Re: [HACKERS] v7.3.1 psql against a v7.2.x database ...

2003-01-18 Thread Justin Clift
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: With ever more larger businesses adopting PostgreSQL, and that leading on to more places having several versions of PostgreSQL in operation simultaneously (i.e. development vs production) we're probably going to need to give psql the ability to handle whichever

Re: [HACKERS] Can we revisit the thought of PostgreSQL 7.2.4?

2003-01-18 Thread Tom Lane
Lamar Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ... Why? If a user doesn't need the features of 7.x.x, and the codebase is working well for him/her, why should said user/DBA feel compelled to go through who knows what mechanations to upgrade to the latest version? Because there are unfixable bugs in

[HACKERS] constraint defaults still print

2003-01-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
Remember how we made DEFERRABLE/DEFERRED not print if the constraint was the default. Shouldn't we do the same for MATCH and ON UPDATE/ON DELETE sections of the constraint in pg_get_constraintdef()? Doing \d I see: test= \d sales Table public.sales

Re: [HACKERS] Can we revisit the thought of PostgreSQL 7.2.4?

2003-01-18 Thread Lamar Owen
On Saturday 18 January 2003 11:13, Tom Lane wrote: Lamar Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ... Why? If a user doesn't need the features of 7.x.x, and the codebase is working well for him/her, why should said user/DBA feel compelled to go through who knows what mechanations to upgrade to the

Re: [HACKERS] constraint defaults still print

2003-01-18 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I vote for not showing 'NO ACTION', so long as it's the SQL standard default... Chris On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: Remember how we made DEFERRABLE/DEFERRED not print if the constraint was the default. Shouldn't we do the same for MATCH and ON UPDATE/ON DELETE sections of the

[HACKERS] Namespace/Table Visibility Behavior Issues

2003-01-18 Thread D. Hageman
Assume a database with a couple of namespaces. Give two of these namespaces the names test_1 and test_2. Under these namespaces create a couple of tables with the names: example, example_2, example_3. set search_path to test_1, test_2; In the psql client, using a standard \d you will only

[HACKERS] Heading to Atlanta

2003-01-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
I am heading to Atlanta for the one week training class. We have thirteen people signed up, and I think that is a good number. I return on Friday, but leave again on Wednesday for two weeks in Tokyo and Brussels, returning February 11. I should have connectivity for most of this period, but it

Re: [HACKERS] Heading to Atlanta

2003-01-18 Thread Lamar Owen
On Sunday 19 January 2003 01:16, Bruce Momjian wrote: I am heading to Atlanta for the one week training class. We have thirteen people signed up, and I think that is a good number. Atlanta, huh. You'll be less than four hours from me. I lived and worked (and went to school) in Atlanta from

Re: [HACKERS] Namespace/Table Visibility Behavior Issues

2003-01-18 Thread Tom Lane
D. Hageman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am not sure that is wise to do the pg_table_is_visible check on those commands. In my humble opinion, those commands are for understanding the layout/structure/nature of the database. If you can't see all your namespaces that you set in your