Hannu Krosing wrote:
> What about functions
>
> 1. split(text,text,int) returns text
>
> 2. split(text,text) returns text[]
>
> and why not
>
> 3. split(text,text,text) returns text
>
> which returns text from $1 delimited by $2 and $3
Given the time remaining before beta, I'll be happy just
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER doesn't respect attisdropped. Unfortunately I
> really don't have the time to submit a patch at the moment - sorry :(
> test=# create constraint trigger "$1" after insert or update on "slave" from
> master not defe
CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER doesn't respect attisdropped. Unfortunately I
really don't have the time to submit a patch at the moment - sorry :(
ctest=# create table master (x int unique, y int4 unique);
NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / UNIQUE will create implicit index 'master_x_key' for
table 'master'
NOT
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Point-in-time recovery - ready for 7.3?
>>
>> This seems very unlikely now. Status?
> It would be a shame to have to wait for 7.4 for this one.
If a credible patch appears before the end of the month, great ---
but the discussion
Actually, looking at this again it's possible that tsearch sees 'a' as a
skip word and so doesn't allow a search on it. This makes it _really_ hard
for me to parse and check user keywords - maybe a 'isvalidsyntax' sort of
function should be included? Hmmm...maybe I could use the cast to
::mquery
Hi,
I noticed this behaviour:
usa=# SELECT rr.id, rr.name, rr.description FROM recipe_recipes rr WHERE
rr.ftiidx ## 's';
id | name |
description
-+--+---
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Point-in-time recovery - ready for 7.3?
>
> This seems very unlikely now. Status?
It would be a shame to have to wait for 7.4 for this one.
> glibc and mktime() - fix?
>
> I can do the work on this I need more info and no one seems to be
> conerned.
I'm
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I guess my question would be that currently fulltextindex generates SQL like
> this:
> create function fti() returns opaque as
> '$libdir/fti'
> language 'C';
> So it references the fti.so, but where does it say what functio
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> create function fti() returns opaque as
> '$libdir/fti'
> language 'C';
>
> So it references the fti.so, but where does it say what function to actually
> run in fti.so? Or is it assumed in C functions that the function to call in
> the shared obj
> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is it possible to have two different functions in the .so that
> can be made
> > into two different postgres funtions, both referencing the same .so?
>
> Certainly, what's the problem there? Offhand I can't think of any
> contrib modules
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it possible to have two different functions in the .so that can be made
> into two different postgres funtions, both referencing the same .so?
Certainly, what's the problem there? Offhand I can't think of any
contrib modules that only de
I believe that
SELECT EXTRACT(EPOCH FROM TIMESTAMP '2001-02-16 20:38:40');
ahould give a fairly large integer --- in 7.2 I get 982373920.
But CVS tip (without the int64-timestamp option) produces
982.35592. Broken, no?
regards, tom lane
---(end of
Is it possible to have two different functions in the .so that can be made
into two different postgres funtions, both referencing the same .so?
Chris
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, 15 August 2002 6:02 AM
> To: Christopher Kings-
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What about this.
> 1. Implement pg_get_foreignkey_def() or whatever
> 2. Adjust pg_dump to dump foreign keys using an ALTER statement
> 3. Back port the above to rel 7_2_2
> 4. Release a 7.2.2 version and ask that people upgrade to that versi
On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 00:01, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > > Dependency - have pg_dump auto-create dependencies when
> > loading 7.2.X
> > > data?
> > >
> > > Are we as far as we can go here?
> >
> > The only trouble maker is foreign keys. If there was a nice way of
> > finding foreign k
Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anyone mind if we bump the DTD version to Docbook 4.2?
Peter E. is the gatekeeper on that, I think --- he pushed us to 4.1
not long ago.
If Peter's okay with 4.2, then full speed ahead ...
regards, tom lane
PS: pgsql-docs is prob
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> remove interfaces/ssl if not improved
>
> I am ready to yank this.
Agreed.
> integrate or remove new libpqxx
> integrate or add to gborg Pg:DBD
>
> Seems like gborg is the place for these.
Yes, but I'd also like to see libpq++, per
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I would like to know how to move this item forward.
Right now (i.e., in 7.2), the only two options we have for moving the
log file to a different spindle are mounting it on pg_xlog and using a
symlink. I doubt many people do the the former, and if they
> > Dependency - have pg_dump auto-create dependencies when
> loading 7.2.X
> > data?
