On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 02:46 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I've been working on some docs for Constraining Exclusion & Partitioning
> for some time now. Deadlines seem to be looming, or may even have
> passed, so it seems sensible to submit what I have now.
> Many thanks to Josh Berkus for providing
On Mon, 2005-31-10 at 22:41 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I believe this is now complete and ready for application.
The changes need a fair bit of copy editing and SGML policy work, but
that is probably easier to do once it has been applied. Barring any
objections I'll apply the patch within 24 hour
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 2005-31-10 at 22:41 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> I believe this is now complete and ready for application.
> The changes need a fair bit of copy editing and SGML policy work, but
> that is probably easier to do once it has been applied. Barring any
On Mon, 2005-31-10 at 23:15 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'd argue for editing first and then applying. I'll take up the job
> if you don't have time for the editing part
Okay. I'll do a round of copy editing and then commit to CVS -- there
will likely be room for additional improvements, so once it
On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 23:27 -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-31-10 at 23:15 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I'd argue for editing first and then applying. I'll take up the job
> > if you don't have time for the editing part
>
> Okay. I'll do a round of copy editing and then commit to CVS -- t
On Mon, 2005-31-10 at 22:41 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I believe this is now complete and ready for application.
Comments:
- INSERT, UPDATE, etc. should be marked with , unless
would be more appropriate
- The names of GUC variables should be marked up with , unless
would be more appropriate
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 18:19 -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-31-10 at 22:41 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > I believe this is now complete and ready for application.
>
> Comments:
>
> - INSERT, UPDATE, etc. should be marked with , unless
> would be more appropriate
>
> - The names of GUC
On Wed, 2005-02-11 at 19:55 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Trying to identify which bit of advice you refer to I put some
> comments in based upon feedback from the beta on specific queries that
> were not optimised the same as non-inherited tables.
ISTM that query optimization *always* works dif
