[DOCS] lastval() not included in table
In the current version of the docs here: http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/functions-sequence.html The lastval() function appears to be missing from table 9-38. I don't see any obvious reason that it's left out. Regards, Jeff Davis ---(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
[DOCS] release notes.. added stefan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 attached - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHVwwZATb/zqfZUUQRAjZyAJ92eIg9+Pk7jiexbQNKLTR2X5m0NwCgpIRs UM0gn1UEqX81/R3eLyvWd44= =ep3U -END PGP SIGNATURE- Index: release.sgml === RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/release.sgml,v retrieving revision 1.559 diff -c -r1.559 release.sgml *** release.sgml 3 Dec 2007 23:49:50 - 1.559 --- release.sgml 5 Dec 2007 20:36:50 - *** *** 1380,1386 Object Manipulation ! --- 1380,1386 Object Manipulation ! *** *** 1951,1956 --- 1951,1972 + ALTER TABLE foo ENABLE/DISABLE REPLICA TRIGGER/RULE auto-complete capability +(Stefan) + + + + + + ALTER/CREATE/DROP TEXT SEARCH auto-complete capability +(Stefan) + + + + + + + List disabled triggers separately in \d output (Brendan Jurd) *** *** 1979,1984 --- 1995,2008 + List text search options \dF, \dFd, + \dFt\dFp auto-complete capability. +(Stefan) + + + + + Add \prompt capability (Chad Wagner) ---(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] release notes.. added stefan
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > attached Isn't it too verbose? I thought we were moving away with mentioning every single change? A single entry to mention psql autocomplete improvements should be OK ... -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.PlanetPostgreSQL.org/ "We are who we choose to be", sang the goldfinch when the sun is high (Sandman) ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [DOCS] release notes.. added stefan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 19:25:14 -0300 Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > > > attached > > Isn't it too verbose? I thought we were moving away with mentioning > every single change? A single entry to mention psql autocomplete > improvements should be OK ... > I added both because they were actually different autocomplete features but otherwise sure.. It could be: Added multiple aut-complete paths to psql including FULL TEXT and ENABLE/DISABLE REPLICA (Stefan) ?? Joshua D. Drake - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHVycCATb/zqfZUUQRAnzcAKCNZJ0WWsw1uJw+7G5xvWm/L8TlQACeOGCv gjLVC7K+yUZjhoOPxE2NqPQ= =4HBa -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
[DOCS] Plug in docs
Looks like we need some docs on all these new plugin APIs we've introduced in this release. - PL/pgSQL hooks - planner hooks - join order hooks Thanks, -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
[DOCS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
As of CVS HEAD, some of the contrib module documentation pages have extensive credit screeds, eg http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/cube.html and some just have the author's name, with or without an link, and some don't have anything at all. This bothers me; it seems like we should have a more uniform approach. There are some arguments to be made for not having credits at all. We don't make a habit of crediting individuals anywhere else in the SGML docs; credits in the source code and/or CVS logs are supposed to be enough. And we do still have author credits in contrib/README, not to mention the individual source code files. And there's the whole issue that files that have been there awhile have probably been tweaked by a number of people besides the original author. OTOH I dislike removing credits that the authors might have expected to be there, and the contrib modules mostly do have identifiable original authors. If we do want to keep credits in the SGML pages, how extensive should they be? I already took it on myself to remove Gene Selkov's snailmail address, but do we even want email addresses there? A lot of them are probably dead, and the ones that aren't are causing their owners to get extra spam, because an link is about the easiest thing to scrape from a webpage that there could possibly be. I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, except that I think we should have a uniform policy for all the contrib modules. Comments? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [DOCS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
Tom Lane wrote: As of CVS HEAD, some of the contrib module documentation pages have extensive credit screeds, eg http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/cube.html and some just have the author's name, with or without an link, and some don't have anything at all. This bothers me; it seems like we should have a more uniform approach. [snip] I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, except that I think we should have a uniform policy for all the contrib modules. Comments? As far as I'm concerned, you can remove any credits for me from the contrib modules I've worked on (or I can do it if you'd prefer). In any case +1 for a uniform policy, and +1 for removing credits from documentation. Joe ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [DOCS] release notes.. added stefan
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> attached > Isn't it too verbose? I thought we were moving away with mentioning > every single change? A single entry to mention psql autocomplete > improvements should be OK ... AFAIR, past practice is that autocompletion fixes don't make the release notes at all. It might be worth reminding folks that the release notes do not exist for the purpose of mentioning contributors. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [DOCS] release notes.. added stefan
Tom Lane wrote: Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joshua D. Drake wrote: attached Isn't it too verbose? I thought we were moving away with mentioning every single change? A single entry to mention psql autocomplete improvements should be OK ... AFAIR, past practice is that autocompletion fixes don't make the release notes at all. From what I can tell, he has done quite a few of them which is why I submitted the patch. *shrug* It might be worth reminding folks that the release notes do not exist for the purpose of mentioning contributors. Then why do we mention them at all in the release notes? Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
[DOCS] Re: [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
Tom Lane wrote: As of CVS HEAD, some of the contrib module documentation pages have extensive credit screeds, eg http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/cube.html and some just have the author's name, with or without an link, and some don't have anything at all. I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, except that I think we should have a uniform policy for all the contrib modules. Well once we push directly into the core documentation I agree that outside of release notes (although you just brought that up in another thread) we don't need to be mentioning contributions like that. Those who have contributed are in the logs. Further those who have provided reasonable contribution really should be mentioned on the contributors page that is up for discussion which would make the rest of this moot yes? Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake Comments? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [DOCS] release notes.. added stefan
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> It might be worth reminding folks that the release notes do not >> exist for the purpose of mentioning contributors. > Then why do we mention them at all in the release notes? You've got the motivation backwards. We mention the responsible (blameworthy?) persons when describing a change that users might find interesting. We don't insert release-note entries that users wouldn't find interesting, just for the purpose of mentioning who did it. Which seemed to me to be mostly the point of your proposed addition. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [DOCS] [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ...Further those who have provided reasonable contribution really should be > mentioned on the contributors page that is up for discussion which would > make the rest of this moot yes? I don't have any objection to listing people on the contributors page on the strength of their work on contrib modules. But that seems orthogonal to the question of what should be in the SGML docs ... regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
[DOCS] Re: [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?
Tom Lane wrote: "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ...Further those who have provided reasonable contribution really should be mentioned on the contributors page that is up for discussion which would make the rest of this moot yes? I don't have any objection to listing people on the contributors page on the strength of their work on contrib modules. But that seems orthogonal to the question of what should be in the SGML docs ... All I was saying is I don't think we need the redundancy :). E.g; if they are worthy in the docs, they are worthy on the contributors page and thus not needed in the docs. I am not of a strong opinion either way but it seems having names plastered everywhere just creates more management of information for no particular purpose. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [DOCS] release notes.. added stefan
Tom Lane wrote: "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Tom Lane wrote: It might be worth reminding folks that the release notes do not exist for the purpose of mentioning contributors. Then why do we mention them at all in the release notes? You've got the motivation backwards. We mention the responsible (blameworthy?) persons when describing a change that users might find interesting. We don't insert release-note entries that users wouldn't find interesting, just for the purpose of mentioning who did it. Which seemed to me to be mostly the point of your proposed addition. You are correct that would be why I submitted it. My motivation may have been backward based on the above definition but I assure you when people are looking at the release notes they are not looking to see who is responsible in the sense you are mentioning. Most are looking for recognition. I would never have considered your reasoning above. When someone puts a concerted effort to provide a better user experience for our number one used client (psql) and they aren't mentioned in the release notes, that to me would be an oversight worth adjustment. Of course that assumes we are on the same page for what the mention in the release notes is for, which we aren't :). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
