Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote:
> On 11/8/07, Collin Kidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm with Thomas. I think that, while inline posting is a good thing,
> > bottom posting is dead stupid and wastes my time.
> Just as bad as top-posting, really.
>
> > It is far easier to
> > follow a thread with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/07/07 11:35, Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote:
> On 11/8/07, Collin Kidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
>
>
>> No, just not everyone agrees with your viewpoint on this topic. Top
>> posting has it's place and some of us prefer it.
> But they could
Collin Kidder wrote:
I'm with Thomas. I think that, while inline posting is a good thing,
bottom posting is dead stupid and wastes my time. It is far easier to
follow a thread with top posting as the relevant text is right there at
the top ready to be read.
That sounds more like an argument t
On 11/8/07, Collin Kidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm with Thomas. I think that, while inline posting is a good thing,
> bottom posting is dead stupid and wastes my time.
Just as bad as top-posting, really.
> It is far easier to
> follow a thread with top posting as the relevant text is righ
My point is: with top-posting I don't care how many lines were repeated
because I don't have to scroll.
Considering there is an RFC that recommends inline posting over
top-posting (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855), and considering the
fact that this topic has been beat to death on do
In response to Thomas Kellerer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Tom Lane, 07.11.2007 06:14:
> > Thomas Kellerer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> If everyone simply top-posted, there would be no need for me to scroll
> >> down,
> >> just to find a two line answer below a forty line quote - which I
> >> pe
Reg Me Please wrote:
> P.S.
> Why not including the pgloader into the main tarball?
We are not attempting to include every useful tool in the database
server. We're actually moving in the opposite direction: stuff has been
offloaded to pgfoundry as appropriate. Add-on packages are encouraged.
If
Le mercredi 07 novembre 2007, Reg Me Please a écrit :
> I installed .deb. The man page has not been included.
It seems the latter package on pgfoundry does have a problem here. As I have
some patches waiting for a release, I'll make current CVS the 2.2.2 version
and update the pgfoundry files so
Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 19:05:52 Reg Me Please ha scritto:
> Hi all.
> I'm generating an SQL script to load some million rows into a table.
> I'm trying to use the COPY command in order to speed the load up.
>
> At a certain point I get an error telling about a
> "invalid input syntax for type
Il Wednesday 07 November 2007 11:26:56 Dimitri Fontaine ha scritto:
> Le mercredi 07 novembre 2007, Reg Me Please a écrit :
> > Maybe just a complete example would suffice. Let's say a table structure,
> > a CSV and a raw text file, a config file and the run output.
>
> Do you mean something like t
Le mercredi 07 novembre 2007, Reg Me Please a écrit :
> Maybe just a complete example would suffice. Let's say a table structure, a
> CSV and a raw text file, a config file and the run output.
Do you mean something like the included examples, which I tend to also use as
(regression) tests?
http
Il Wednesday 07 November 2007 11:10:40 Dimitri Fontaine ha scritto:
> Le mercredi 07 novembre 2007, Reg Me Please a écrit :
> > pgloader seems not that easy to use for a newbie like myself.
> > Also because domentation seems too skinny.
>
> Sorry about this, writting documentation in English is not
Le mercredi 07 novembre 2007, Reg Me Please a écrit :
> pgloader seems not that easy to use for a newbie like myself.
> Also because domentation seems too skinny.
Sorry about this, writting documentation in English is not that easy when it's
not one's natural language... I'll accept any comment/p
Il Wednesday 07 November 2007 07:54:41 Reg Me Please ha scritto:
> Il Wednesday 07 November 2007 01:29:44 Alvaro Herrera ha scritto:
> > Reg Me Please wrote:
> > > Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 22:13:15 hai scritto:
> > > That's the "branch and bound". Editing 29M+ lines file takes some time.
> > > B
Tom Lane, 07.11.2007 06:14:
Thomas Kellerer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
If everyone simply top-posted, there would be no need for me to scroll down,
just to find a two line answer below a forty line quote - which I personally
find more irritating than top-posting.
I think you're ignoring my b
Il Wednesday 07 November 2007 01:29:44 Alvaro Herrera ha scritto:
> Reg Me Please wrote:
> > Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 22:13:15 hai scritto:
> > That's the "branch and bound". Editing 29M+ lines file takes some time.
> > But this is the way I'm going to go right now.
>
> Huh, why not just use pgl
Thomas Kellerer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If everyone simply top-posted, there would be no need for me to scroll down,
> just to find a two line answer below a forty line quote - which I personally
> find more irritating than top-posting.
I think you're ignoring my basic point, which was tha
Reg Me Please wrote:
> Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 22:13:15 hai scritto:
> > Split it in half, with the appropriate sql on each end so the data
> > still works, and see which half causes a problem. Keep splitting the
> > one that causes a problem in half until you have a small one with the
> > pr
Hi,
Le Tuesday 06 November 2007 22:40:50 Tom Lane, vous avez écrit :
> Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm trying to understand what and where.
> > The point is that I have this 29M+ lines script telling me there's a
> > problem somewhere.
You could use pgloader, which reads CSV inp
Tom Lane wrote on 06.11.2007 21:21:
The real point here is that when writing to a mailing list, you should
make an effort to conserve other peoples' time. Hundreds of people are
going to read what you wrote, possibly thousands when you count in
people searching the list archives in the future.
Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 22:37:12 Scott Marlowe ha scritto:
> On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 22:13:15 hai scritto:
> > > On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 19:43:38 Scott Marlowe ha scritt
Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm trying to understand what and where.
> The point is that I have this 29M+ lines script telling me there's a problem
> somewhere.
It told you exactly where it detected the problem.
Actually ... are you looking at the right error message? If this is
On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 22:13:15 hai scritto:
> > On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 19:43:38 Scott Marlowe ha scritto:
> > > > On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 22:13:15 hai scritto:
> On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 19:43:38 Scott Marlowe ha scritto:
> > > On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > That seems not to be the case.
> > > > The last line has a \
On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 19:43:38 Scott Marlowe ha scritto:
> > On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > That seems not to be the case.
> > > The last line has a \. by its own and the last but one is
> > > well formed.
> >
Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 19:43:38 Scott Marlowe ha scritto:
> On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That seems not to be the case.
> > The last line has a \. by its own and the last but one is
> > well formed.
>
> (Please don't top post...)
>
> Got a self contained test case y
"Scott Marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But the other reason is that top posters are often the biggest
> offenders of not editing their replies. there's nothing like seeing a
> one line reply to a 500 line conversation.
> When inline posting, one can delete the parts of the converstation
> t
On Nov 6, 2007 1:16 PM, Collin Kidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is offtopic but there is nothing wrong with top posting. Is there a
> mail list policy on it or are you just picky about it?
OK, I was being a bit flippant with my last response. The reasoning
on technical mailing lists for p
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
On Nov 6, 2007 1:16 PM, Collin Kidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is offtopic but there is nothing wrong with top postin
This is offtopic but there is nothing wrong with top posting. Is there a
mail list policy on it or are you just picky about it?
Scott Marlowe wrote:
On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That seems not to be the case.
The last line has a \. by its own and the last but one is
On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That seems not to be the case.
> The last line has a \. by its own and the last but one is
> well formed.
(Please don't top post...)
Got a self contained test case you can post?
---(end of broadcast)--
That seems not to be the case.
The last line has a \. by its own and the last but one is
well formed.
Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 19:14:00 Tom Lane ha scritto:
> Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > At a certain point I get an error telling about a
> > "invalid input syntax for type numer
Reg Me Please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At a certain point I get an error telling about a
> "invalid input syntax for type numeric"
> The incriminated line number is the last one (the one containing the \.).
> Is there a way to know which line is really malformed?
Why do you think the report
Hi all.
I'm generating an SQL script to load some million rows into a table.
I'm trying to use the COPY command in order to speed the load up.
At a certain point I get an error telling about a
"invalid input syntax for type numeric"
The incriminated line number is the last one (the one containin
34 matches
Mail list logo
