Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions
Date
Msg-id 20051201171211.GC31881@surnet.cl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
List pgsql-patches
Tom Lane wrote:

> Don't worry about that, I'll take care of it.  I prefer committing all
> the branches at once when doing a multi-branch fix (less clutter in
> the CVS logs).

How do you do that?  I have multiple checked-out trees, I assume you do
the same and just handle the simultaneous-ness by hand?

BTW, has anyone checked Command Prompt's Subversion repository?  It's a
mirror of our anonymous CVS (AFAICT).  I'm using it for reading diffs
lately, and it's much nicer to look at the whole patch as a single diff
rather than going a single file at a time.

http://projects.commandprompt.com/projects/public/pgsql/browser/trunk/pgsql

It has the additional advantage over our current CVSweb that it's set
with tabs to 4 spaces, so it looks just like our code is supposed to ...

--
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions