Mailing lists [pgsql-hackers]

10 March 2005

• 01:22   Re: Runtime accepting build discrepancies Tom Lane
• 02:31   Re: Runtime accepting build discrepancies Thomas Hallgren
• 02:40   Re: BUG #1528: Rows returned that should be excluded by WHERE clause Tom Lane
• 03:01   Re: fool-toleranced optimizer Kevin Brown
• 04:24   Re: pgpool question Tatsuo Ishii
• 05:20   Re: could not read, could not write, could not fsync, Windows 2000, PostgreSQL 8.0.1 Qingqing Zhou
• 05:21   We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY Tom Lane
• 06:14   Re: pgpool question Jeff Hoffmann
• 06:30   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY Kevin Brown
• 06:46   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY Greg Stark
• 06:51   Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] snprintf causes regression tests Bruce Momjian
• 06:53   Re: fool-toleranced optimizer Greg Stark
• 07:00   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 07:23   Information schema tweak? Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 07:26   Re: pgpool question Oleg Bartunov
• 07:35   Re: pgpool question Tatsuo Ishii
• 07:43   Re: pgpool question Oleg Bartunov
• 07:45   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP Tom Lane
• 08:06   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY Tom Lane
• 08:10   Re: Information schema tweak? Tom Lane
• 08:24   Re: Information schema tweak? Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 08:28   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP Dann Corbit
• 10:10   NIST Test Suite Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 10:29   Re: NIST Test Suite Tom Lane
• 10:34   Re: NIST Test Suite Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 10:39   Re: NIST Test Suite Tom Lane
• 12:18   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD
• 15:28   Re: Runtime accepting build discrepancies Laszlo Hornyak
• 17:34   Re: Runtime accepting build discrepancies Thomas Hallgren
• 19:21   TODO item: support triggers on columns Chris Mair
• 19:21   Re: [ADMIN] Too frequent warnings for wraparound failure Tom Lane
• 20:45   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY Tom Lane
• 21:07   Raw size Ioannis Theoharis
• 21:09   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GR Bort, Paul
• 21:15   Re: Raw size Bort, Paul
• 21:21   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP Kevin HaleBoyes
• 21:34   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY Barry Lind
• 22:22   Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] snprintf causes regression tests to fail Nicolai Tufar
• 22:24   Re: [BUGS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without Michael Fuhr
• 22:37   PostgreSQL pam ldap document Adrian Nida
• 22:57   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY johnnnnnn
• 23:14   Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY Jaime Casanova