Re: [HACKERS] A couple of TODO notes

2003-10-21 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >>> * Allow INET subnet tests using non-constants > >>> This should say "Allow ... to be indexed" as it's otherwise a nonissue. > > > Uh, what should be in the TODO? I am confused. > > "* Allow INET subnet tests us

Re: [HACKERS] A couple of TODO notes

2003-10-20 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >>> * Allow INET subnet tests using non-constants >>> This should say "Allow ... to be indexed" as it's otherwise a nonissue. > Uh, what should be in the TODO? I am confused. "* Allow INET subnet tests using non-constants to be indexed"

Re: [HACKERS] A couple of TODO notes

2003-10-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> * Allow INET subnet tests using non-constants > >> This should say "Allow ... to be indexed" as it's otherwise a nonissue. > > > New text is: > > * Allow INET subnet tests to use indexes > > Is that right? >

Re: [HACKERS] A couple of TODO notes

2003-10-20 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> * Allow INET subnet tests using non-constants >> This should say "Allow ... to be indexed" as it's otherwise a nonissue. > New text is: > * Allow INET subnet tests to use indexes > Is that right? No, because we already index sub

Re: [HACKERS] A couple of TODO notes

2003-10-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Some comments on random TODO entries: > > * Allow INET subnet tests using non-constants > > This should say "Allow ... to be indexed" as it's otherwise a nonissue. New text is: * Allow INET subnet tests to use indexes Is that right? > * ARRAYS > o -Allow array

Re: [HACKERS] A couple of TODO notes

2003-10-20 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane writes: > >> o Add SET SCHEMA > >> > >> What is this supposed to do (and how's it different from SET SEARCH_PATH)? > > > I believe someone thought it was the SQL standard way of doing it. > > Probably needs to be checked though. > > I can find no mention of it in SQL99. Given that the sp

Re: [HACKERS] A couple of TODO notes

2003-10-19 Thread Tom Lane
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> o Add SET SCHEMA >> >> What is this supposed to do (and how's it different from SET SEARCH_PATH)? > I believe someone thought it was the SQL standard way of doing it. > Probably needs to be checked though. I can find no mention of it in SQL

Re: [HACKERS] A couple of TODO notes

2003-10-19 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
o Add SET SCHEMA What is this supposed to do (and how's it different from SET SEARCH_PATH)? I believe someone thought it was the SQL standard way of doing it. Probably needs to be checked though. Chris ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you