not as if
objecting to this requires a bunch of abstract hyperbole, just a
simple it's not worth the effort and it's considered a bad idea to
put security-senstive data inside PL function bodies.
On 12/20/07, Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 10:47:53 -0800
Trevor Talbot
I wrote:
That's it. A very simple problem.
It was hinted to me off-list that my mail was fanning the flames, so
to clarify: when I say things like the above, I mean conceptually.
I think there might be a shared pool of knowledge that says it's
anything but simple in practical terms, but that
On 12/20/07, Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roberts, Jon wrote:
This really is a needed feature to make PostgreSQL more attractive to
businesses. A more robust security model that better follows commercial
products is needed for adoption.
I would argue that commercial products
On 11/29/07, Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 14:48 +0100, Csaba Nagy wrote:
In fact an even more useful option would be to ask the planner to throw
error if the expected cost exceeds a certain threshold...
Tom's previous
On 11/13/07, Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
I'm not a private support organisation; please send your replies to the
list, not me.
Sorry. Most of the lists I send to have ReplyTo set, but a few do not.
And then I forget.
If
On 9/5/07, Scott Marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/5/07, Carlo Stonebanks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right, additionally NTFS is really nothing to use on any serious disc
array.
Do you mean that I will not see any big improvement if I upgrade the disk
subsystem because the client is
On 9/5/07, Scott Marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/5/07, Trevor Talbot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/5/07, Scott Marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/5/07, Carlo Stonebanks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right, additionally NTFS is really nothing to use on any serious disc
array
On 9/5/07, Thomas Finneid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
how does pg utilise multi cpus/cores, i.e. does it use more than one
core? and possibly, how, are there any documentation about this.
PostgreSQL creates a new process to handle each connection to the
database. Multiple sessions can therefore
On 8/9/07, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 06:04:09PM +0530, Merlin Moncure wrote:
keep an eye for the HOT feature which will hopefully make 8.3 that
will highly reduce the penalty for (small) updates in many cases.
Is there an overview somewhere about how this
