On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 11:48:50AM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote:
> Well, I'm sure that one "could" use debian's solution, but that's the
> problem, it isn't PostgreSQL's solution. Shouldn't PostgreSQL provide the
> mechanisms? Will debian support FreeBSD? NetBSD? Is it in the PostgreSQL
> admin manual?
I meant that it's a good start. It's a fully functional solution (for
its intended audience) that works now and thus might give you ideas how
you want your solution to work.
> Argg, the pgfoundary is sort of the "free speech zones" that the U.S. sets
> up out of view of the president and the press. Yea, its there, and if you
> go out of your way, you can find it. Think of Arthur Dent's "The plans
> were on display!"
My point is only that since trying to convince people on -hackers to
write the code isn't working, perhaps someone (you?) could write it
seperately for possible inclusion later. If someone writes it all
themselves then they can send a patch. OTOH if several people want to
collaborate on a solution, something like pgfoundary is useful.
Have a nice day,
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a
> tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone
> else to do the other 95% so you can sue them.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2006-02-27 19:41:14|
|Subject: Re: pg_config, pg_service.conf, postgresql.conf ....|
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2006-02-27 19:24:05|
|Subject: Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance|