Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On Thursday 02 April 2009 21:38:06 Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Now, what about the idea of providing a shorthand LOCALE='foo',
mirroring --locale=foo initdb option? It seems like a good idea, because
you almost never
On Thursday 02 April 2009 21:38:06 Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Now, what about the idea of providing a shorthand LOCALE='foo',
mirroring --locale=foo initdb option? It seems like a good idea, because
you almost never want to set LC_COLLATE
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
As near as I can tell, every place where you see an explicit cast
between char * and xmlChar * is probably broken. I think we ought
to approach this by refactoring to have all those conversions go
through subroutines, instead of blithely casting.
There is
On Sunday 05 April 2009 05:00:04 Tom Lane wrote:
Chris Browne cbbro...@acm.org writes:
j...@agliodbs.com (Josh Berkus) writes:
This one is also really bad, but probably only Doc-patchable.
However, can SQL/XML really be said to be core functionality if it
only works in UTF-8?
* BUG
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On Sunday 05 April 2009 05:00:04 Tom Lane wrote:
Is there a reason not to fix it as suggested at
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2009-02/msg00032.php
ie recode on-the-fly from database encoding to UTF8?
Probably just verifying that it works.
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On Sunday 05 April 2009 05:00:04 Tom Lane wrote:
Is there a reason not to fix it as suggested at
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2009-02/msg00032.php
ie recode on-the-fly from database encoding to UTF8?
Probably just verifying that it works.
Chris Browne cbbro...@acm.org writes:
j...@agliodbs.com (Josh Berkus) writes:
This one is also really bad, but probably only Doc-patchable.
However, can SQL/XML really be said to be core functionality if it
only works in UTF-8?
* BUG #4622: xpath only work in utf-8 server encoding
Well,
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
The other existing bugs I think relate to extreme corner cases (e.g.
ENUMs of DOMAINS) and/or may be feature requests rather than bugs (e.g.
Cover Density Ranking) so I think can safely be put off until 8.4.1 or
later.
As far as the
Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Both of those things are related to 8.4 feature changes, so we should
either do them now or
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
As Dave Page pointed
out, other people have already started designing tools based on CVS
HEAD.
Now is the time to decide, before the PostgreSQL beta is out. I understand
the pain inflicted on
Dave Page wrote:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
As Dave Page pointed
out, other people have already started designing tools based on CVS
HEAD.
Now is the time to decide, before the PostgreSQL beta is out. I understand
Dave Page dp...@pgadmin.org writes:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Now is the time to decide, before the PostgreSQL beta is out. I understand
the pain inflicted on tools, but I don't think that's a good reason to not
change it.
Tom Lane wrote:
Dave Page dp...@pgadmin.org writes:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Now is the time to decide, before the PostgreSQL beta is out. I understand
the pain inflicted on tools, but I don't think that's a good reason to
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Personally I think the naming decision is close enough to be a coin
toss, and so either choice is fine with me. However, I think it is
Clearly Unacceptable for createdb's switches to be spelled differently
than the underlying
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Personally I think the naming decision is close enough to be a coin
toss, and so either choice is fine with me. However, I think it is
Clearly Unacceptable for createdb's switches to be spelled differently
than the underlying SQL
Dave Page dp...@pgadmin.org writes:
In this case, createdb - however, this particular case is of very
minor impact to us. My gripe is more on the general issue of being
potentially forced to add support for a new version and beta test
tools in the same timeframe that PostgreSQL has for beta.
Tom Lane wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Personally I think the naming decision is close enough to be a coin
toss, and so either choice is fine with me. However, I think it is
Clearly Unacceptable for createdb's switches to be spelled differently
than
Tom Lane wrote:
Dave Page dp...@pgadmin.org writes:
In this case, createdb - however, this particular case is of very
minor impact to us. My gripe is more on the general issue of being
potentially forced to add support for a new version and beta test
tools in the same timeframe that
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Dave Page dp...@pgadmin.org writes:
In this case, createdb - however, this particular case is of very
minor impact to us. My gripe is more on the general issue of being
potentially forced to add support for a new version and
Dave Page wrote:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Dave Page dp...@pgadmin.org writes:
In this case, createdb - however, this particular case is of very
minor impact to us. My gripe is more on the general issue of being
potentially forced to add support
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Personally I think the naming decision is close enough to be a coin
toss, and so either choice is fine with me. However, I think it is
Clearly Unacceptable for createdb's switches to be spelled
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Now, what about the idea of providing a shorthand LOCALE='foo',
mirroring --locale=foo initdb option? It seems like a good idea, because
you almost never want to set LC_COLLATE and LC_CTYPE differently. If we
do that, should
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Both of those things are related to 8.4 feature changes, so we should
either do them now or decide we won't do
j...@agliodbs.com (Josh Berkus) writes:
This one is also really bad, but probably only Doc-patchable.
