Re: PLpgsql debugger question

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tony Caduto <tony_caduto(at)amsoftwaredesign(dot)com>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PLpgsql debugger question
Date: 2007-11-14 19:29:59
Message-ID: 11689.1195068599@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tony Caduto <tony_caduto(at)amsoftwaredesign(dot)com> writes:
> Who said anything was incorrect? It's just a bit misleading (the Info
> Week Article).

Three out of the four features mentioned in your quote are not part of
core Postgres, so the author was obviously taking a very wide view of
what "Postgres" is. Or was just misinformed.

> Whoever is doing the release notes may want to have something in there
> about the debugger and the fact that it's not included and has to be
> manually compiled and all that.

Yup, I can see it now:

<para>
Never believe anything you read in Information Week.
</para>

Seriously, we can't be expected to worry about misstatements made by
others. If we had to add a paragraph to the release notes for every
incorrect thing that's ever been said about Postgres, they'd be
completely unreadable rather than just mostly.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Willem Buitendyk 2007-11-14 19:30:57 Windows x64 Port
Previous Message SHARMILA JOTHIRAJAH 2007-11-14 19:24:23 Re: pg_dump problem