> >
> > Are we as far as we can go here?
>
> The only trouble maker is foreign keys. If there was a nice way of
> finding foreign keys in 7.2 and prior it probably would have been
> implemented a long ti
I would like to know how to move this item forward.
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Curt Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ... just for the record I'm with the "don't
> > use an environment variable" crowd here, too. It's way,
> Dependency - have pg_dump auto-create dependencies when loading 7.2.X
> data?
>
> Are we as far as we can go here?
The only trouble maker is foreign keys. If there was a nice way of
finding foreign keys in 7.2 and prior it probably would have been
implemented a long time ago in p
Curt Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ... just for the record I'm with the "don't
> use an environment variable" crowd here, too. It's way, way to easy
> to start up with the wrong setting in your environment.
What he said ...
> Oh, and yes, it does need to be changable after an initdb. Say
Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ... it occurred to me that a predefined set of views
> and/or tables for all replication implementations may be worthwhile.
Do we understand replication well enough to define such a set of views?
I sure don't ...
regards, tom la
Here are some comments on the open 7.3 items. We have to start pairing
this down if we are going to hit beta in 2.5 weeks:
---
P O S T G R E S Q L
7 . 3 O P E N
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, scott.marlowe wrote:
> My non-coding vote goes with Tom Lane on this. initdb can set pg_xlog,
> and if you need to change it, use symlinks.
I've not been following this thread, and thus I suppose I missed
my opportunity to vote, but just for the record I'm with the "don't
u
Thanks.
-Greg
On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 22:34, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> OK, I have applied all three of Greg's python patches.
>
> ---
>
> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > Yep - alright, just commit it I guess.
> >
> > Ch
OK, I have applied all three of Greg's python patches.
---
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Yep - alright, just commit it I guess.
>
> Chris
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Greg Copeland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTE
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Greg Copeland wrote:
Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> This fixes some text as well as enforces the use of "drop table cascade"
> since we moved fro
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Greg Copeland wrote:
Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> Well, that certainly appeared to be very straight forward. pg.py and
> syscat.py scripts wer
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Greg Copeland wrote:
Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> Okay, I read
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2002-06/msg00086.php and never
> saw
Reading about the pgmonitor thread and mention of gborg made me wonder
about replication and ready ability to uniformly monitor it. Just as
pg_stat* tables exist to allow for statistic gathering and monitoring in
a uniform fashion, it occurred to me that a predefined set of views
and/or tables fo
Yep - alright, just commit it I guess.
Chris
> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Copeland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, 15 August 2002 11:09 AM
> To: Rod Taylor
> Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne; Bruce Momjian; PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing
> List
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] python p
Anyone mind if we bump the DTD version to Docbook 4.2?
This consists on all users who wish to build docs on installing the 4.2
DTD set, and updating some depreciated tags within the sgml files.
comment -> remark
docinfo -> appendixinfo, chapterinfo, bookinfo, etc.
What it buys is a number of u
Well, I tend to agree with that. Overall, I can't say that I see bad
things coming out of accepting the patch as is. It's not exactly
causing an extra join or other wise a significant waste of resources.
At worst, it appears to be ambiguous. Since Christopher has not offered
any additional fol
I backed this out. It is part of a later patch still in the queue.
---
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> [ Sorry for previous message saying it was added to queue.]
>
> Patch applied. Thanks.
>
>
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> CHANGES:
>
> August 13, 2002
> Use parser of OpenFTS v0.33.
>
> --
> Teodor Sigaev
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
[ application/gzip is not supported, skipping... ]
[ Sorry for previous message saying it was added to queue.]
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Rod Taylor wrote:
> Appears there is a problem finding the opclass when indexing a domain.
>
> CREATE DOMAIN newint as int4;
> CREAT
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://candle.pha.pa.us/cgi-bin/pgpatches
I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
---
Rod Taylor wrote:
> Appears there is a problem
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Momjian) wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > I don't know where else to go with the patch at this point. I
>> > think increasing the number of 'global' users is polluting the
>> > namespace too much,
>>
>> Why? If the installation
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's nonlocal constraints that are the problem, and here foreign keys
> and UNIQUE constraints are certainly the canonical examples. Both of
> these would be largely solved with table-spanning indexes I think.