However, can SQL/XML really be said to be core functionality if it
only works in UTF-8?
* BUG #4622: xpath only work in utf-8 server encoding
Well, much of the definition of XML assumes
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Josh Berkus wrote:
These bugs strike me as especially pernicious and to need fixing before 8.4
release (but NOT before Beta):
* GiST picksplit (maybe GIN too?) can fail
we have patch for recent problem raised by Sergey Konoplev (thanks Andrew for
the test case),
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
and the first two items from the questions category, which
don't seem important enough to worry about at this stage of the game.
Both of those things are related to 8.4 feature changes, so we should
either do them now or
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Both of those things are related to 8.4 feature changes, so we should
either do them now or decide we won't do them.
Well, Should we have a LOCALE option in CREATE DATABASE? has to
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Both of those things are related to 8.4 feature changes, so we should
either do them now or decide we won't do
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Hmm, well, Tom dropped a filtered version of your list into the open
items wiki page.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items
That includes a whole slough of patches that weren't submitted until
after
Guillaume Smet wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
That includes a whole slough of patches that weren't submitted until
after November 1st and which I think should probably be bumped en
masse to 8.5:
postgresql.conf: patch to have ParseConfigFile
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I think we should also boot everything in the pre-existing bugs
category, and the first two items from the questions category, which
don't seem important enough to worry about at this stage of the game.
That would leave
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps so, but again, it's not a new regression, so why should it be
considered a blocker for 8.4beta?
I agree they shouldn't. You were talking about bumping them to 8.5
which is a totally different thing.
--
Guillaume
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
That can be argued to just be completing the pg_hba rewrite stuff that
happened long before november with the final logical step.
I guess if you stretch that definition as well, this could also be an
extension to that
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Guillaume Smet
guillaume.s...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
That includes a whole slough of patches that weren't submitted until
after November 1st and which I think should probably be bumped en
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items
That includes a whole slough of patches that weren't submitted until
after November 1st and which I think should probably be bumped en
masse to 8.5:
Change behavior of statement-level
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
PQinitSSL broken in some use cases
This is a hard case. It's arguably a bug fix, but not one that we could
back-patch. I think we would have applied it by now if there were
consensus on which solution to pick.
I think the
All,
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I think we should also boot everything in the pre-existing bugs
category,
I don't agree. I think we should fix as many of those as we can without
holding up the release. Having been (briefly) in charge of
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
All,
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think we should also boot everything in the pre-existing bugs
category,
I don't agree. I think we should fix as many of those as we can
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
And Magnus fixed this one:
* Path separator consistency on Windows
Uh, no, that's still an open issue. Magnus put up a proposed patch that
I didn't like. I think it's arguable that we should be going the other
way: convert backslashes to slashes.
It seems that we have full consensus about the following Open Items
not being material for 8.4, so I'm going to move them to the TODO
list or Commitfest 2009-First as appropriate:
* Change behavior of statement-level triggers for inheritance cases?
No patch, no interest in making it happen for
Robert Haas wrote:
Wow, that is a large list. ?Getting this all on a wiki is really what
needed to happen. ?I can't keep an open list current enough to be
useful.
Ah, glad you like. I thought you'd been arguing the other side of
that point with me for several days, but no matter - it
Since Bruce seems not to be in a hurry to update his open-items mailbox,
I've taken the liberty of adding entries for all the items that I think
are relevant for 8.4 to the wiki page:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items
Anybody who wants to start cleaning these things up,
Tom Lane wrote:
Since Bruce seems not to be in a hurry to update his open-items mailbox,
I've taken the liberty of adding entries for all the items that I think
are relevant for 8.4 to the wiki page:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items
Anybody who wants to start
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items
Anybody who wants to start cleaning these things up, have at it.
We were in agreement to move the Win32 namespace issue to the TODO list,
right? Unless anybody objects, I'll
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I'm sure they will. But the current problem is getting beta released
in the first place, and AFAICS we're all waiting for you.
As Tom said, it is more the open items that we are waiting on, not the
release notes, but if
Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I'm sure they will. ?But the current problem is getting beta released
in the first place, and AFAICS we're all waiting for you.
As Tom said, it is more the open items that we are waiting on, not the
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I think pushing pre-existing bugs to 8.5 is a mistake,
What is the threshold for has to be fixed before we can go to beta
versus has to be fixed before release?
I did not by any
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
That includes a whole slough of patches that weren't submitted until
after November 1st and which I think should probably be bumped en
masse to 8.5:
postgresql.conf: patch to have ParseConfigFile report all parsing
48 matches
Mail list logo
