Hi,
I recently bumped into http://semver.org/
It can be interesting to participants of this discussion.
Especially motivation for minor version (middle number).
Best,
Grazvydas
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:30 PM, David G. Johnston <
david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016
This has been fixed by Joe Conway meanwhile.
Nice,
thaks!
Hi,
with 9.2.2 I can see harmless cosmetic defect while dumping/restoring
database with postgis extension.
Steps to reproduce:
- create new database;
- CREATE EXTENSION IF NOT EXISTS postgis WITH SCHEMA public;
- backup it;
- create new database and restore it from this new backup.
It
Thanks for explanation.
Now I remember the discussion on hackers list about this feature, but
anyway, this feature surprised little bit.
G.
Hi,
accidentally found a our sql typo, which runs without errors on pg 9.1, but
raises error on 9.0. It seems to me, that 9.0 behaviour was correct.
Reproducing case:
create table aaa(id integer NOT NULL, something double precision,
constraint pk_aaa primary key (id));
insert into aaa values
This is because PostgreSQL 9.1 added the feature of simple checking of
functional dependencies for GROUP BY. The manual of 9.1 explains quite well
when PostgreSQL considers there to be a functional dependency.
When GROUP BY is present, it is not valid for the SELECT list expressions
to
