On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Lamar Owen wrote:
> > > And the sooner our very old perl client goes away, the better I like it. It
> > > is a good client, don't get me wrong: but DBD:Pg is the standard now.
> >
> > I have been in contact with Edmund about mov
Ummm ... stupid question, but can we even bring this into the 'core'?
You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public
License or the Artistic License, as specified in the Perl README file.
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Thursday 01 August 2002 04:37 pm, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > I thought we were talking about trimming the source tree, not adding more.
> > Why not put it on gborg or somewhere else?
>
> It's already in CPAN. A link to CPAN should suffice, IMHO.
>
> I
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> >
> > > OK, I have attached a patch for testing. Sample output is:
> > >
> > > $ sql -U guest test
> > > psql: FATAL: user "test.guest" does not exist
> > > $ createuser test.guest
> >
> > I wil
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, jtv wrote:
> Looking at it that way, it seems to me that the proper approach is to
> cut out all interfaces that don't talk to the backend themselves--e.g.
> the ones that build on top of libpq, like libpq++ and libpqxx do.
This is what my opinion is ... what I'm setting up r
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >> Ummm ... stupid question, but can we even bring this into the 'core'?
> >>
> >> You may distribute under the terms of either
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I seem to find this argument a lot on the list here. For some reason,
> > many of the developers are under the impression that even if code is
> > never touched, it has a very high level of effort to keep it in t
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > > With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=16:
> > > (average = 28.6 seconds)
> > > With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=32:
> > > (average = 29.15 seconds)
>
> That is almost a 2 percent cost. Shall we challenge someone to get us
> back 2 percent from somewhere before the 7.3 release? Opt
On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Joe Conway wrote:
> I couldn't keep up with the list traffic this week, but I thought I saw
> enough to convince me that after it was all said and done, I would still
> be able to do `cvs co pgsql`. I'm finding today that after using cvsup
> to sync up, I can no longer checkou
On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The problem I see now is that libpqxx has a completely different build
> > system and documentation system.
>
> Unless someone's going to do the work to integrate libpqxx into our
> build/documentation system,
should be fixed ... looks like just an ownership issue on a new directory
...
On 13 Aug 2002, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> anoncvs is still broken:
>
> cvs server: Updating src/interfaces/libpqxx/config
> cvs server: Updating src/interfaces/libpqxx/debian
> cvs server: failed to create lock directo
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > OK, seeing as no one voted, and only Tom and I objected originally, we
> > will keep the code as Thomas has applied it, namely that PGXLOG/-X is
> > recognized by initdb, postmaster, postgres, and pg_ctl.
>
> We
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > OK, seeing as no one voted, and only Tom and I objected originally, we
> > > will keep the code as Thomas has applied it, namely that PGXLOG/-X is
> > > recognized by initdb, postmaster
On 13 Aug 2002, Greg Copeland wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-08-12 at 23:09, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > OK, seeing as no one voted, and only Tom and I objected originally, we
> > > will keep the code as Thomas has applied it, namely that PGXLOG/-X is
> > > recogniz
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > I think Tom is on to something here. I meant to ask but never got
> > > around to it. Why would anyone need to move the XLOG after you've
> > > inited the db?
> >
> > I jus
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Marc G. Fournier writes:
> >> Okay, but if we are going to pull libpqxx, what about the other lib's too?
>
> > Certain things apply to libpqxx that don't all apply t
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> If you move pg_xlog, you have to create a symlink in /data that points
> to the new location. Initdb would do that automatically, but if you
> move it after initdb, you would have to create the symlink yourself.
> With Thomas's current code, you would
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:38:00PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >
> > should be fixed ... looks like just an ownership issue on a new directory
>
>
> More like I uploaded that directory just as you were rsync'ing
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> I think this belongs on gborg. Would you create a project there?
>
> > A number of people at OSCON did consider this to be a nice contrib
> > feature. Out of curious
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > Anything in contrib that can be built seperately from the server code,
> > that just requires libpq and headers, should be pulled and distributed as
> > seperate modules, which has the added benefit tha
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > > Anything in contrib that can be built seperately from the server code,
> > > > that just
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > They are moving pgaccess more into the admin role, and pgmonitor fit in
> > > with that.
> >
> > Personally, I kinda like to be able to run admin modularized ... they
> > *should* be
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
>
> > OK, we got _that_ answer. Looks like gborg. Marc really wants to pump
> > that up.
>
> I think if gborg had a different name and looked more like the main site,
> more people would consider using it without feeling "kick
On 14 Aug 2002, Oliver Elphick wrote:
>
> cvs server: Updating src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs/ascii_and_mic
> cvs server: failed to create lock directory for
> `/projects/cvsroot/pgsql-server/src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs/ascii_and_mic'
>(/projects/cvsroot/pgsql-server/src/backend
all gone ...
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>
> Who the hell are these people and why can't they configure their
> own MTA?
>
> Vince.
> --
> ==
> Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSHemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]http:/
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > integrate or remove new libpqxx
> > integrate or add to gborg Pg:DBD
> >
> > Seems like gborg is the place for these.
>
> I would volunteer to package libpq++ separately.
Okay, the procedure is simple, but where do we want to put this? Do
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> OK, I am ready to do the work, but I would like to get a plan of where
> we are going. I see in interfaces:
>
> cli
> ecpg
> jdbc
> libpgeasy
> libpgtcl
> libpq
> libpq++
> libpqxx
> odbc
> pe
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Now, I know one of Marc's goals is to have libpq as a stand-alone
> > tarball, but I thought we decided that this _didn't_ require it to be in
> > a separate CVS repository.
>
> Removing libpq is impossible since
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > Chris has made code changes to GBorg to allow for this based on requests
> > from Dave Page (ie. PgAdminII) ... so there is no problems with that ...
> >
> > As for keeping them in our main CVS
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I think the only unknown is whether their CVS's should be moved out of
> >> the main tree.
>
> > Yes, they should be ...
>
> Certainly. I was a b
On Sun, 18 Aug 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier writes:
>
> > Okay, here is what I'd like to suggest ... Bruce, let's start off really
> > simple ... go create a project for libpq++ (I believe someone even
> > volunteered to maintain it?) and
help. I am CC'ing him.
>
>
> -------
>
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Aug 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >
> > > Marc G. Fournier writes:
> > >
> > > > Okay, here is what I'd li
On 20 Aug 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Here's yet another.
>
> Should someone from the core team perhaps get in contact with this guy
> and ask if he could get in contact with the development team before
> publicizing any further security holes? AFAIK
On 21 Aug 2002, Robert Treat wrote:
> Assuming that we do go ahead with a 7.2.2 release, can we get some kind
> of unofficial statement on pushing back the 7.3 beta? I know Tom was
v7.3 goes beta Sept 1st ... v7.2.2 will be purely a security bugfix
release, with no changes in functionality that
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> We learned a few lessons from previous releases. First, don't delay
> the beta by days/weeks that drag on. Delay one month at a time.
> Second, don't decide on a further delay the day before you are going to
> go beta. Multiple short-period delays
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Justin Clift wrote:
> - Find out from Sir Mordred if he wants to take a look at the CVS
>version of code and audit in that for a bit, Just In Case he turns
>up something that's serious and requires substantial re-work.
>Although it means he wouldn't have a bunch
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Justin Clift wrote:
> > Only two things which have the potential to be worth waiting for, from
> > what I'm aware of. There may be others:
> >
> > - Find out from Sir Mordred if he wants to take a look at the CVS
> >version of code and audit in th
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Justin Clift wrote:
> > Reckon it's worth asking him, to find out if he'd be interested in this?
>
>
> I wouldn't do it yet until we know if we are going to delay.
Any security audit of the code should *not* be done while the code is in
flux, and if we
On 21 Aug 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
> Agreed. If patches are applied to the 7.4 branch as fast as normal,
> then maybe 7.4 will only be 6 months out with well tested Windows, PIT,
> etc. code that gets applied this October.
>
> Whats the intended branchpoint? Beta with less than 5 patches? 3rd
>
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On 21 Aug 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
> >
> > > Agreed. If patches are applied to the 7.4 branch as fast as normal,
> > > then maybe 7.4 will only be 6 months out with well tested Windows, PIT,
t the propsed features aren't ready, but I had
> > to let the discussion happen so people felt their opinions where being
> > heard.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >
Morning all ...
This afternoon, Bruce Momjiam created a new project on GBorg for
libpq++, and Jeroen T. Vermeulen created one for libpqxx ... Both projects
source directory from the central CVS repository have been copied over,
including full history logs, and can be viewed at:
they are no longer on the central repository, but are on GBorg ... I've
made the appropriate chagnes to configure and Makefiles to reflect the
fact that libpq++ is no longer part of the central distribution, *but* I
used 'cvs remove' to remove the files themselves, so that the old branches
(ie. i
That's one thing that I can't touch, since I have no idea about SGML :(
Bruce, can you extract that and add it to the CVS repository for libpq++?
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscr
ent linking to gborg from the postgresql.org
> home page? Especially now that there's libpq++ and stuff on there?
>
> Chris
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Marc G. Fournier
> > Sent: Thu
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Where can we see the new portal? Maybe it should be designed in such a way
> as to not use image links at all. From all my experience in doing
> websites - that'd be a _really_ good idea.
I don't believe we are using image links on the new
he docs in the project itself?
>
> -------
>
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >
> > That's one thing that I can't touch, since I have no idea about SGML :(
> >
> > Bruce, can you extract that and add it to the
ur SGML to
> > compile properly. I can do that much.
> >
> > -------
> >
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> >
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> I knew that was coming. Some have been concerned that though Edmund
> said OK, there is some new person who is the maintainer, though you
> would think Edmund would be the final word on that.
>
> Anyway, I will do it now, or as soon as I empty the pa
Are we all caught up now on the known bugs/fixes? Would it be reasonably
safe to do up a quick v7.2.2 Security Fix Release tomorrow afternoon?
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> OK, I have applied this to 7.2.X.
>
> I have applied the lpad/rpad/repeat patch to CVS head. I assume yo
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> OK, I understand your point. What do we need to do now that the
> announcement has already been made?
I'm still slightly confused here ... from what Neil/Gavin have stated so
far, all it sounds like is that if I pass a wrong date/time string, it
wil
the release docs are pulled from petere's account:
cp ~petere/man.tar.gz ~petere/postgres.tar.gz doc
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> I say a re-release of 7.2.2 is sufficient, as it's just docs...
>
> What docs were in there? 7.3? or 7.2.1?
>
> Chris
>
> > -Origina
action...I'm hassling the maintainer at the moment...
already fixed ...
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Marc G. Fournier
> > Sent: Monday, 26 August 2002 10:17 AM
> > To: Bruce Momjian
> >
having never had to do it before, do you know what the procedure is?
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Henshall, Stuart - WCP wrote:
> Does someone from core want to inform bugtraq about 7.2.2?
> Cheers,
> - Stuart
>
> Westcountry Design & Print,
> Heron Road, Sowton, Exeter.
> EX2 7NF - also at -
> 17 Bres
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> As someone's suggestion, we are going to continue accepting patches
> through Sunday night, EDT, which will give us Monday to make sure all
> the patches are in. I will have the HISTORY/release.sgml ready by then.
>
> At that point, we can collect an
"User's Lounge" and then "PostgreSQL
> Related Projects". Perhaps extra link emphasis is needed since a
> seemingly new level of demand is being placed on gborg's significance?
>
> Sign,
>
> Greg Copeland
>
>
> On Thu, 2002-08-22 at 17:46
On Sun, 1 Sep 2002, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Gavin Sherry wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 1 Sep 2002, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
> >
> > > When is the beta freeze?
> >
> > Today.
> >
>
> Oops, my fault for being imprecise.
