I just seem to recall a discussion where we decided to 'standardise' on PostgreSQL...I'm not fussed tho.
Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Momjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Hackers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 12:53 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] followup on previous > > Thomas liked Postgres rather than PostgreSQL in the docs, and I think > that's where it came from. I use Postgres in speaking, and PostgreSQL > in writing, so I guess either is OK. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > > Just a slight nitpick, shouldn't this line: > > > > # - Previous Postgres Versions - > > > > Be this: > > > > # - Previous PostgreSQL Versions - > > > > Chris > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your > > joining column's datatypes do not match > > > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road > + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
