2008/8/24 daveg [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 05:08:25PM +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello
2008/8/23 Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Friday 22 August 2008 07:41:30 Decibel! wrote:
If we're really worried about it we can have
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:57:50 -0400
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, having now looked at the proposed patch, it seems clear that it
isn't addressing the issue of quoting/escaping at all; so I wonder how
this can be considered to be a safely machine-readable format.
It's not a machine
2008/8/23 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 2008-08-23 at 08:21 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
record or hash table - it's implementation - second step. We have to
find syntax and semantic now.
Why not just use some standard record syntax, like
On Sun, 2008-08-24 at 08:05 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2008/8/23 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 2008-08-23 at 08:21 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
record or hash table - it's implementation - second step. We have to
find syntax and semantic now.
On Sat, 2008-08-23 at 14:42 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 21:04:07 -0400
D'Arcy J.M. Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's still the question of whether this covers any needs that aren't
met just as well by XML or CSV output formats.
Hello
2008/8/24 Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, 2008-08-24 at 08:05 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2008/8/23 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 2008-08-23 at 08:21 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
record or hash table - it's implementation -
On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 11:44:59PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
I'm not sure all browsing setups support tooltips nicely.
Any half way modern browser that is not text based should support tool tips.
Are we in the business of excluding
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 2:00 AM, D'Arcy J.M. Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:57:50 -0400
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, having now looked at the proposed patch, it seems clear that it
isn't addressing the issue of quoting/escaping at all; so I wonder how
this can
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 11:36 PM, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I assume there is no TODO here.
Well, there doesn't seem to be a TODO for partial/restartable vacuums,
which were mentioned upthread. This is a really desirable feature for
big databases and removes one of the reasons to
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:16:43 -0400
Merlin Moncure [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally I think it's rather nice to be able to have some extra
flexibility in how psql prints out data. Maybe, instead of the dry
and uninformative 'border 2', there could be a set of ouput control
options. Maybe I
Are we in the business of excluding text-based browsers? Or obsolete
ones, for that matter?
I don't think we would want to be in the business of
dealing successfully with every quirk of every browser
ever released.
Another way to look at it is supporting standards:
If graphical browsers
Tom Lane wrote:
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
I'm not sure all browsing setups support tooltips nicely.
Any half way modern browser that is not text based should support tool tips.
Are we in the business of excluding text-based browsers? Or obsolete
ones, for
Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 11:36 PM, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I assume there is no TODO here.
Well, there doesn't seem to be a TODO for partial/restartable vacuums,
which were mentioned upthread. This is a really desirable feature for
big databases and
Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
2008/8/23 Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Why not just use some standard record syntax, like
do you thing, so is it simpler?
It's not about being simpler, it's about pointing out that there are
ways to do what you need without creating compatibility
Steven Lembark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are we in the business of excluding text-based browsers? Or obsolete
ones, for that matter?
I don't think we would want to be in the business of
dealing successfully with every quirk of every browser
ever released.
That's nothing but a straw-man.
Recently Postgres has added a data type 'xml' which allows for
a well formed document to be inserted as a column in a Postgres database.
At the moment it doesnot have much utility, you can *almost* get the
same thing done with a text column. It's obviously the first step.
Is there a document
We currently have the ability to generate error location pointers, such
as
regression=# select nosuchcolumn from int8_tbl;
ERROR: column nosuchcolumn does not exist
LINE 1: select nosuchcolumn from int8_tbl;
^
for grammar-detected syntax errors and for errors during first-level
D'Arcy J.M. Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:57:50 -0400
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, quite aside from the question of whether we care to support ReST,
my opinion is that this patch fails to do so, and a significantly more
invasive patch would be needed to do it.
2008/8/24 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
2008/8/23 Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Why not just use some standard record syntax, like
do you thing, so is it simpler?
It's not about being simpler, it's about pointing out that there are
ways to do what
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 12:00:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
So I feel that the proposal for labeled parameters as such is dead
in the water, and that the only usefulness this thread has had is
(re-) exploring the syntactic alternatives available for named params.
FWIW, I think the way that
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:22:38 -0400
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suppose it is my fault for mentioning ReST. That was the reason I
looked into this but that is not what the final proposal is.
Well, if you can't just paste your output into ReST without having to
hand-munge it
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Merlin Moncure wrote:
Well, there doesn't seem to be a TODO for partial/restartable vacuums,
which were mentioned upthread. This is a really desirable feature for
big databases and removes one of the reasons to partition large
tables.
I would agree that partial vacuums
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If we didn't set the locations to unknown, then errors complaining about
problems arising within a rule would try to print pointers to locations in
the calling query's text having the same offsets as the problematic item
Matthew T. O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think everyone agrees that partial vacuums would be useful / *A Good
Thing* but it's the implementation that is the issue.
I'm not sure how important it will really be once we have support for
dead-space-map-driven vacuum.
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If we didn't set the locations to unknown, then errors complaining about
problems arising within a rule would try to print pointers to locations in
the calling query's text having the same offsets as the problematic
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Can you modify the buildfarm's description of that machine to mention
the special malloc debug flags? It'd probably stop me from asking
you this question again ;-)
hmm - would take somebody with SQL-level access to do this -
On Sunday 24 August 2008 19:19:24 Greg Fausak wrote:
Is there a document that describes the direction Postgres
will take relative to xml technology?
There is some information at http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/XML_Todo, but
these items are mainly aiming to complete the approach taken in 8.3.
I was looking just now at gram.y's handling of various peculiar SQL
constructs, and was reminded of a point that's bothered me before,
but I don't recall if it's ever been discussed explicitly on -hackers.
As an example, take the production for BETWEEN ASYMMETRIC:
a_expr BETWEEN
I'd like to stop autovac by changing the conf file then sending the
server a HUP
This appears to work, the logs show autovac terminated by
administrative command. Then a few minutes later I see a vacuum
process spawned.
Is it possible that there are timers that aren't being properly
Dave Cramer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like to stop autovac by changing the conf file then sending the
server a HUP
Uh ... why should that stop an autovac already in progress? I'd
only expect it to affect future launches.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via
Hi Dave,
Dave Cramer wrote:
I'd like to stop autovac by changing the conf file then sending the
server a HUP
This appears to work, the logs show autovac terminated by
administrative command. Then a few minutes later I see a vacuum process
spawned.
Is it possible that there are timers
Tom Lane wrote:
Matthew T. O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think everyone agrees that partial vacuums would be useful / *A Good
Thing* but it's the implementation that is the issue.
I'm not sure how important it will really be once we have support for
dead-space-map-driven
32 matches
Mail list logo