Re: ECPG FETCH readahead
Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>
From: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>
To: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Date: 2012-04-10T15:24:55Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Fix some "translator:" comments mangled by pgindent
- 673b52753489 9.4.0 cited
-
Make sure float4in/float8in accept all standard spellings of "infinity".
- 221e92f64c6e 9.4.0 cited
2012-04-10 16:55 keltezéssel, Michael Meskes írta:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:37:22AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>>> Only a non-decorated cursor can be overridden, even if
>>> a different default readahead window size is specified with
>>> e.g. "ecpg -R 8". If ECPGFETCHSZ is not present, 8 will be used,
>>> if ECPGFETCHSZ is present, its value will be used. ECPGopen()
>>> will need an extra bool argument to distinguish this.
>>>
>>> Is this acceptable? Noah, Michael?
>> Sounds perfect.
> Fine by me.
>
> Michael
OK. Next question: now that both patches are intended to be applied,
should I send a unified single patch that contains the previous functionality
and the required fixes or a new one that only contains the last required fixes?
Thanks in advance,
Zoltán Böszörményi
--
----------------------------------
Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Schönig& Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de
http://www.postgresql.at/