Re: [HACKERS] HAVING clause and 6.3.2 release

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org (The Hermit Hacker)
Cc: lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu, hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, ssimkovi(at)rainbow(dot)studorg(dot)tuwien(dot)ac(dot)at
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] HAVING clause and 6.3.2 release
Date: 1998-04-17 04:12:28
Message-ID: 199804170412.AAA08546@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > How about an elog(NOTICE,"...") so it runs, but they see the NOTICE
> > every time.
>
> That works too...but how does something like that work from within
> a C program? Or Perl?

I have disabled HAVING completely, and removed it from the features
list. I think we have enough bug reports on it that allowing people to
use it is really not going to give us any additional bug-fixing
information.

We can always release a 6.3.2 patch that will enable it when we have it
working 100%.

--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message SC Altex Impex SRL 1998-04-17 07:16:19 lock failed and buffer leak
Previous Message Thomas G. Lockhart 1998-04-17 02:45:03 Re: [INTERFACES] Re: ODBC driver