Exactly. I've got something that works and is, in fact, the recommended
method for upgrading, currently.
For me to switch, I'd need something in which the developers were
confident enough to recommend.
And even to test, I'd need something more than what is available right
now.
-tfo
In articl
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Momjian) wrote:
> Is pg_upgrade too hard to run? Is no one really interested in it?
As an end-user, I'm very interested in pg_upgrade, but I think it's kind
of a chicken and egg problem.
Without much of a guarantee that it's fail-safe,
So if this gets added to the 7.3 branch, will there be documentation
accompanying it?
-tfo
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Momjian) wrote:
> OK, I just talked to Patrick on the phone, and he says Neil Conway is
> working on merging the code into 7.3, and adding missing
As someone who exists mainly as an active user (and part-time
advocate/documentation tweaker), I have found the release of PostgreSQL
7.3 to be disappointing. The ensuing pseudo-flamewar on the various
lists has been similarly disappointing.
I was surprised, for instance, to receive a non-list
It seems worth pointing out, too, that some SQL purists propose not
relying on product-specific methods of auto-incrementing.
I.e., it is possible to do something like:
insert into foo( col, ... )
values( coalesce( ( select max( col ) from foo ), 0 ) + 1, ... );
and this is easily placed in a t
> Is anyone interested in translating the English version to other
> languages?
I don't have time for the translation, unfortunately, but i would
suggest changing "worlds" to "world's" on the main page.
-tfo
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscr
