Re: [DOCS] [pgsql-www] 8.1 PDF Documentation.

2005-11-15 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote:

> I am still unclear why there is no more reliable SGML toolchain for PDF
> output after all these years.  Seems things have improved because we now
> have bookmarks, but still, why is this functionality not more mainstream.

There is no SGML toolchain because SGML has been abandoned as the
DocBook markup language.  The toolchain that everybody else uses is
based on XML DocBook.  It has been proposed that we abandon SGML and
jump to XML, but the idea has been shot down.  And it's possible to
convert our SGML to XML automatically and process it with the newer
toolchain.

-- 
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [DOCS] [pgsql-www] 8.1 PDF Documentation.

2005-11-15 Thread Michael Glaesemann


On Nov 15, 2005, at 20:23 , Alvaro Herrera wrote:


Bruce Momjian wrote:

I am still unclear why there is no more reliable SGML toolchain  
for PDF
output after all these years.  Seems things have improved because  
we now
have bookmarks, but still, why is this functionality not more  
mainstream.


There is no SGML toolchain because SGML has been abandoned as the
DocBook markup language.  The toolchain that everybody else uses is
based on XML DocBook.  It has been proposed that we abandon SGML and
jump to XML, but the idea has been shot down.  And it's possible to
convert our SGML to XML automatically and process it with the newer
toolchain.


It's my understanding that it hasn't been shot down as much as no one  
has shown that it will serve our needs. IIRC, there are two issues:


Marked sections: SGML DocBook (which is currently used) supports  
parameter entities to be used to include or exclude certain  
sections of material depending on the desired output. Profiling in  
XML DocBook may be able to accomplish the same task.


XML DocBook toolchain: making sure the tools to produce the  
documentation in its myriad forms (e.g., html, manpages, PDF) works.


(Just for history repeating itself, this was brought up Aug 2004 as  
well :) )


I don't think anyone's standing in the way. It's just that no one's  
shown that the XML toolchain can do the work for us.


Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com




---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [DOCS] [pgsql-www] 8.1 PDF Documentation.

2005-11-15 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Dienstag, 15. November 2005 06:13 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
> I am still unclear why there is no more reliable SGML toolchain for PDF
> output after all these years.  Seems things have improved because we now
> have bookmarks, but still, why is this functionality not more mainstream.

I don't understand how you get from "ancient Acrobat can't display large PDF 
file" to "SGML toolchain is unreliable".

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match


Re: [DOCS] [pgsql-www] 8.1 PDF Documentation.

2005-11-15 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Dienstag, 15. November 2005 12:23 schrieb Alvaro Herrera:
> There is no SGML toolchain because SGML has been abandoned as the
> DocBook markup language.  The toolchain that everybody else uses is
> based on XML DocBook.  It has been proposed that we abandon SGML and
> jump to XML, but the idea has been shot down.  And it's possible to
> convert our SGML to XML automatically and process it with the newer
> toolchain.

Oh, what is this stable and mature DocBook XML to print output conversion tool 
that you seem to be referring to?

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: 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


Re: [DOCS] [SQL] pg_dump

2005-11-15 Thread Oliver Elphick
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 17:04 -0600, Judith Altamirano Figueroa wrote:
> Hi
> 
> how could I restore a db if I did next:
> 
> pg_dump -Z 9 soi > $DESTINO/soi.bkp

Since you don't specify any dump format, your dump should be plain text
and is compressed with gzip, so the restore command is going to be:

  zcat $DESTINO/soi.bkp | psql -d restore_database_name -f - 

You have to create the database to restore into first.


  --


[Note for documentation:
According to the psql man page:
   -Z 0..9

   --compress=0..9
  Specify  the  compression  level  to use in archive formats that
  support compression. (Currently only the custom  archive  format
  supports compression.)

However using psql -Z with no format or with "-F p" in fact produces a
gzipped file.]

This might be a suitable amendment to the docs?:
$ diff -u /tmp/pg_dump.sgml.orig /tmp/pg_dump.sgml
--- /tmp/pg_dump.sgml.orig  2005-11-15 11:50:55.0 +
+++ /tmp/pg_dump.sgml   2005-11-15 11:57:38.0 +
@@ -492,8 +492,9 @@
   

 Specify the compression level to use in archive formats that
-support compression.  (Currently only the custom archive
-format supports compression.)
+support compression.  (Currently the tar archive
+format does not support compression.  The plain text format is
+compressed with gzip.)

   
  

-- 
Oliver Elphick  [email protected]
Isle of Wight  http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/A54310EA  92C8 39E7 280E 3631 3F0E  1EC0 5664 7A2F A543 10EA
 
   Do you want to know God?   http://www.lfix.co.uk/knowing_god.html


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: 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


Re: [DOCS] [pgsql-www] 8.1 PDF Documentation.

2005-11-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> > I am still unclear why there is no more reliable SGML toolchain for PDF
> > output after all these years.  Seems things have improved because we now
> > have bookmarks, but still, why is this functionality not more mainstream.
> 
> There is no SGML toolchain because SGML has been abandoned as the
> DocBook markup language.  The toolchain that everybody else uses is
> based on XML DocBook.  It has been proposed that we abandon SGML and
> jump to XML, but the idea has been shot down.  And it's possible to
> convert our SGML to XML automatically and process it with the newer
> toolchain.

OK, that makes sense.  We went from LaTeX to SGML long ago with the idea
that we could easily generate any output format, but that promise has
never been fully realized.

Could the SGML be automatically converted to XML during the print
process and then converted to PDF?

-- 
  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 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster


Re: [DOCS] [pgsql-www] 8.1 PDF Documentation.

2005-11-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 15. November 2005 06:13 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
> > I am still unclear why there is no more reliable SGML toolchain for PDF
> > output after all these years.  Seems things have improved because we now
> > have bookmarks, but still, why is this functionality not more mainstream.
> 
> I don't understand how you get from "ancient Acrobat can't display large PDF 
> file" to "SGML toolchain is unreliable".

Well, historically we have had trouble generating PDF (particuarly
bookmarks), and it took _days_ to generate the output, which certainly
seems strange.

In fact, this is the first verion that has bookmarks, and that is 1/2
the value of a PDF file for me, so I see this release as a great leap
forward for us.  What I do not understand is why it has taken >5 years
for this to happen.

-- 
  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 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [DOCS] [pgsql-www] 8.1 PDF Documentation.

2005-11-15 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Dienstag, 15. November 2005 15:04 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
> Could the SGML be automatically converted to XML during the print
> process and then converted to PDF?

Certainly.

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: 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


Re: [DOCS] [pgsql-www] 8.1 PDF Documentation.

2005-11-15 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 15. November 2005 12:23 schrieb Alvaro Herrera:
> > There is no SGML toolchain because SGML has been abandoned as the
> > DocBook markup language.  The toolchain that everybody else uses is
> > based on XML DocBook.  It has been proposed that we abandon SGML and
> > jump to XML, but the idea has been shot down.  And it's possible to
> > convert our SGML to XML automatically and process it with the newer
> > toolchain.
> 
> Oh, what is this stable and mature DocBook XML to print output conversion 
> tool 
> that you seem to be referring to?

I'm not saying there's any -- I'm just saying nobody else uses SGML.

That said, I just looked at a Gnome book that is published as PDF and
written using XML DocBook, and they seem to use "docbook2pdf" which in
turns appears to be this:

http://sourceware.org/docbook-tools/

One drawback that I can see in that book is that the HTML pages do not
have the nice names our current docs have.  Not sure if that's an
inherent property of the XML tools.

That said, I don't have much interest in messing with all this.
Personally I'm pretty happy using the HTML docs (I even read the SGML
directly at times.)

-- 
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: 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


[DOCS] pl/pgSQL doco patch

2005-11-15 Thread Philip Yarra
Hi, I supplied a minor doco patch relating to porting pl/SQL to pl/pgSQL: 
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-10/msg01295.php. Also 
attached here.

Could someone please review and apply this for me?

Regards, Philip.

-- 

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan

-
Utiba Pty Ltd 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by Utiba mail server and is 
believed to be clean.

Index: doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml
===
RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml,v
retrieving revision 1.79
diff -c -r1.79 plpgsql.sgml
*** doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml	21 Oct 2005 05:11:23 -	1.79
--- doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml	28 Oct 2005 05:20:54 -
***
*** 3132,3137 
--- 3132,3144 
 state in temporary tables, instead.

   
+  
+   
+You cannot use parameter names that are the same as columns 
+that are referenced in the function. Oracle does allow you to do this
+if you qualify the parameter name as function_name.paramater_name
+   
+  
  
 
  

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: 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


Re: [DOCS] pl/pgSQL doco patch

2005-11-15 Thread Bruce Momjian

Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:

http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches

It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.

---


Philip Yarra wrote:
> Hi, I supplied a minor doco patch relating to porting pl/SQL to pl/pgSQL: 
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-10/msg01295.php. Also 
> attached here.
> 
> Could someone please review and apply this for me?
> 
> Regards, Philip.
> 
> -- 
> 
> "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
> Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
> by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
> 
> -
> Utiba Pty Ltd 
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by Utiba mail server and is 
> believed to be clean.
> 

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

> 
> ---(end of broadcast)---
> TIP 1: 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

-- 
  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: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq