: dpage@vale-housing.co.uk, pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
Sujet: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 22:46:10 +0200
Hi Tomasz,
Message d'origine
Sujet: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
De: Tomasz Rybak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Copie à: dpage
Thanks Raphaël, Tomasz. Patch applied.
Regards Dave
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 05 October 2005 17:46
To: Dave Page
Cc: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
Dave
Dave Page wrote:
Why are such actions not performed on the origin node as a matter of
course (see below before answering that :-) )?
Ask Slony's designers :-) Actually, at least storenode() changed its
requirements; in 1.0.5, it must be called on the subscriber, in 1.1.1 on
the
Dnia 03-10-2005, pon o godzinie 18:50 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
napisał(a):
Hi Tomasz, Dave and friends,
first day to my new job and first day with an access to
the net since a long time.
Good luck with new job.
Tomasz, if you have some time to produce a merge between
what you provided and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To all french speackers around, I'd also appreciate any help with
pga3 translation in french too.
However, I plan to work on this until the end of the week if it's not
too late.
Of course it's not too late. It's certainly several weeks until we release.
Regards,
I did all on the code that was on my in-mind list (except for those
things on the TODO list).
Slony-I failover will take more than just some minutes, so this must
wait for 1.5/1.6 (which we might release with Slony-I 1.2?)
There's only that issue from David Fetter, if it really is one.
From
Hi Tomasz,
Message d'origine
Sujet: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
De: Tomasz Rybak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Copie à: dpage@vale-housing.co.uk, pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 21:24:33 +0200
Dnia 03-10-2005, pon o godzinie 18:50 +0200
-Original Message-
From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 01 October 2005 00:08
To: Dave Page
Cc: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org; Slony Mailing List
Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
Dave Page wrote:
OK, we'll aim for Tuesday then.
Yup, I'll
-Original Message-
From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 03 October 2005 11:50
To: Dave Page
Cc: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org; Slony Mailing List;
Christopher Kings-Lynne
Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
Dave Page wrote:
We already
.
Message d'origine
Sujet: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
De: Tomasz Rybak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A: Dave Page dpage@vale-housing.co.uk
Copie à: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 17:33:54 +0200
Dnia 30-09-2005, pi± o godzinie 16:03 +0100, Dave Page napisa³(a):
Are we ready to roll
Dave Page wrote:
I'm running out of time for today (and tomorrow), so I committed a what
I have now.
- move set not completely tested, because I hit a slony bug.
- failover not implemented.
- event tracking enhanced
Apparently even without my patch the admin nodes won't conflict with
-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
Dave Page wrote:
We already discussed to include the creation scripts into pgadmin
installations to make administrator's life easier, but
apparently we
*must* do that to have pgadmin working on slony 1.1.
No, that is a very *bad* idea
-general] RE: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
The other reason for not using an origin is that there may be more than
one table set in the cluster originating on different nodes. No?
Yes, but I don't think that's a problem as (in pgAdmin's case at least) we can
just connect to the origin
I just tested slony cvs head, and found that creation from scratch
(using the unmodified slony scripts) will work ok, but joining will fail
with the bug reported repeatedly from enablenode_int inserting into
sl_confirm (illegal default for con_timestamp). Since I didn't test
1.1.1, this might
Dnia 30-09-2005, pią o godzinie 16:03 +0100, Dave Page napisał(a):
Are we ready to roll a beta yet? Any more patches or commits
outstanding?
What's with Debian package files?
In revision 4476 there are still old files.
I've downloaded Debian's source of pgadmin3 1.2.2, and
as Raphael's
Are we ready to roll a beta yet? Any more patches or commits
outstanding?
Regards, Dave
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Dave Page wrote:
Are we ready to roll a beta yet? Any more patches or commits
outstanding?
Um, please let me this weekend (including monday) to review slony stuff.
Regards,
Andreas
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase
I will complete spanish translation for monday.
Regards,
Diego.
El vie, 30-09-2005 a las 16:03 +0100, Dave Page escribió:
Are we ready to roll a beta yet? Any more patches or commits
outstanding?
Regards, Dave
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP
-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
I will complete spanish translation for monday.
Regards,
Diego.
El vie, 30-09-2005 a las 16:03 +0100, Dave Page escribió:
Are we ready to roll a beta yet? Any more patches or commits
outstanding?
Regards, Dave
---(end of broadcast
OK, we'll aim for Tuesday then.
/D
-Original Message-
From: Andreas Pflug[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30/09/05 18:47:48
To: Dave Pagedpage@vale-housing.co.uk
Cc: pgadmin-hackerspgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
Dave Page wrote:
Are we ready
Dave Page wrote:
OK, we'll aim for Tuesday then.
Yup, I'll give you a 'go'.
Um, seeing that apparently nothing I posted in the last 4 weeks to
slony-general is fixed appropriately or finally discussed, and we really
need to roll a beta quite soon, I'm afraid we'll have to fork the slony
21 matches
Mail list logo
