Re: [HACKERS] Can we revisit the thought of PostgreSQL 7.2.4?

2003-01-19 Thread mlw
This is an interesting thought. My gut tells me it is a viable opportunity for the corporate entities that offer support and wish to have 'VAR' status. This is just my opinion, but I view the core development group as pure development, and the various people that resell or distribute

Re: [HACKERS] Can we revisit the thought of PostgreSQL 7.2.4?

2003-01-19 Thread Justin Clift
mlw wrote: This is an interesting thought. My gut tells me it is a viable opportunity for the corporate entities that offer support and wish to have 'VAR' status. This is just my opinion, but I view the core development group as pure development, and the various people that resell or

Re: [HACKERS] Anyone want to get involved in writing the the driver

2003-01-19 Thread Justin Clift
Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote: On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 01:20:45PM +1030, Justin Clift wrote: Have been discussing what it would take to write an SDBC driver for connecting StarOffice/OpenOffice to PostgreSQL with Frank Schönheit, a senior member of the Sun StarOffice/OpenOffice DBA team, and a

[HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Justin Clift
Hi everyone, Dave Page put up a new survey on the PostgreSQL portal page very recently, What would attract the most new PostgreSQL users? and the results in already are interesting (1,529 results as this is being written): http://www.postgresql.org/survey.php?SurveyID=9 Listed from most

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
On Sun, 2003-01-19 at 15:20, Justin Clift wrote: Now, we don't necessarily have a speed problem, as people who take the time to tune the database can attest to, so this is making me consider why such a large percentage of folk would vote for that. The possibilities that come to mind

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread D'Arcy J.M. Cain
On Sunday 19 January 2003 09:20, Justin Clift wrote: Dave Page put up a new survey on the PostgreSQL portal page very recently, What would attract the most new PostgreSQL users? and the results in already are interesting (1,529 results as this is being written):

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Hans-Jürgen Schönig
+ people measure postgresql by the speed of bulk imports This is a good point. I can complete agree. What we might need is something called SQL Loader or so. This may sound funny and it doesn't make technical sense but it is an OBVIOUS way of importing data. People often forget to use

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Tom Lane
Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dave Page put up a new survey on the PostgreSQL portal page very recently, What would attract the most new PostgreSQL users? and the results in already are interesting (1,529 results as this is being written): [snip] Now, we don't necessarily have a

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Michael Meskes
On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 09:43:03AM -0500, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: What I find interesting is that 25% voted for replication and only 1/2% voted for PITR. I think that that shows that surveys are easily skewed by their own parameters. People interested in both probably just voted for the one

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Rod Taylor
I wonder why people ask for better documentation. I think the documentation is really good. Ever read Oracle stuff? *ugh*. They want examples of real-world usage. The commands themselves have good 'HOW TO' notes, and an explanation of what they are, but we don't really have anything on

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Oliver Elphick
On Sun, 2003-01-19 at 14:20, Justin Clift wrote: Dave Page put up a new survey on the PostgreSQL portal page very recently, What would attract the most new PostgreSQL users? ... Other interesting conclusions can be drawn from the results too, one of which is that only about 2% of people

Re: [HACKERS] Can we revisit the thought of PostgreSQL 7.2.4?

2003-01-19 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2003-01-16 at 22:47, Justin Clift wrote: Over the last few days we've had patches submitted for 7.2.3 that address a couple of things, both the WAL Recovery Bug that Tom has developed a patch for, and a couple of buffer overflows that have been widely reported. The buffer

Re: [HACKERS] Suggestion for aggregate function

2003-01-19 Thread Manfred Koizar
On 17 Jan 2003 19:08:06 -0500, Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Would this query be efficient if there's an index on item_id, price ? That is, would it know to do an index scan Yes, at least to avoid the sort step. and be able to skip to the next item_id in the index as soon as a price was

Re: [HACKERS] Can we revisit the thought of PostgreSQL 7.2.4?

2003-01-19 Thread Justin Clift
Bruce Momjian wrote: Tom Lane wrote: snip PS: I'm not taking a position on Justin's suggestion that there should be a 7.2.4. Marc and Bruce would be the ones who have to do the work, so they get to make the decision... Who, us? Well, there is the confusion factor of releasing a patch to a

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Robert Treat
On Sunday 19 January 2003 09:20, Justin Clift wrote: Dave Page put up a new survey on the PostgreSQL portal page very recently, What would attract the most new PostgreSQL users? and the results in already are interesting (1,529 results as this is being written): *** Answer

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Michael Meskes
On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 01:19:03PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote: pretty wide feature set (as good as any other open source rdbms afaik) plus it's open source, so if we don't have a feature that say oracle has, you can pay someone the $10,000+ the oracle license will cost to implement it. I've

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Dave Page
-Original Message- From: Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 January 2003 14:47 To: PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page btw, PITR would get more hits if more people knew

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Satoshi Nagayasu
Michael Meskes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unfortunately it doesn't always work this way. I knew one government organization that decided to go for Oracle for 500K Euro instead of adding the missing features (actually almost exclusively PITR). One of the top arguments I heard was: I don't

Re: [HACKERS] Can we revisit the thought of PostgreSQL 7.2.4?

2003-01-19 Thread Josh Berkus
Neil, Robert: As for the WAL recovery bug, AFAIK no such bug has been reported in the last few days. Exactly what issue are you referring to? That's my bug; I filed it on Wednesday. However, it is not 100%; that is: 1) While Tom and I are pretty sure that the issue *could* cause the behavior

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I wonder why people ask for better documentation. I think the documentation is really good. Ever read Oracle stuff? *ugh*. Ever read MySQL docs - *hack*!! Chris ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Justin Clift
Michael Meskes wrote: On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 01:19:03PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote: pretty wide feature set (as good as any other open source rdbms afaik) plus it's open source, so if we don't have a feature that say oracle has, you can pay someone the $10,000+ the oracle license will cost to

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results from the PostgreSQL portal page

2003-01-19 Thread Gavin Sherry
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: I wonder why people ask for better documentation. I think the documentation is really good. Ever read Oracle stuff? *ugh*. Ever read MySQL docs - *hack*!! The documentation definately needs work -- particularly client library

[HACKERS] unquoted special constants

2003-01-19 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Hi, Is this the complete list of constants that must not be quoted? CURRENT_TIME CURRENT_TIMESTAMP CURRENT_DATE LOCAL_TIME LOCAL_TIMESTAMP CURRENT_USER SESSION_USER USER Anything else? (Aside from functions?) Chris ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP

Re: [HACKERS] Can we revisit the thought of PostgreSQL 7.2.4?

2003-01-19 Thread Justin Clift
Josh Berkus wrote: Neil, Robert: As for the WAL recovery bug, AFAIK no such bug has been reported in the last few days. Exactly what issue are you referring to? That's my bug; I filed it on Wednesday. However, it is not 100%; that is: 1) While Tom and I are pretty sure that the issue *could*

Re: [HACKERS] Can we revisit the thought of PostgreSQL 7.2.4?

2003-01-19 Thread Lamar Owen
On Sunday 19 January 2003 22:16, Justin Clift wrote: An interesting thought here is to know if Red Hat fixed *all* of the known PostgreSQL security flaws for 7.2.3 with their latest security release. It would be interesting to see their code if they did so, but from Tom's previous comments it

Re: [HACKERS] Prepare enabled pgbench

2003-01-19 Thread Justin Clift
Hi Curtis, Have you had time to get this done? :-) Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift Curtis Faith wrote: Tatsuo Ishii [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks. I can commit it for 7.4. BTW, it would be nice if we could have a switch to turn on/off PREPARE/EXECUTE in pgbench so that we could

[HACKERS] What goes into the security doc?

2003-01-19 Thread Dan Langille
With reference to my post to the PostgreSQL Password Cracker on 2003-01-02, I've promised to write a security document for the project. Here it is, Sunday night, and I can't sleep. What better way to get there than start this task... My plan is to write this in very simple HTML. I will post the

Re: [HACKERS] Getting float8 data into cube?

2003-01-19 Thread Bruno Wolff III
I have a specific proposal for allowing for building cube values from float8 values with building strings (which will typically lose information). I want to add the following 4 overloaded functions: cube(float8) cube(1) returns '(1),(1)'::cube cube(float8,float8) cube(1,2) returns

Re: [HACKERS] default to WITHOUT OIDS? Possible related problem

2003-01-19 Thread Emmanuel Charpentier
Tom Lane wrote: Daniel Kalchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If ever this happens, same should be considered for tables created via the SELECT INTO statement. These are in many cases 'temporary' in nature and do not need OIDs (while making much use of the OIDs counter). SELECT INTO does create