Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> How about an environment variable to control the timeout? Is that
> >> cleaner?
>
> > I don't see why it should be. I think Peter's --timeout suggestion
> > should be just fine.
>
> I wrote a moment ago t
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Joe, are you nearly ready to apply this?
Done (head and backwards to 7.3).
Joe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Joe, are you nearly ready to apply this?
Yeah, sorry for the delay. By the end of the weekend.
Joe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Meredith L. Patterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In brief, when installing on OS X with "make install-strip",
> > installation goes fine, but initdb dies here:
> > ...
> > I see three possible fixes:
> > 1) Patch config/install-sh such that on OS X, install-strip calls 'st
Joe, are you nearly ready to apply this?
---
Joe Conway wrote:
> Joe Conway wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> A couple of minor thoughts:
> >>
> >> * You could reduce the ugliness of many of the tests by introducing a
> >> var
> That doesn't have a whole lot to do with where we are today:
> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/textsearch-dictionaries.html#TEXTSEARCH-SIMPLE-DICTIONARY
> http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/tsearch/dict_simple.c
Great, I didn't know the API was that conv
=?UTF-8?B?SmFuIFVyYmHFhHNraQ==?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> If there is a use-case for it, IMHO it'd be better to add a boolean
>> accept-or-pass-on parameter to the "simple" dictionary than to add a
>> whole new dictionary type.
> Ah, I never thought of it. You may be very right - it does loo
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
Attached patch removes pg_dump dependency on postgres.h. The main reason
for that was discussed there:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-10/msg01261.php
I found two problems there. One is that I forgot postgres.h include in
common.c. it is easy to fix. H
> This example still doesn't seem very convincing --- why would you not
> merely attach the stopword list to the pl_ispell dictionary?
Because the ispell-based dictionaries first stem the lexeme and then
search for it in the stopwords file. The situation here is that a
stopword is first stemmed to
Simon Riggs wrote:
> > I have developed the attached patch which uses "?" to mark stop words in
> > the thesaurus file. ("*" was already in use in the file.) I updated
> > the docs to use "?", which makes the documentation clearer too.
> >
> > The patch also reenables testing of stop words in th
On Tue, 2007-11-06 at 18:10 -0800, Henry B. Hotz wrote:
> On Nov 6, 2007, at 6:27 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 11:23:30AM -0700, Henry B. Hotz wrote:
> >> I'm not entirely sure what the intended semantics of
> >> krb_match_realm
> >> are, but if you're trying
> dictionaries. In this case, you would first check against one stopword
> list, eliminating 'od', then check the ispell dictionary, and then check
> another stopword list without 'od'.
My problem is basically solved using the patch I sent earlier. I use
'{stop, pl_ispell, simple}' which has the e
Jan Urbański wrote:
The solution I came up with was simple: write a dictionary, that does
only one thing: looks up the lexeme in a stopwords file and either
discards it or returns NULL.
Doesn't the "simple" dictionary handle this?
I don't think so. The 'simple' dictionary discards stopwords, b
>> The solution I came up with was simple: write a dictionary, that does
>> only one thing: looks up the lexeme in a stopwords file and either
>> discards it or returns NULL.
>
> Doesn't the "simple" dictionary handle this?
I don't think so. The 'simple' dictionary discards stopwords, but
accepts
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 21:32 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> One possible real solution would be to tweak the dictionary APIs so
> > >> that the dictionaries can find out whether this is the first load during
>
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 21:50 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Could we maybe have some flavor of ROLLBACK that doesn't issue a warning
> > > if no transaction is in progress? There is precedent for this sort of
> > > facility - DROP
16 matches
Mail list logo
