Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.3.1 issues
| От | Thomas G. Lockhart |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.3.1 issues |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 3527BA0A.71FCB42D@alumni.caltech.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.3.1 issues (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.3.1 issues
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
> > > > indexes not used that were used in 6.2(fixed)
> > > > memory leak in backend when run on simple queries(fixed)
> > > > negative sign causing problems in various areas
> > > > configure assert checking is reversed
> > > > UNION crashes on ORDER BY or DISTINCT
> I would think we are safer by releasing a new diff. The char2-16
> changes are the only ones I know of that should not have been applied
> (by me!), so we can back them out. Just seems it is too easy to miss
> some part of the patch.
Well, we have the other side of the problem to worry about too: that
with changes in the source tree, there may be unanticipated interactions
with other patches when we are really trying to fix only 5 specific
problems.
I would like to do a test with specific patches on a clean v6.3.1
installation, and then we can compare the patches from my test with
patches from the CVS extraction. I'll isolate my "negative sign" fixes
(which I haven't yet committed to the source tree, but which I think
just need a reversion of scan.l/scan.c to the v6.3 release).
Can you (re)send me the patches for these others? I still have the
"memory leak" patches, but can't remember who posted the "index" and
"UNION" patches (were they all yours Bruce?? Probably gone from my mail
anyway).
- Tom
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: