On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Gregory Stark wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If I link to a comment URL, how do people know if they should look at
that comment or all comments below it?
They should look at whatever they want to. I usually have to back up several
messages to understand
Greg Smith wrote:
If you look at how the archives store things, the threading in there
sometimes isn't sufficient to support this. As an example, I was just
trying to read all the messages in the Group Commit thread that Bruce
has tracked on Patches Held For PostgreSQL 8.4, and for
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Greg Smith wrote:
If you look at how the archives store things, the threading in there
sometimes isn't sufficient to support this. As an example, I was just
trying to read all the messages in the Group Commit thread that Bruce
has tracked on
On Feb 13, 2008 3:27 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps it's because it was split in two by a monthly boundary? (I
didn't look.)
Most likely. Somebody on the www team really ought to make an effort
to fix that sometime --- it reduces the value of the archives noticeably
if you
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Perhaps it's because it was split in two by a monthly boundary? (I
didn't look.)
That looks to be it. There's also another split it did manage to catch
where the original author started a new thread themselves that got linked
in. That sort of
Gregory Stark wrote:
Pointing to mail messages doesn't help us with any of that. We have to go back
and read the original message and make a judgement ourselves what state it's
in. If our judgement disagrees with others patches will just sit there with
everyone assuming someone else is
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Perhaps it's because it was split in two by a monthly boundary? (I
didn't look.)
That looks to be it. There's also another split it did manage to catch where
the original author started a new thread
Tom did most of the 8.4 stamping and I incremented the library minor
version numbers. I have updated the library bump wording in
RELEASE_CHANGES:
o Bump minor library versions, major if appropriate (see below)
I also updated this item description:
o update config.guess and
Sorry, please ignore me. I got start of beta confused with start of
development.
---
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom did most of the 8.4 stamping and I incremented the library minor
version numbers. I have updated the library
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Minor version bump is done unconditionally for each release cycle.
This isn't a *huge* deal, but I'm not sure it's actually appropriate.
We should bump the minor version when we actually add something new to
the
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom did most of the 8.4 stamping and I incremented the library minor
version numbers. I have updated the library bump wording in
RELEASE_CHANGES:
o Bump minor library versions, major if appropriate (see below)
I admit I am surprised
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom did most of the 8.4 stamping and I incremented the library minor
version numbers. I have updated the library bump wording in
RELEASE_CHANGES:
o Bump minor library versions, major if appropriate (see below)
I admit I am surprised by the library bump. We
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I admit I am surprised by the library bump. We haven't done anything to
the libraries yet, so why bump the versions?
Minor version bump is done unconditionally for each release cycle.
Major version bump is as-needed (ABI break).
Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I admit I am surprised by the library bump. We haven't done anything to
the libraries yet, so why bump the versions?
Minor version bump is done unconditionally for each release cycle.
Oh, I see. I will update RELEASE_CHANGES to
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I admit I am surprised by the library bump. We haven't done anything to
the libraries yet, so why bump the versions?
Minor version bump is done unconditionally for each release cycle.
Oh, I see. I
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I admit I am surprised by the library bump. We haven't done anything to
the libraries yet, so why bump the versions?
Minor version bump is done unconditionally for each release cycle.
This isn't a *huge* deal,
Stephen Frost wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I admit I am surprised by the library bump. We haven't done anything to
the libraries yet, so why bump the versions?
Minor version bump is done
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stephen Frost wrote:
We should bump the minor version when we actually add something new to
the library (which is probably just about every time we do a major
version, but still).
The problem is the risk of forgetting during development. When we break
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I admit I am surprised by the library bump. We haven't done anything to
the libraries yet, so why bump the versions?
Minor version bump is done unconditionally for each release
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stephen Frost wrote:
We should bump the minor version when we actually add something new to
the library (which is probably just about every time we do a major
version, but still).
The problem is the risk of forgetting during
Hi.
Still, my health is not good...
First, Probably, as for the 8.3 release binary, NLS is offed.
Even if it arranges shar/locale, it is not used.
Next, NLS was confirmed by VCBUILD of CVS-HEAD.
A very interesting result can be seen here.
hi there,
I recently found myself trying to build a trigger to modify some fields
in a good dozen similarly structured tables in which the similar columns
had different names.
in fact, I got stuck in pl/pgsql with the fact that there's no way to
access the NEW tuple in an indirect way, having
I brought this up a while ago, but I didn't get any responses, I assume
due to everyone being too busy with 8.3
I think that it would be great if the pg_timezone_names and
pg_timezone_abbrevs included a boolean field indicating if that item is
in the Olsen DB or if it is a system alias or
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Gregory Stark wrote:
Pointing to mail messages doesn't help us with any of that. We have to go
back
and read the original message and make a judgement ourselves what state it's
in. If our judgement disagrees with others patches will just sit there with
everyone
Hello hackers,
psql's \du command currently does not list the INHERIT role attribute.
It does show the other privilege attributes (superuser, create role,
create db), and INHERIT seems like the kind of thing a user
executing\du would want to know.
I'd like to add it to \du. The downside is
25 matches
Mail list logo
