Mailing lists [pgsql-hackers]

2 May 2005

• 00:02   Re: Increased company involvement Marc G. Fournier
• 00:40   Re: SPI bug. Neil Conway
• 01:48   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Christopher Kings-Lynne
• 02:06   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Neil Conway
• 03:59   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Oliver Jowett
• 04:08   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Jaime Casanova
• 04:14   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Neil Conway
• 04:25   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Tom Lane
• 04:42   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Tom Lane
• 05:05   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Neil Conway
• 05:20   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Oliver Jowett
• 05:22   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Russell Smith
• 05:35   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Tom Lane
• 05:57   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Tom Lane
• 06:01   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Tom Lane
• 06:07   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Neil Conway
• 06:07   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Dennis Bjorklund
• 06:52   Re: SPI bug. Thomas Hallgren
• 06:54   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Oliver Jowett
• 06:56   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Oliver Jowett
• 08:11   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Peter Eisentraut
• 08:15   Re: custom guc vars Brent Verner
• 08:49   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Oliver Jowett
• 08:52   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 08:58   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 09:12   Using LDAP for authorization Magnus Hagander
• 09:12   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 09:14   Re: custom guc vars Thomas Hallgren
• 09:29   Re: SPI bug. Thomas Hallgren
• 09:36   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 09:53   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 10:01   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 10:52   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Hannu Krosing
• 10:52   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Hannu Krosing
• 10:59   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Hannu Krosing
• 11:23   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 11:25   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 11:32   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Alvar Freude
• 11:54   Re: How to make lazy VACUUM of one table run in several Hannu Krosing
• 13:25   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 13:39   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Christopher Browne
• 13:39   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Christopher Browne
• 13:41   Python James William Pye
• 13:41   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Christopher Browne
• 13:41   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Christopher Browne
• 14:34   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Tom Lane
• 14:38   Re: How to make lazy VACUUM of one table run in several transactions ? Tom Lane
• 14:41   Re: Using LDAP for authorization Stephen Frost
• 14:58   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Merlin Moncure
• 15:00   Re: SPI bug. Tom Lane
• 15:00   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Dave Held
• 15:07   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Tom Lane
• 15:37   Re: SPI bug. Thomas Hallgren
• 15:38   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Tom Lane
• 15:48   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Heikki Linnakangas
• 16:48   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Josh Berkus
• 16:51   Re: How to make lazy VACUUM of one table run in several Hannu Krosing
• 16:53   ARCHIVE TABLES (was: possible TODO: read-only tables, select from indexes only.) Hannu Krosing
• 17:13   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Merlin Moncure
• 17:14   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 17:17   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 17:21   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 17:23   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Marc G. Fournier
• 17:23   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Alvaro Herrera
• 17:28   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 17:30   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Tom Lane
• 17:32   Citation for "Bad n_distinct estimation; hacks suggested?" Gurmeet Manku
• 17:33   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Joshua D. Drake
• 17:39   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Dave Held
• 17:47   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Joshua D. Drake
• 17:48   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 17:54   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Merlin Moncure
• 17:54   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Dave Held
• 17:56   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 17:57   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Joshua D. Drake
• 17:59   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 18:12   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Marc G. Fournier
• 18:13   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Merlin Moncure
• 18:13   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 18:14   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 18:15   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement Josh Berkus
• 18:27   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Andrew - Supernews
• 18:35   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased Marc G. Fournier
• 18:37   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Tom Lane
• 18:39   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Marc G. Fournier
• 18:40   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased Joshua D. Drake
• 18:42   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 18:44   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement Dave Held
• 18:44   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement Josh Berkus
• 18:50   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement Tom Lane
• 18:52   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Marc G. Fournier
• 18:55   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 19:00   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Joshua D. Drake
• 19:04   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Marc G. Fournier
• 19:05   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Joshua D. Drake
• 19:07   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company Andrew Dunstan
• 19:08   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement Josh Berkus
• 19:13   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Tom Lane
• 19:14   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Marc G. Fournier
• 19:19   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Joshua D. Drake
• 19:21   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Chris Travers
• 19:23   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company Bruce Momjian
• 19:24   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 19:25   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Dann Corbit
• 19:25   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 19:28   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement Robert Treat
• 19:29   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Rob Butler
• 19:31   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Marc G. Fournier
• 19:45   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Bruno Wolff III
• 19:51   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 19:54   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Andrew - Supernews
• 19:57   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company Bruce Momjian
• 20:00   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Marc G. Fournier
• 20:05   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Joshua D. Drake
• 20:08   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Bruce Momjian
• 20:13   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Joshua D. Drake
• 20:14   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Marc G. Fournier
• 20:16   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Tom Lane
• 20:17   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Tom Lane
• 20:20   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Jim C. Nasby
• 20:27   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Andrew Dunstan
• 20:34   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company Bruce Momjian
• 20:36   PostgreSQL Guru needed: $70K - $80K year!! PeterS
• 20:38   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Merlin Moncure
• 20:40   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Ron Mayer
• 20:43   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Jim C. Nasby
• 20:43   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Joshua D. Drake
• 20:45   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 
• 20:47   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Jim C. Nasby
• 20:54   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Andrew Dunstan
• 20:56   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Alvar Freude
• 20:58   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company Rosser Schwarz
• 20:59   Re: ARCHIVE TABLES (was: possible TODO: read-only tables, select from indexes only.) Jim C. Nasby
• 21:01   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company Rosser Schwarz
• 21:02   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Jim C. Nasby
• 21:06   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Jim C. Nasby
• 21:11   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Andrew Dunstan
• 21:32   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement Dave Held
• 21:35   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Oliver Jowett
• 21:39   Re: pg_locks needs a facelift Alvaro Herrera
• 21:39   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement Alvaro Herrera
• 21:51   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Oliver Jowett
• 21:56   Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Decision Process WAS: Increased company involvement Dave Held
• 21:57   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Chuck McDevitt
• 21:59   Re: ARCHIVE TABLES (was: possible TODO: read-only tables, select from indexes only.) Jochem van Dieten
• 22:03   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Kris Jurka
• 22:06   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Oliver Jowett
• 22:13   Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 Chuck McDevitt
• 23:22   Heads up: impending 8.0, 7.4, 7.3 releases Tom Lane
• 23:33   Re: Heads up: impending 8.0, 7.4, 7.3 releases Joshua D. Drake