Dear Bruce,
Just my 0.02 euro cents:
On Sat, 28 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> This is going to have to wait for 8.1. If it was so important, someone
> would have asked for it long before we went beta.
I'm not sure it works that way. Not that simply anyway.
Those having a say BEFORE beta are those interested in the implementation
of the feature. For instance I'm not interested in how tablespace are
implemented, mostly because I don't have time and also because I think
that many people may have better ideas than mine on that issue.
Those having a say DURING beta are those interested in using the feature.
I'm interested in using that because I may need it. So I evaluate the
feature wrt how I may use it. The above syntax fix really look useful to
me from that point of view, even if it is not essential to tablespace
implementation.
So what does not seem important to developers may be seen as important to
users. ISTM that it is the case with tablespace, which is a nice feature
mostly implemented, but the small things that may be missing could make
all the difference wrt its usability by database administrators, and could
potentially harm postgresql reputation. That include fixing dump/restore,
being able to move objects between tablespace...
Hence all these arguments so that new features should be "clean" enough,
and that "workable" may not enough.
Have a nice day,
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------(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
