Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dilip Kumar
Subject Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning
Date
Msg-id CAFiTN-sTUfz_HgHWFBsgvPOYU+ZzMHbXd2j1f13U67kvhbVDRA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning  (amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:07 PM, amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would suggest "non-zero positive", since that's what we are using in
>> the documentation.
>>
>
> Understood, Fixed in the attached version.

Why non-zero positive?  We do support zero for the remainder right?

-- 
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 10beta1/m68k: static assertion failed: "MAXALIGN toosmall to fit int32"
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Preventive maintenance in advance of pgindent run.