Mailing lists [pgsql-hackers]

22 February 2010

• 01:06   Re: PGXS: REGRESS_OPTS=--load-language=plpgsql David Fetter
• 02:30   Time travel on the buildfarm Tom Lane
• 02:58   Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Oops, don't forget to rewind the directory before scanning it to Tom Lane
• 03:47   Re: Streaming replication on win32, still broken Fujii Masao
• 05:52   Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables Heikki Linnakangas
• 07:20   Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Oops, don't forget to rewind the directory before scanning it to Andres Freund
• 08:12   Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables Gokulakannan Somasundaram
• 09:24   Re: scheduler in core Simon Riggs
• 09:30   Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables Greg Stark
• 10:02   Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables Gokulakannan Somasundaram
• 11:31   Re: Streaming replication and pg_xlogfile_name() Heikki Linnakangas
• 13:03   Re: Time travel on the buildfarm Andrew Dunstan
• 13:38   Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables Alvaro Herrera
• 13:42   Re: Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling multiqueries, contrib module for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries Alvaro Herrera
• 13:46   ALTER TABLE documentation Robert Haas
• 13:54   Re: [COMMITTERS] Re: pgsql: Speed up CREATE DATABASE by deferring the fsyncs until after Tom Lane
• 14:31   Re: Plans for 9.1, Grouping Sets, disabling multiqueries, contrib module for string, plpgpsm, preload dictionaries Pavel Stehule
• 14:32   Re: ALTER TABLE SET STATISTICS requires AccessExclusiveLock Bruce Momjian
• 15:04   Re: [COMMITTERS] Re: pgsql: Speed up CREATE DATABASE by deferring the fsyncs until after Tom Lane
• 15:49   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Magnus Hagander
• 15:54   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Tom Lane
• 16:00   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Magnus Hagander
• 16:25   Reason why set-value functions not allowed in GREATEST(), etc? Hitoshi Harada
• 16:25   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Tom Lane
• 16:33   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Joshua D. Drake
• 16:35   Re: scheduler in core Jaime Casanova
• 16:36   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Joshua D. Drake
• 16:46   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Magnus Hagander
• 16:50   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Chris Campbell
• 17:01   Re: What does this configure warning mean? Bruce Momjian
• 17:09   Re: transaction_isolation vs. default_transaction_isolation Bruce Momjian
• 17:12   Re: Wire protocol docs Bruce Momjian
• 17:15   Re: What does this configure warning mean? Alvaro Herrera
• 17:15   Re: What does this configure warning mean? Bruce Momjian
• 17:17   Re: Reason why set-value functions not allowed in GREATEST(), etc? Pavel Stehule
• 17:18   Re: scheduler in core Heikki Linnakangas
• 17:22   Re: scheduler in core Pavel Stehule
• 17:34   tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Jaime Casanova
• 17:42   Re: scheduler in core Merlin Moncure
• 17:49   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Joshua D. Drake
• 17:50   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Heikki Linnakangas
• 18:00   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Jaime Casanova
• 18:01   Re: What does this configure warning mean? Alvaro Herrera
• 18:05   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Dave Page
• 18:30   Re: scheduler in core Alvaro Herrera
• 18:34   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Magnus Hagander
• 18:40   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Magnus Hagander
• 18:48   Re: What does this configure warning mean? Bruce Momjian
• 18:53   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Tom Lane
• 18:57   Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL Tom Lane
• 19:08   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Jaime Casanova
• 19:10   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Jaime Casanova
• 19:15   Re: scheduler in core Merlin Moncure
• 19:25   Re: Reason why set-value functions not allowed in GREATEST(), etc? Tom Lane
• 19:31   Re: What does this configure warning mean? Tom Lane
• 19:33   Re: What does this configure warning mean? Bruce Momjian
• 19:34   Re: What does this configure warning mean? Bruce Momjian
• 20:09   Re: What does this configure warning mean? Tom Lane
• 20:17   Re: What does this configure warning mean? Bruce Momjian
• 20:18   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Dimitri Fontaine
• 20:35   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Merlin Moncure
• 20:37   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Tom Lane
• 20:53   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Dimitri Fontaine
• 22:23   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Jaime Casanova
• 22:41   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) David Christensen
• 22:47   Re: remove useless set of active snap Bruce Momjian
• 22:53   Re: commented out para in docs Bruce Momjian
• 23:35   Re: remove useless set of active snap Alvaro Herrera
• 23:48   Re: tie user processes to postmaster was:(Re: [HACKERS] scheduler in core) Alvaro Herrera