Re: followup on previous

I just seem to recall a discussion where we decided to 'standardise' on
PostgreSQL...I'm not fussed tho.

Chris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] followup on previous

>
> Thomas liked Postgres rather than PostgreSQL in the docs, and I think
> that's where it came from. I use Postgres in speaking, and PostgreSQL
> in writing, so I guess either is OK.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > Just a slight nitpick, shouldn't this line:
> >
> > # - Previous Postgres Versions -
> >
> > Be this:
> >
> > # - Previous PostgreSQL Versions -
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if
your
> > joining column's datatypes do not match
> >
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
> + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania
19073
>