Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string
Date
Msg-id 9172.1586271763@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string  ("movead.li@highgo.ca" <movead.li@highgo.ca>)
Responses Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
"movead.li@highgo.ca" <movead.li@highgo.ca> writes:
> After several patch change by hacker's proposal, I think it's ready to
> commit, can we commit it before doing the code freeze for pg-13?

It would be easier to get this done if you had addressed any of the
objections to the patch as given.  Integer-overflow handling is still
missing, and you still are assuming that it's okay to change catalog
entries in released branches.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Juan José Santamaría Flecha
Date:
Subject: Re: PG compilation error with Visual Studio 2015/2017/2019
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join