

Dec. 5, 2005

Thread Author Time
port/snprintf.c (was Re: Numeric 508 datatype) Tom Lane 02:50
Re: port/snprintf.c (was Re: Numeric 508 datatype) Bruce Momjian 03:18
Re: TODO item -- Improve psql's handling of multi-line queries Bruce Momjian 03:22
Re: port/snprintf.c (was Re: Numeric 508 datatype) Tom Lane 03:27
Re: TODO item -- Improve psql's handling of multi-line 📎 Sergey E. Koposov 04:12
Re: port/snprintf.c (was Re: Numeric 508 datatype) Tom Lane 04:16
Re: psql, tab completion additions 📎 Sergey E. Koposov 04:18
Re: psql, tab completion additions Bruce Momjian 04:47
Re: port/snprintf.c (was Re: Numeric 508 datatype) Bruce Momjian 05:10
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Bruce Momjian 05:21
Re: port/snprintf.c (was Re: Numeric 508 datatype) Tom Lane 05:25
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Andrew Dunstan 07:02
Re: date overflows 📎 Kris Jurka 08:35
TODO-Item: Rename of constraints 📎 Joachim Wieland 09:24
mvcc.sgml make up 📎 Volkan YAZICI 11:09
Trivial doc-patch for constraint description 📎 Joachim Wieland 12:27
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits John D. Burger 13:24
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Andrew Dunstan 14:19
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 14:35
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Andrew Dunstan 15:44
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 15:56
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Andrew Dunstan 16:33
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 16:44
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Bruce Momjian 16:46
Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits Bruce Momjian 17:38
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Andrew Dunstan 17:53
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 18:18
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 18:19
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits Tom Lane 18:31
Re: mvcc.sgml make up Peter Eisentraut 18:41
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working 📎 Andrew Dunstan 19:02
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 digits Gregory Maxwell 19:07
Re: mvcc.sgml make up Volkan YAZICI 19:10
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 19:32
I have a non-ascii name. 📎 Dennis Bjorklund 19:35
Re: mvcc.sgml make up Tom Lane 19:39
AIX FAQ update 📎 Seneca Cunningham 20:09
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 20:37
Re: mvcc.sgml make up Volkan YAZICI 20:56
Re: mvcc.sgml make up Tom Lane 21:10
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working 📎 Andrew Dunstan 22:30
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working 📎 Andrew Dunstan 22:42
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 22:42

Dec. 6, 2005

Thread Author Time
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 03:46
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Andrew Dunstan 04:23
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Bruce Momjian 04:39
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 Bruce Momjian 04:59
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 05:08
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Andrew Dunstan 05:19
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working Tom Lane 05:29
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 Michael Fuhr 05:51
Re: Reduce NUMERIC size by 2 bytes, reduce max length to 508 Tom Lane 06:02
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working under Windows in 8.1 Nicolai Tufar 08:52
Re: [PATCHES] snprintf() argument reordering not working under Windows in 8.1 Nicolai Tufar 08:59

Browse Archives

Prev | Next
Jump to day: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31