Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck)
Subject Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size
Date
Msg-id m12PLXZ-0003kGC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size
Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size
Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size
List pgsql-hackers
> > > If you could keep the labels just for EXPLAIN, go for it.
> >
> >     Not right now, put it onto TODO for after 7.0.
>
> But we just required initdb for lztext.  If we need another initdb
> later, maybe we should do it?
   LZTEXT  was  a  fairly  limited change, tested out before and   just reapplied. This time you ask for mucking with
thefamily   of  node-print  and  -read  functions. Even if it's a limited   area of code affected, I don't feel
comfortabledoing it now.
 


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#========================================= wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A further thought on rule string size
Next
From: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Beta for 4:30AST ... ?