[HACKERS] HISTORY updated for 7.3beta2

2002-09-22 Thread Bruce Momjian
I have updated /HISTORY for 7.3beta2. Looking at the open items list, I think we are ready for beta2 now. --- P O S T G R E S Q L 7 . 3 O P E NI T E M S

[HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1. I used the same HISTORY categories Peter made in 7.2. I liked them. Please review the HISTORY file. I am sure there are improvements that can be made. -- Bruce Momjian|

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 4 Sep 2002 at 3:24, Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1. I used the same HISTORY categories Peter made in 7.2. I liked them. Please review the HISTORY file. I am sure there are improvements that can be made. Some minor stuff,

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
I assume you are not looking at the 7.3 release notes. It does take a while for anon to get the changes. --- Shridhar Daithankar wrote: On 4 Sep 2002 at 3:24, Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, the HISTORY file is updated,

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1. I used the same HISTORY categories Peter made in 7.2. I liked them. Please review the HISTORY file. I am sure there are improvements that can be made. Please change: Add CREATE/DROP CONVERSION, allowing loadable

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Rod Taylor
Found this line without a name: Propagate column or table renaming to foreign key constraints Is that item complete? pg_constraint follows (as such dump / restore will work) but the triggers themselves still break, don't they? On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 03:24, Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, the HISTORY

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Found this line without a name: Propagate column or table renaming to foreign key constraints Is that item complete? pg_constraint follows (as such dump / restore will work) but the triggers themselves still break, don't they? Yes, no. There's hackery

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Shridhar Daithankar dijo: On 4 Sep 2002 at 3:24, Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1. Some minor stuff, In the schema changes description: Schemas allow users to create objects in their own namespace so two people can have the

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread cbbrowne
Shridhar Daithankar dijo: On 4 Sep 2002 at 3:24, Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1. Some minor stuff, In the schema changes description: Schemas allow users to create objects in their own namespace so two people

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tatsuo Ishii wrote: OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1. I used the same HISTORY categories Peter made in 7.2. I liked them. Please review the HISTORY file. I am sure there are improvements that can be made. Please change: Add CREATE/DROP

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Rod Taylor wrote: Found this line without a name: Propagate column or table renaming to foreign key constraints Is that item complete? pg_constraint follows (as such dump / restore will work) but the triggers themselves still break, don't they? No idea. The item only talks about the

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Shridhar Daithankar dijo: On 4 Sep 2002 at 3:24, Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1. Some minor stuff, In the schema changes description: Schemas allow users to create objects in their own

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, wording updated to add 'applications': Schemas allow users to create objects in their own namespace so two people or applications can have tables with the same name. There is also a public schema for shared tables. Table/index creation can be

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Joe Conway
Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1. I used the same HISTORY categories Peter made in 7.2. I liked them. Please review the HISTORY file. I am sure there are improvements that can be made. A few minor comments: 1. suggested

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joe Conway wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1. I used the same HISTORY categories Peter made in 7.2. I liked them. Please review the HISTORY file. I am sure there are improvements that can be made. A few minor

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please review the HISTORY file. PostgreSQL now support ALTER TABLE ... DROP COLUMN functionality. s/support/supports/ Functions can now return sets, with multiple rows and multiple columns. You

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't remember every seeing a function returning sets before. Can you give an example? http://www.ca.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.2/postgres/xfunc-sql.html#AEN26392 Also, the preceding subsection shows SQL functions returning rows. So these

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't remember every seeing a function returning sets before. Can you give an example? http://www.ca.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.2/postgres/xfunc-sql.html#AEN26392 Also, the preceding subsection shows SQL functions

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, now I remember, only SQL functions could return sets. How about this: PL/PgSQL and C functions can now return sets, with multiple rows and multiple columns. You specify these functions in the SELECT FROM clause,

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Joe Conway
Tom Lane wrote: C functions have always been able to return sets too; you don't honestly think that a SQL function can do something a C function can't, do you? The original dblink is an example. There are really two independent improvements here: one is the ability for plpgsql functions

Re: [HACKERS] HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded

2002-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joe Conway wrote: What about this: Functions returning multiple rows and/or multiple columns are now much easier to use than before. You can call such a table function in the SELECT FROM clause, treating its output like a table. Also, plpgsql functions can now return sets. Added. --

[HACKERS] HISTORY updated

2001-10-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
I have updated the HISTORY file to be current as of today. Marc, it may be nice to repackage beta1 with that one file changed, but my guess is that we will have a beta2 soon enough. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610)