| From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [POC] hash partitioning |
| Date: | 2017-05-18 16:09:03 |
| Message-ID: | CAFiTN-sTUfz_HgHWFBsgvPOYU+ZzMHbXd2j1f13U67kvhbVDRA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:07 PM, amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-05-18 16:13:36 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Preventive maintenance in advance of pgindent run. |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-05-18 16:00:42 | Re: 10beta1/m68k: static assertion failed: "MAXALIGN too small to fit int32" |