> There are still a few problems with the function of the current CVS. > > 1) Has anyone got the latest full CVS actually working correctly using the > new table names? > 2) The current CVS might be a little premature for a candidate release. > > best... Mike
I did - only after manually changing all the table names under postgres to dbmail_whatever. AFAIK the latest CVS will not work unless you do this, however there is nothing in the sql-changelog that says this needs to be done. Here's the changes for Postgres: BEGIN TRANSACTION; ALTER TABLE acl RENAME TO dbmail_acl; ALTER TABLE aliases RENAME TO dbmail_aliases; ALTER TABLE auto_notifications RENAME TO dbmail_auto_notifications; ALTER TABLE auto_replies RENAME TO dbmail_auto_replies; ALTER TABLE dups RENAME TO dbmail_dups; ALTER TABLE mailboxes RENAME TO dbmail_mailboxes; ALTER TABLE messageblks RENAME TO dbmail_messageblks; ALTER TABLE messages RENAME TO dbmail_messages; ALTER TABLE pbsp RENAME TO dbmail_pbsp; ALTER TABLE physmessage RENAME TO dbmail_physmessage; ALTER TABLE subscription RENAME TO dbmail_subscription; ALTER TABLE users RENAME TO dbmail_users; END TRANSACTION; Something else I'd like to see before a 2.0 release, is that dbmail has support for Postgres transactions built in, but it's not actually using them anywhere. I see the function calls in db.c, but they're not being used. Actually using transactions would be an enormous performance benefit to dbmail Postgres users. ----- "Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature." -- Rich Kulawiec [EMAIL PROTECTED]
