On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Greg Stark gsst...@mit.edu wrote:
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 4:29 AM, Sergio A. Kessler
sergiokess...@gmail.com wrote:
on every single planet of the universe, except the one called
postgrearth, whose inhabitants breathe sql and eat messages from
postgresql
The current system give people the completely false impression that
7.0 and 7.4 are somehow similar.
On what planet?
on every single planet of the universe, except the one called
postgrearth, whose inhabitants breathe sql and eat messages from
postgresql mailing lists... :-)
most people I
hi tom, sorry for the out-of-the-blue email (I'm not on the list)...
On Nov 6, 2009, at 12:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I believe we had consensus that plpgsql should offer the following
three
behaviors when a name in a SQL query could refer to either a plpgsql
variable or a column from a table of
dennis, look at vtiger crm (http://www.vtiger.com)
vtiger is a fork of sugarcrm and are 100% commited to open source.
(unlike sugar, who offer the full version only for purchase)
and they actively want to support more databases.
regards,
/sak
Denis Lussier wrote:
At EnterpriseDB we're doing a
chris, have you looked at how sapdb (http://www.sapdb.org)
does this ?
/sergio
ps: IANAL
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió en el
mensaje [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
OK,
DROP COLUMN now seems to work perfectly. All the old test cases that
failed
now work
first, congratulations to all for the 7.1 release, good work.
second, I've found (some years ago to be honest) that pgsql can ALTER
TABLE while the table is widely available for all users...
this strike me as pretty bad/dangerous/confusing/messy (even from the
POV of implementation)
should I
