Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

initdb for RC1 (was Re: [GENERAL] possible to create multivalued index from xpath() results in 8.3?)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: "Matt Magoffin" <postgresql(dot)org(at)msqr(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: initdb for RC1 (was Re: [GENERAL] possible to create multivalued index from xpath() results in 8.3?)
Date: 2007-11-26 15:02:43
Message-ID: 13773.1196089363@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, if you're going to change the contents of pg_cast then there is
>> little choice.  I was considering something less invasive ...

> I will hang on to this patch for a few more days to see if any invasive 
> catalog changes come out of the quote_literal/set_config discussion.  If not,
> I'll consider a less invasive solution.

ATM it seems that consensus is to change quote_literal, so we may as
well adopt the cleaner solution for fixing the xml functions too.

Anyone out there who wants to argue against forcing initdb for RC1?
If so, better speak up now.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-11-26 15:26:24
Subject: Re: plpgsql: another new reserved word
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-11-26 14:55:20
Subject: Re: 8.3devel slower than 8.2 under read-only load

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: LewDate: 2007-11-26 15:10:07
Subject: Re: Why LIMIT and OFFSET are commutative
Previous:From: Sascha BohnenkampDate: 2007-11-26 14:45:33
Subject: Re: replication in Postgres

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group