On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 22:27:08 -0600, Dave Balderstone
> You're way too impatient. Things don't happen here in time scales that
> are measured in hours or days. Hang in there. You've got a good start
> and some good people supporting what you want to do.
>
> Relax, take your time (and the advise of the wise ones here (not me...
> um well, whatever)) and work through the process.
>
> Your proposal is, in its genesis, sound. Now, evolution.
I agree. The idea of the Usenet group comp.databases.postgresql is
sound, and I think it really should be created, so go on with the RFD
process.
I think group should NOT be mail-gated to pgsql maillists. IMHO
"Big 8" groups and maillists serve different purposes.
I think having "local" mail-news gateways is good (like ones already
existing), but IMHO there is vast difference between "local" gateways
and full-blown "Big 8" network.
And finally, I think "comp.databases.postgresql.*" names are poor
choice for "local" gateway. They clash with "Big 8" servers and most
properly configured newsservers will not pass such groups. And in
future, when Big8 c.d.postgresql.* matures, some clashes are
inevitable. I personally think postgresql.* names for "local" gate
is THE right way (and it would make it OK to pass the feed without said
clash).
Regards,
Dawid
PS: And I think one should ask if it is OK to propose someone else as
Big8 group gateway admin/moderator/etc before doing so. It was...
uncourteous...
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