Note that the other obvious way to solve this
> Do any of the encodings with encoding max length > 1 have a constant
> character size (e.g. unicode?). If so, how hard would it be to add
> another member to pg_wchar_tbl, say:
>
> bool mblen_is_const; /* all chars = max bytes this charset */
>
> Then those character sets code gain back m
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I don't know where else to go with the patch at this point. I think
> > increasing the number of 'global' users is polluting the namespace too
> > much,
>
> Why? If the installation needs N global users, then it needs N global
> us
Curt Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's my biggest fear as well. Here are a couple of possible
> assertions we could make about supertables and subtables that have,
> I think, some fairly far-reaching implications.
CHECK-style constraints don't seem like a huge issue to me. We already
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> I agree. Table-spanning indexes would be a large, complex,
> difficult-to-get-right feature. Before diving into that we should get
> some idea of just how we'd actually use them, and whether that's the
> only big chunk of work standing between us and a mor
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > How about if we just document that they have to create a
> > > postgres@template1 user before flipping the switch. That way, there is
> > > no special user, no PG_INSTALLER file, and n
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't know where else to go with the patch at this point. I think
> increasing the number of 'global' users is polluting the namespace too
> much,
Why? If the installation needs N global users, then it needs N global
users; who are you to make that
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > How about if we just document that they have to create a
> > postgres@template1 user before flipping the switch. That way, there is
> > no special user, no PG_INSTALLER file, and no double-tests for user
> > names.
>
> ... and no us
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I have no personal preference between period and @ or whatever. See if
> > you can get some other votes for @ because most left @ when the ORDER BY
> > idea came up from Marc.
>
> FWIW, I still lean to username
On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 18:20, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > I will vote against this as being a major loss of legibility. Perhaps
> > > we could compromise on controlling it by a GUC variable, though.
> >
> > I was afraid of that, but to pick up the theme of the day, I'm no
On 14 Aug 2002, Oliver Elphick wrote:
>
> cvs server: Updating src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs/ascii_and_mic
> cvs server: failed to create lock directory for
> `/projects/cvsroot/pgsql-server/src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs/ascii_and_mic'
>(/projects/cvsroot/pgsql-server/src/backend
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It also allowed auto-migration to encrypted passwords from an old dump
> file.
Ah, right, that was it: we wanted to be able to have a pg_dumpall script
containing a mix of crypted and noncrypted passwords in CREATE USER
commands be loaded either as-is,
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
>
> > OK, we got _that_ answer. Looks like gborg. Marc really wants to pump
> > that up.
>
> I think if gborg had a different name and looked more like the main site,
> more people would consider using it without feeling "kick
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How about if we just document that they have to create a
> postgres@template1 user before flipping the switch. That way, there is
> no special user, no PG_INSTALLER file, and no double-tests for user
> names.
... and no useful superuser account; if you
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> Most of these look like they would break a lot of people --- for
>> example, we can't just arbitrarily change the results of bool_out.
> That wouldn't help anyway. I meant to add code in pg_dump (and possibly
> the rule recompile
Tom Lane wrote:
> Hmm. I thought it *was* done, but it looks like Bruce forgot to change
> the actual guc.c value? The docs and postgresql.conf.sample claim the
> default is true...
>
> 2002-06-14 21:29 momjian
>
> * doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml,
> src/backend/utils/misc/postgresql.c
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A couple questions regarding encrypted passwords:
> (1) There was talk of changing the default value of the
> 'password_encryption' GUC variable for 7.3; AFAIK, this hasn't
> happened yet. Should this be done?
Hmm. I thought it *was* done, but it
OK, I have a new idea. Seems most don't like that 'postgres' is a
special user in this context.
How about if we just document that they have to create a
postgres@template1 user before flipping the switch. That way, there is
no special user, no PG_INSTALLER file, and no double-tests for user
na
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > I will vote against this as being a major loss of legibility. Perhaps
> > we could compromise on controlling it by a GUC variable, though.
>
> I was afraid of that, but to pick up the theme of the day, I'm not sure if
> I want to overcomplexify things that much. ;-)
Rod Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 16:32, Neil Conway wrote:
> > A couple questions regarding encrypted passwords:
> >
> > (1) There was talk of changing the default value of the
> > 'password_encryption' GUC variable for 7.3; AFAIK, this hasn't
> > happened yet. Should this be don
Neil Conway wrote:
> A couple questions regarding encrypted passwords:
>
> (1) There was talk of changing the default value of the
> 'password_encryption' GUC variable for 7.3; AFAIK, this hasn't
> happened yet. Should this be done?
