Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Kevin Grittner" writes:
>
> >> shouldn't we be getting support for the new syntax added, so
> >> there can be a release or two supporting both?
> >
> > You mean like 9.0?
>
> Yeah, just like that.
>
> If we're going to be supporting that long t
: Re: [HACKERS] Database file copy
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" writes:
>> If we're going to be supporting that long term, we should probably
>> change the note about FREEZE being deprecated, though.
>
>> So, still +1 on
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> I'm not wildly enthusiastic about breaking this with only one
>> intervening release. We normally support deprecated syntax for
>> quite a bit longer than that.
>
> "one intervening release"? Where did you see that
Robert Haas wrote:
> I'm not wildly enthusiastic about breaking this with only one
> intervening release. We normally support deprecated syntax for
> quite a bit longer than that.
"one intervening release"? Where did you see that?
I thought we were just talking about deprecating the old sy
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" writes:
>> If we're going to be supporting that long term, we should probably
>> change the note about FREEZE being deprecated, though.
>
>> So, still +1 on removing the wording about FREEZE being deprecated,
>> but instead we sh
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The reason for wanting to deprecate and ultimately remove that
> >> syntax is so we can get rid of FREEZE as a reserved word.
>
> > Oh, OK. I can go along with that. If we're going that route,
> > though, shouldn't we be getti
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" writes:
>> So, still +1 on removing the wording about FREEZE being
>> deprecated, but instead we should mention what actually *is*
>> deprecated (the omission of the parentheses).
>
> If we're going to do that, we should deprecate the unparenthesized
> synta
"Kevin Grittner" writes:
> If we're going to be supporting that long term, we should probably
> change the note about FREEZE being deprecated, though.
> So, still +1 on removing the wording about FREEZE being deprecated,
> but instead we should mention what actually *is* deprecated (the
> omissi
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" writes:
>> shouldn't we be getting support for the new syntax added, so
>> there can be a release or two supporting both?
>
> You mean like 9.0?
Yeah, just like that.
If we're going to be supporting that long term, we should probably
change the note abou
"Kevin Grittner" writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> The reason for wanting to deprecate and ultimately remove that
>> syntax is so we can get rid of FREEZE as a reserved word.
> Oh, OK. I can go along with that. If we're going that route,
> though, shouldn't we be getting support for the new syntax
Tom Lane wrote:
> The reason for wanting to deprecate and ultimately remove that
> syntax is so we can get rid of FREEZE as a reserved word.
>
> We could probably still allow the new-style syntax VACUUM (FREEZE)
Oh, OK. I can go along with that. If we're going that route,
though, shouldn't
"Kevin Grittner" writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> I'd rather remove the deprecating warning.
>> +1
> +1
The reason for wanting to deprecate and ultimately remove that syntax is
so we can get rid of FREEZE as a reserved word.
We could probably still allow the new-style syntax VACUUM (FREEZ
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message:
>
>> I'd rather remove the deprecating warning.
>
> +1
+1
-Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie ene 14 11:18:16 -0300 2011:
> I'd rather remove the deprecating warning.
+1
--
Álvaro Herrera
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of jue ene 13 00:05:53 -0300 2011:
>> > Srini Raghavan wrote:
>> > > Thank you very much for reviewing, appreciate the feedback.? As pointed
>> > > out by
>> > > you, it is alway
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of jue ene 13 00:05:53 -0300 2011:
> > Srini Raghavan wrote:
> > > Thank you very much for reviewing, appreciate the feedback.? As pointed
> > > out by
> > > you, it is always best to test it out with the latest version, so, I
> > > t
Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of jue ene 13 00:05:53 -0300 2011:
> Srini Raghavan wrote:
> > Thank you very much for reviewing, appreciate the feedback.? As pointed out
> > by
> > you, it is always best to test it out with the latest version, so, I tested
> > the
> > same approach with
Srini Raghavan wrote:
> Thank you very much for reviewing, appreciate the feedback.? As pointed out
> by
> you, it is always best to test it out with the latest version, so, I tested
> the
> same approach with postgres 9.0.2 on windows just now, and it works!
>
>
> I forgot to mention earlie
Thank you, that is a great point.
Based on your suggesstion, I wrote the following query:
select * from pg_class where relisshared=true order by relname
The above query returns 27 rows. I evaluated the impact on the following:
pg_auth_members - We create roles and memberships on each deplo
Excerpts from Srini Raghavan's message of jue dic 23 18:55:20 -0300 2010:
> Please let me know if you or anyone think of any other potential issues.
> Thanks
> again for reviewing.
I think anything in the shared catalogs could be an issue (look for
tables with pg_class.relisshared=true). I thi
Thank you very much for reviewing, appreciate the feedback. As pointed out by
you, it is always best to test it out with the latest version, so, I tested the
same approach with postgres 9.0.2 on windows just now, and it works!
I forgot to mention earlier that in addition to setting vacuum_fre
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 7:35 PM, Srini Raghavan wrote:
> I have tested this and it works, and I am continuing to test it more. I
> would like for validation of this idea from the experts and the community to
> make sure I haven't overlooked something obvious that might cause issues.
Interesting i
Hello,
[Tried the general forum, didn't hear from anyone so far, trying this forum
now,
please review, thanks]
We are looking to distribute postgres databases to our customers along with our
application. We are currently evaluating postgres version 8.4.4. The database
can be of size 25 gb (c
23 matches
Mail list logo
