On Sat, 2007-12-08 at 12:46 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Simon's the guy who (rightfully, IMHO) smacked me for forgetting to
credit him on a commit message. Credit is important to some people.
Let's not get in the business of annoying the people who gives their
work
On Sat, 2007-12-08 at 10:13 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
If I had had no credit, I wouldn't have a job.
Agree with this 100%
I don't have a problem with mentioning sponsoring companies on the
bottom of the release notes. I think it will encourage wider sponsorship
if people do that. Probably
On Sat, 2007-12-08 at 17:09 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
So what I think we must do is split the function into two:
PQconnectionNeedsPassword: true if server demanded a password and there
was none to send (hence, can only be true for a failed connection)
PQconnectionUsedPassword: true if server
I am trying to add support for timestamps in our proposed libpq PGparam patch.
I ran into something I don't really understand. I wasn't sure if it was my
libpq code that was wrong (converts a binary timestamp into a time_t or struct
tm) so I tried it from psql.
Server is using EST (8.3devel)
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sat, 2007-12-08 at 10:13 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
If I had had no credit, I wouldn't have a job.
Agree with this 100%
I don't have a problem with mentioning sponsoring companies on the
bottom of the release notes. I think it will encourage wider sponsorship
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I am actually a little worried that companies who sponsor developers
might some day want their company name on the release note item. I am
glad we have not had to make that decision yet. This actually
O.k. I will bite :)
highlights a danger of having
On Sunday 09 December 2007 09:44, Andrew Chernow wrote:
I am trying to add support for timestamps in our proposed libpq PGparam
patch. I ran into something I don't really understand. I wasn't sure if it
was my libpq code that was wrong (converts a binary timestamp into a time_t
or struct tm)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ~rob/devel/postgresql/83/bin/psql -h localhost -u rob -p
5483]
psql: Warning: The -u option is deprecated. Use -U.
User name: rob
Password for user :
Welcome to psql 8.3beta2, the PostgreSQL interactive terminal.
1) I don't recall why -u was ever deprecated (and honestly
Okay, thanks. So using WITHOUT TIME ZONE basically means, store the provided
value as UTC. Meaning, 8AM EST NOW() is stored/treated as 8AM UTC.
That explains why my libpq code was getting 3AM for without time zone values.
I am using code from src/interfaces/ecpg/pgtypeslib/timestamp.c
On Thursday 06 December 2007 03:54, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 10:46:51PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
As of CVS HEAD, some of the contrib module documentation pages have
extensive credit screeds, eg
Robert Treat wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ~rob/devel/postgresql/83/bin/psql -h localhost -u rob -p
5483]
psql: Warning: The -u option is deprecated. Use -U.
User name: rob
Password for user :
Welcome to psql 8.3beta2, the PostgreSQL interactive terminal.
1) I don't recall why -u was ever
On Sunday 09 December 2007 11:54, Andrew Chernow wrote:
Okay, thanks. So using WITHOUT TIME ZONE basically means, store the
provided value as UTC. Meaning, 8AM EST NOW() is stored/treated as 8AM
UTC.
Not quite. Using WITHOUT TIME ZONE means to not store any time zone
information. It
Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, thanks. So using WITHOUT TIME ZONE basically means, store the provided
value as UTC. Meaning, 8AM EST NOW() is stored/treated as 8AM UTC.
No, I think you are more confused now than you were before.
For both types, the underlying stored value is
Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) I don't recall why -u was ever deprecated (and honestly postgresql is the
only program I know which uses -U rather than -u) but maybe we should revert
to -u and deprecate -U instread?
You appear to think that -u and -U are supposed to be equivalent.
On Sunday 09 December 2007 13:33, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) I don't recall why -u was ever deprecated (and honestly postgresql is
the only program I know which uses -U rather than -u) but maybe we should
revert to -u and deprecate -U instread?
You appear to
I don't remember why it's deprecated. These days it seems to use the
same prompting mechanism as we use for passwords, so hopefully there
is no security risk. Maybe it should be un-deprecated? I'd tend to
take out the forced password prompt if we did, though.
regards,
I wrote:
I don't remember why it's deprecated.
Some trawling of the CVS logs shows that the deprecation notice was
added by Peter here:
2000-01-14 17:18 petere
* doc/src/sgml/ref/psql-ref.sgml, src/bin/psql/command.c,
src/bin/psql/command.h, src/bin/psql/common.c,
Magnus Hagander wrote:
You seem to have misunderstood what I am suggesting. Of course we should
document use of buildenv.pl in addition to the hacky fix to the .bat
files. The hack is the part that would be invisible. The docs would be
visible and contain what would be our ongoing
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Yeah, I don't know when did that start but I would prefer that the names
would be spelled in full. On the other hand, having a first name only
is a kind of a sign that you're already an established developer. Still
I would like my last name to be there and I was
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I am actually a little worried that companies who sponsor developers
might some day want their company name on the release note item. I am
glad we have not had to make that decision yet. This actually
O.k. I will bite :)
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Note that I am not arguing one way or the other, but I find the
distinction between a individual who is a contributor and a company that
is a contributor interesting.
Individual mentions are only so we know who did the work.
got it. stored vs. displyed was confusing me.
Andrew
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, thanks. So using WITHOUT TIME ZONE basically means, store the provided
value as UTC. Meaning, 8AM EST NOW() is stored/treated as 8AM UTC.
No, I think you are more confused
Gregory Stark wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Note that I am not arguing one way or the other, but I find the
distinction between a individual who is a contributor and a company that
is a contributor interesting.
Individual mentions are only so we know
Gregory Stark wrote:
I understand the thinking but I disagree that various optimizations speeding
up merge sort, reducing contention at transaction start and end, ... is
entirely content-free. I agree that nobody is really going to be specifically
saying gee, i wish we could use postgres but
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
However as a user I find it helpful to get a kind of overview of the kinds
of
invisible changes there were so I can get a feel for the magnitude of the
improvements between versions.
I agree with this as well. However, I am starting to wonder if the
release
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
However as a user I find it helpful to get a kind of overview of the kinds of
invisible changes there were so I can get a feel for the magnitude of the
improvements between versions.
I agree with this as well. However, I am starting to wonder if the
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
However as a user I find it helpful to get a kind of overview of the
kinds of
invisible changes there were so I can get a feel for the magnitude of the
improvements between versions.
I agree with this as well.
Based on this discussion I think it is clear the release notes chapter
needs an introductory section. This would not be for any specific
release but the release notes in general. I have come up with the
following text:
The release notes contain the significant changes for each
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't remember why it's deprecated.
The manual explains it:
-u
Forces psql to prompt for the user name and password before connecting to
the database.
This option is deprecated, as it is conceptually flawed. (Prompting for a
non-default
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Don't want to shoot your Albatross, but those lines were written by
Coleridge. Must give the appropriate credits :-)
Doh ... of course ... but why does Project Gutenberg have it filed
under Wordsworth?
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/8905
Anyway, you are
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't remember why it's deprecated.
The manual explains it:
This option is deprecated, as it is conceptually flawed. (Prompting for a
non-default user name and prompting for a password because the server
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I assumed the white paper would have proper attribution.
Right, but is the white paper going to be thorough to mention _all_
changes?
Hmmm good question which gets back to where we started :). My very first
thought on all of this was that we
Tom Lane wrote:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The manual explains it:
This option is deprecated, as it is conceptually flawed. (Prompting for
a
non-default user name and prompting for a password because the server
requires it are really two different things.)
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have never understood what's the point of having an option to force a
password prompt. I wonder why don't we deprecate -W?
It's not *completely* useless, because you only need one connection
attempt not two --- normally, psql gets rejected once before
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The manual explains it:
This option is deprecated, as it is conceptually flawed. (Prompting for a
non-default user name and prompting for a password because the server
requires it are really two
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Don't want to shoot your Albatross, but those lines were written by
Coleridge. Must give the appropriate credits :-)
Doh ... of course ... but why does Project Gutenberg have it filed
under Wordsworth?
Greg Smith wrote:
It's good this came up, because that is factually wrong; while the average
case is much better some OS-dependant aspects of the spike (what happens at
fsync) are certainly still there. I think it's easier to rewrite this
whole thing so it's technically accurate rather
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have never understood what's the point of having an option to force a
password prompt. I wonder why don't we deprecate -W?
It's not *completely* useless, because you only need one connection
attempt not two ---
Gregory Stark wrote:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have never understood what's the point of having an option to force a
password prompt. I wonder why don't we deprecate -W?
It's not *completely* useless, because you only need one
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
OK, works for me. I'll try to look at it after I have attended to the
Windows build issues. My plate is pretty full right now, though.
FYI I'm having a look at it now.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/CTMLCN8V17R4
Llegará una época en
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
OK, works for me. I'll try to look at it after I have attended to the
Windows build issues. My plate is pretty full right now, though.
FYI I'm having a look at it now.
Great. Thanks.
cheers
andrew
---(end
On Dec 10, 2007 10:39 AM, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like the realease notes intro. You may have already picked up on
these, but a couple typos:
A names appearing next to an item represents the major developer for
that item. Of course all changes involve
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As I recall there was a bug under very specific circumstances that a
password prompt would not appear. Thus we added the option for -W.
I don't see any evidence for that theory in the CVS logs ..
Peter seems to have invented -W out of whole cloth.
On Dec 8, 2007 3:42 AM, Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I still think this needs to be qualified either way. As it stands
it's
quite misleading. Many update scenarios will not benefit one whit
from
HOT updates.
Doesn't the
--- Original Message ---
From: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 09/12/07, 23:39:55
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Release Note Changes
First-name-only
entries represent established developers, while full names represent
newer
45 matches
Mail list logo