>
> I was wondering what time of day with timezone. Someone sugge
e RC level that we're saying we believe we have all the
issues worked out ...
>
> -------
>
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Sun, 1 Sep 2002, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
> >
> &
On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Yes, I am just concerned we may actually adjust functionality after
> beta1 if we haven't tied everything down, and that may be a problem.
Why? Nobody should be using a beta for production anyway ... until we go
to RC1, functionality can change if its
On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> So my take is that anything that needs initdb doesn't get in after
> beta1, unless it's a "must fix" bug. What have we got in the queue
> that would require system catalog changes?
Agreed, but, have we ever done such when it *wasn't* required? I know in
th
Just a quick one before I package up the wrong thing ... where should I be
pulling docs from? :)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL P
S'alright, I can do the package together tomorrow morning to let you wrap
up the loose ends :)
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I am still working on the 7.3 HISTORY file. I have extracted the items,
> but I have to worksmith them and write an introduction.
>
> It is midnight here no
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Yes, I haven't gotten to the release checklist yet. Let's delay a day.
>
> Or at least late in the day tomorrow. I have some loose ends to clean
> up yet as well, but I'm beat and am going to bed.
>
> But I assu
ignore if you see this ...
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> >
> > ignore if you see this ...
>
> What if we don't see it?
let me know? :)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you che
Can anyone find an email in all of that? I did a search of 'afk' ... oops
:) got it and removed ...
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Does anyone else get this rubbish when they post to -php ?
>
> Our domain isn't on any blacklists AFAIK...
>
> Chris
>
> > -Original Me
should already be fixed ...
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>
> >
> > Warning: Supplied argument is not a valid PostgreSQL link resource in
> > /usr/local/www/gborg3/html/index.php on line 52
>
> Looks like the machine with the dat
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Cool. Is it worth putting it on greatbridge? gborg.postgresql.org
greatbridge is back again? *raised eyebrow*
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.
will announce it on -announce tomorrow, if ppl want to take a quick look
at it ... man pages weren't included, but I did regenerate the docs per
Peter's suggested commands ...
Scary, even with removing a load of stuff over to gborg, its still gotten
bigger then the last release :)
%ls -lt ~ftp/
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> > %ls -lt ~ftp/pub/source/v7.3beta
>
> Is this where you're putting it this time? Last time was ~ftp/pub/beta.
actually, should be a symlink, but until I know the packagi
On 5 Sep 2002, Manuel Sugawara wrote:
> Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So it would seem. The utils/mb directory is certainly there in the full
> > tarball that I pulled from ftp.us.postgresql.org this morning. How did
> > you acquire your source tree, exactly?
>
> The file is postgr
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On 5 Sep 2002, Manuel Sugawara wrote:
> >
> > > Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > So it would seem. The utils/mb directory is certainly t
0On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > OK, so if base isn't compilable, then what is it good for? I don't see
> > any add-on packages that would make it usable.
>
> AFAIR, the only reason for having the split packaging is to accommodate
> people who
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > OK, so if base isn't compilable, then what is it good for? I don't see
> > > any add-on packages that would make it usable.
> >
> > AFAIR, the only reason for having the split packaging
ot use it in a production environment
as of yet. The more people that can test this release, the faster bugs
will get reported and fixed in a much shorter time.
Any bugs/problems, please report them to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ...
If we are lucky, we can keep this to a reasonably short beta per
God, I wish ppl would at least get information correct :(
Justin Clift (for the postgreSQL documentation website)
the website they point to *isn't* techdocs, but www, which Justin has had
nothing to do with ;(
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> You might be inte
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Hold
> ---
> Point-in-time recovery
> Win32 port
> Security audit
Why is the security audit on hold? This is the best time to do it, while
the code is reasonably static :(
---(end of broadcast)
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > On Hold
> > > ---
> > > Point-in-time recovery
> > > Win32 port
> > > Security audit
> >
> > W
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I am waiting the result of the pg_dump from 7.2.x to 7.3 restore discussion.
>
> Right. We clearly have to support loading of 7.2 dumps; the only issue
> in my mind is exactly how we kluge that up ;-). I just talked to Bruce
> about this a little bit, an
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
> > Which in this case is what puzzles me. We are only talking about a
> > simple GUC variable after all - I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing
> > it's not a huge effort to add one?
>
> Can we get agreement on that? A GUC for pg_xl
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Going
>
> Point-in-time recovery
> Win32 port
these have nothing to do with v7.3, so shouldn't even be listed here ...
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Sean Chittenden wrote:
> > There has been a lot of activity on open items in the past week. Here
> > is the updated list.
> >
> > Basically, upgrading and casting have blown up into a variety of items.
>
> What's the timeframe for beta2? FreeBSD's going into a ports freeze
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > ...
> > > Fix SIMILAR TO to be Posix compiant or remove it
> >
> > Sorry, was there a decision here?
> >
> > No one has described the problem, just declared that there is one and
> > declared that the feature should be removed
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> We are going to require an initdb for beta2 and I think we need to get
> _everything_ required in there before going to beta2. See the open
> items list. I think we will need until the middle of next week for
> beta2. In fact, I have the inheritance
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Sorry, I don't see the logic here. Using postgresql.conf, you set it
> once and it remains set until you change it again. With -X, you have to
> use it every time. I think that's where the votes came from.
Ah, so you are saying that you type out you
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > We are going to require an initdb for beta2 and I think we need to get
> > > _everything_ required in there before going to beta2. See th
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I think you are confusing the open items list with the TODO list. TODO
> usually has some basis, while open items is just that, things we need to
> decide on. Peter brought it up and wanted it on the list so I put it
> on. I can be taken off just as
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ... I'm going to do up a beta2 on Friday due to the number changes
> > that have been committed over the past 2 weeks ...
>
> I want to review and apply Alvaro
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm in agreement with Thomas here ... unless a problem has been defined a
> > bit more specifically then 'it isn't posix compliant', it shouldn't
ings to, the
list ...
>
> ---
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I'm in agreement with Thomas here ... unless a problem has been defined a
> > > bit more specifically then 'it isn't posix complian
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Yea, but you aren't going to be needing to know the xlog directory that
> way, will you?
Why not? Who are you to tell me how my scripts work, or how they get
their information? I have a script that runs to tell me how much disk
space each instance is
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> Sorry, I don't see the logic here. Using postgresql.conf, you set it
> >> once and it remains set until you ch
the why of it ... don't re-add it
until we've determined *if* it is actually an open issue or not ... stop
jumping the gun ...
>
> -------
>
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002,
On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > It is an open issue. It has to be resolved. When it is, I will remove
> > > it. I added a question mark to it but it ne
On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Who implemented SIMILAR TO in the first place?
>
> Thomas. He put in the syntax, but as it stands it's simply syntactic
> sugar for ~ --- that is, our Posix-compa
On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Robert Treat wrote:
> I don't know if I agree with that. Most servers (apache for instance) have
> configuration variables on where files are going to live, not command line
> options.
Not where it involves *critical* files:
OPTIONS
-R libexecdir
T
gborg
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Justin Clift wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Have gotten a new PostgreSQL utility together called "pg_autotune" that
> load tests using Tatsuo's pgbench code over multiple-iterations,
> attempting to determine decent buffer settings for a specified client
> load.
>
> It's m
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> In fact, I tried to open a dialog with you on this issue several times,
> but when I got no reply, I had to remove PGXLOG. If we had continued
> discussion, we might have come up with the GUC compromise.
Ya know, I'm sitting back and reading this, an
On Sun, 22 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > In fact, I tried to open a dialog with you on this issue several times,
> > > but when I got no reply, I had to remove PGXLOG. I
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It occurs to me that opening web page on www.postgresql.org, asking the
> user to select the mirror, is rather unprofessional. I am sure this has
> been discussed before but I thought I would bring it up again anyway.
Already being worked on
301 - 400 of 1762 matches
Mail list logo
