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

Re: doc/src/FAQ/FAQ.html changes

From: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
To: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: doc/src/FAQ/FAQ.html changes
Date: 2002-01-12 22:09:42
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-patches
Hash: SHA1

>> * ?? The text version seems to have a lot of blank lines which 
>>   I had to strip out to get it to match the output of 
>>   lynx -dump -nolink FAQ.html. For example, the third line 
>>   of doc/FAQ has 40 blank lines. Why is this?

> I don't see that here or in CVS.

I got that from using the web-based cvs:


[regarding xhtml tags]

> Not sure that is a good idea.  I don't want to go out in an 
> advanced direction with the FAQ, want to make it is simple to 
> render as possible. I auto-uppercased the tags again to match 
> the HTML version of our docs. I also found <br /> and <hr /> 
> which htmllint didn't understand and I have never seen; 
> changed to <br> and <hr>.

They are a XHTML artifact: all tags are required to have a 
matching closing tag. To maintain compatibility with older 
browsers, the start and end tags are allowed to be combined 
into one with the <br /> trick. I'm surprised htmllint 
complained about that. The only other major difference is that 
all tags must be lowercase. (which is very difficult for me: 
after so many years, my fingers automatically type tags in 
uppercase!). In the long run, XHTML/XML will actually 
allow pages to be more widely accessible, but the world isn't 
exactly rushing to embrace XML yet. It was last on my list 
anyway. :)

> > * 2.1: Changed the ODBC hyperlink from
> >> >   to:
> >> 
> Not really a good idea. Old one put back.

So this link is now removed entirely?

> It's "indices" when talking about an array or field index, and 
> it's "indexes" when concerning the index at the end of a book 
> or a database index.

Thanks for that.

[regarding a better "vs. mySQL" page]

I surfed a little, and here are some links I came up with. Be 
careful when searching the web for similar pages: many 
comparisons use v6 of postgreSQL :(. I don't know mySQL version 
number well enough to know if they do the same, but I suspect 

First, a quote from someone on slashdot:

"If you want details of high performance testing, then you need 
to visit Until I see Postgres up there then this 
testing is useless to the business world."

I agree - it sure would be nice if postgreSQL could get included 
in the tests. (paging RedHat...)

October 10, 2001
I like this one

September 2001:
Pretty new. Fairly good, if a little (IMO) apologetic about 
some of mySQL's shortcomings at times:
"Although MySQL can't perform subqueries, its temporary tables 
can help you mimic subqueries in SELECT statements..."

July 2000:

May 2000:
The one currently used, but it's old (and admits it in 
bold at the top of the page) and has a huge flame war at 
the bottom of the page. Maybe we can as the author to update 
it and clean it up a bit?

"mySQL Benchmarks"
Lots of colorful graphs, and whining about not getting 
vacuum to work reliably.

"Featurewise Comparison of MySQL and PostgreSQL"
mysql's take on why they are better. Very few are valid. 
Matter of fact, they really seem to be reaching on some 
of these.

Heh. At the bottom of the page, "Only transactional tables"  
is listed as a "drawback" of PostgreSQL!
Good user review. There are four others, one of which is 
Not sure of the date of this.

And of course, there is the GreatBridge funded study that has 
been analyzed to death. That's why something like would 
be nice.

Greg Sabino Mullane
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200201121119



pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Antonello NocchiDate: 2002-01-13 01:34:57
Subject: Locale support for postgresql regex (src)
Previous:From: Rick FlowerDate: 2002-01-12 01:45:06
Subject: Patches for AIX builds..

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group