Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-16 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 11:22:58PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 03:33:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: For the batch job and single-CPU issues, they did not fit into existing FAQ entries, and I am not sure they are asked enough to be added as FAQs. I am

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-16 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 01:20:29AM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote: My experience is that long FAQ's are fine, so long as they're easy to search through. This means you've got to support users who may not know the magic word to search on. A good example is finding the limits for how many rows in a

[GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
Hi, After going through pgsql-general a bit I figured there were a few important questions missing from the FAQ, so I wrote some. Comments welcome. I can write more, if people can suggest things to write about. I was thinking something about collation and locales but I'm sure sure I understand

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Brendan Jurd
Comments welcome. I can write more, if people can suggest things to write about. I was thinking something about collation and locales but I'm sure sure I understand them myself. The following should read ... has no facility to fire jobs ... +PPostgreSQL itself has no facility fire jobs

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Brendan Jurd
Comments welcome. I can write more, if people can suggest things to write about. I was thinking something about collation and locales but I'm sure sure I understand them myself. Missed this on the first pass, but you need to s/seperate/separate here: +PA seperate project has started

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Roman Neuhauser
# kleptog@svana.org / 2005-08-10 10:02:20 +0200: After going through pgsql-general a bit I figured there were a few important questions missing from the FAQ, so I wrote some. Comments welcome. I can write more, if people can suggest things to write about. I was thinking something about

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 10:44:14AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote: +H3A name=4.224.22/A) Why are PostgreSQL table names case-sensitive?/H3 http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/features.html doesn't contain fold (as in case folding) at all, doesn't this topic belong

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Roman Neuhauser
# kleptog@svana.org / 2005-08-10 11:22:16 +0200: On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 10:44:14AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote: +H3A name=4.224.22/A) Why are PostgreSQL table names case-sensitive?/H3 http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/features.html doesn't contain fold (as

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 07:40:23PM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote: # kleptog@svana.org / 2005-08-10 11:22:16 +0200: Well, it's not a feature, so I'm not sure why it would be mentioned there. It's PostgreSQL's implementation of the standard. That page has this heading: Appendix D. SQL

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Bruce Momjian
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. Hi, After going through pgsql-general a bit I figured there were a few important questions missing from the FAQ, so I wrote some. Comments welcome. I can write more, if people can suggest things to write about. I was thinking

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Dan Armbrust
Bruce Momjian wrote: I have updated the FAQ to handle three of the items you mentioned. In one case, I added a new FAQ entry (double-quoting identifiers with a link to our docs), and in two other cases (indexing long columns, case-insensitive columns) I added to existing FAQ items where

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Bruce Momjian
Dan Armbrust wrote: I liked the FAQ entry written up by the original submitter much better, WRT to the long index issue. This write up does not contain the actual error message encountered, so its not going to be found by someone looking for a solution to the problem. It doesn't contain the

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 03:33:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: For the batch job and single-CPU issues, they did not fit into existing FAQ entries, and I am not sure they are asked enough to be added as FAQs. I am interested to hear other's opinions on this. Maybe, just looking through my

Re: [GENERAL] 5 new entries for FAQ

2005-08-10 Thread Bruce Momjian
pgman wrote: Dan Armbrust wrote: I liked the FAQ entry written up by the original submitter much better, WRT to the long index issue. This write up does not contain the actual error message encountered, so its not going to be found by someone looking for a solution to the problem. It