Strange. I had updated the docs and postgresql.conf, b
interesting.
>From: Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [HACKERS] journaling in contrib ...
>Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 00:01:41 +0200
Tom Lane writes:
> Most of these look like they would break a lot of people --- for
> example, we can't just arbitrarily change the results of bool_out.
That wouldn't help anyway. I meant to add code in pg_dump (and possibly
the rule recompiler). That doesn't break anything.
> You mean you'd
Bruce Momjian writes:
> OK, what I didn't want to do we to over-complexify
That's reasonable, but not when you break other things along the way that
were themselves meant to decomplexify things.
> something that is for only a few users.
If it's only for a few users, please send private patches
Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:
> How can I modify it to build two different C files into two different .so's?
That is next to impossible in the current setup.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe an
Bruce Momjian writes:
> OK, we got _that_ answer. Looks like gborg. Marc really wants to pump
> that up.
I think if gborg had a different name and looked more like the main site,
more people would consider using it without feeling "kicked out".
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So the former plain 'postgres' user could still be such to us, to client
> programs, etc, but the backend would assume that that meant
> postgres@template1 -- no namespace collision, and the special case is that
> anyone@template1 has the behavior the un
On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 16:32, Neil Conway wrote:
> A couple questions regarding encrypted passwords:
>
> (1) There was talk of changing the default value of the
> 'password_encryption' GUC variable for 7.3; AFAIK, this hasn't
> happened yet. Should this be done?
Since ODBC is capable of u
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 03:49 pm, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Lamar Owen wrote:
> > On Wednesday 14 August 2002 03:29 pm, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> > > Hate to complicate things more, but back to a global username, say
> > > you have user "lowen" that should have access to all databases. What
> >
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 03:55 pm, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Lamar Owen wrote:
> > If the user 'lowen' is then expanded to 'lowen@template1' it would be
> > stored that way -- and lowen@template1 is different from lowen@pari, for
> > But maybe I'm just misunderstanding the
A couple questions regarding encrypted passwords:
(1) There was talk of changing the default value of the
'password_encryption' GUC variable for 7.3; AFAIK, this hasn't
happened yet. Should this be done?
(2) What is the reasoning behind the current storage format of
MD5-encrypted pas
On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 12:47, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > > They are moving pgaccess more into the admin role, and pgmonitor fit in
> > > > with that.
> > >
> > > Personally, I kinda like to be able to run admin modularize
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 August 2002 03:29 pm, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> > Hate to complicate things more, but back to a global username, say
> > you have user "lowen" that should have access to all databases. What
> > happens if there's already a lowen@somedb that
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > > They are moving pgaccess more into the admin role, and pgmonitor fit in
> > > > with that.
> > >
> > > Personally, I kinda like to be able to run admin modularized ... they
> > > *should* be
Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 August 2002 03:29 pm, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> > Hate to complicate things more, but back to a global username, say
> > you have user "lowen" that should have access to all databases. What
> > happens if there's already a lowen@somedb that's an unprivileged use
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > They are moving pgaccess more into the admin role, and pgmonitor fit in
> > > with that.
> >
> > Personally, I kinda like to be able to run admin modularized ... they
> > *should* be looking at stuff like webmin, where you
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 03:29 pm, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> Hate to complicate things more, but back to a global username, say
> you have user "lowen" that should have access to all databases. What
> happens if there's already a lowen@somedb that's an unprivileged user.
> Assuming lowen is a d
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > They are moving pgaccess more into the admin role, and pgmonitor fit in
> > with that.
>
> Personally, I kinda like to be able to run admin modularized ... they
> *should* be looking at stuff like webmin, where you can plug-n-play admin
> functions as required, or hord
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Problem is that pg_shadow flat file _only_ has users with passwords. I
> > do a btree search of that file, but I am not sure I want to add a dump
> > of _all_ users just to allow this. Do we?
>
> Why not? Doesn't seem like a big p
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 03:04 pm, Tom Lane wrote:
> Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Appending '@template1' to unadorned usernames, and giving inherited
> > rights across the installation to users with template1 rights? Then you
> > have the unadorned 'lowen' becomes 'lowen@template
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Appending '@template1' to unadorned usernames, and giving inherited rights
> > across the installation to users with template1 rights? Then you have the
> > unadorned 'lowen' becomes 'lowen@template1' -- but lowen@
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > > Anything in contrib that can be built seperately from the server code,
> > > > that just requires libpq and headers, should be pulled and dis
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Problem is that pg_shadow flat file _only_ has users with passwords. I
> do a btree search of that file, but I am not sure I want to add a dump
> of _all_ users just to allow this. Do we?
Why not? Doesn't seem like a big penalty ...
Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Appending '@template1' to unadorned usernames, and giving inherited rights
> across the installation to users with template1 rights? Then you have the
> unadorned 'lowen' becomes 'lowen@template1' -- but lowen@pari wouldn't have
> access to template1, r
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > Anything in contrib that can be built seperately from the server code,
> > > that just requires libpq and headers, should be pulled and distributed as
> > > seperate modules, which has the adde
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > Anything in contrib that can be built seperately from the server code,
> > that just requires libpq and headers, should be pulled and distributed as
> > seperate modules, which has the added benefit that, if listed on GBorg,
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 02:38 pm, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > The nice thing about it is you can have any combination of people with
> > installation-wide access (create them as joeblow) and people with
> > one-database access (create them as joeblow@joesdatabase). A special
>
I have been getting this for at least two days:
[matthew@zeut src]$ cvs -v
Concurrent Versions System (CVS) 1.11.2 (client/server)
[matthew@zeut src]$ cvs -z3 -d
:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/projects/cvsroot co -P pgsql
[...]
cvs server: Updating pgsql/src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs/asc
On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 14:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Oh, so try it with and without. I can do that, but it seems more of a
> > security problem where you were trying two names instead of one. Do
> > people like that?
>
> The nice thing about it is you can
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Oh, so try it with and without. I can do that, but it seems more of a
> > security problem where you were trying two names instead of one. Do
> > people like that?
>
> The nice thing about it is you can have any combination of peop
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Oh, so try it with and without. I can do that, but it seems more of a
> security problem where you were trying two names instead of one. Do
> people like that?
The nice thing about it is you can have any combination of people with
installation-wide ac
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In a way that user has to be special for this case
> > because of the requirement that at least one person be able to connect
> > when you flip that flag.
>
> Why does anyone need to be special? The behavior should be to try the
> g
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I needed to move a PostgreSQL database to another product but I noticed
^^
Surely this is a misprint. ;-)
> that the pg_dump output contains a few artifacts that make the output
> nonportable. Most of these sh
> * Is anyone working on using standard foreign key creation commands
> instead of CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER?
Submitted with the pg_constraint patch, and more recently updated to
match cvs tip. I believe Tom wishes to review this prior to
application.
---(end of broad
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Anything in contrib that can be built seperately from the server code,
> that just requires libpq and headers, should be pulled and distributed as
> seperate modules, which has the added benefit that, if listed on GBorg,
> search engines will pick up the modules ...
>
>
I believe the dictionary meaning of 'object' in this context would be 'a
cause for concern or attention'. Each of Peters uses of the word is
highly appropriate, as he was concerned and I'd agree with the
sentiments that those concepts needed attention.
Anyway, object with stars and strongly obje
Tom Lane wrote:
> I'd suggest dropping the talk slides (and you might as well flatten the
> thing into one directory). Perhaps instead the README could include a
> pointer to where to find the talk slides on-line. That'd bring it down
> to half a dozen K which is a more appropriate size for a co
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In a way that user has to be special for this case
> because of the requirement that at least one person be able to connect
> when you flip that flag.
Why does anyone need to be special? The behavior should be to try the
given user name, and if that's
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I needed to move a PostgreSQL database to another product but I noticed
> that the pg_dump output contains a few artifacts that make the output
> nonportable. Most of these should be relatively easy to fix.
Most of these look like they would break a
Sounds good to me. TODO updated:
o Cluster all tables at once using pg_index.indisclustered set
during previous CLUSTER
---
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
>
> > Added to TODO:
> >
> > o Cluster al
Thanks. I will keep it in the queue for CVS commit message sake.
---
Rod Taylor wrote:
> Sorry Bruce, this was included as a part of the patch of the below
> subject:
>
> Re: [PATCHES] Dump serials as serial -- not a sequ
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
