Re: Outstanding patches

I have applied the following doc patch for array_upper/lower(). The
other issues have already been addressed.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > I will be applying outstanding 7.4 patches on Friday:
> > http:/momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches2
> > If anyone wants those rejected/modified, please let me know.
>
> array upper/lower bound: missing doc updates, otherwise seems okay.
>
> \pset pager always: I thought we had rejected that idea in favor of
> making the whether-to-use-pager decision pay attention to width as
> well as number of lines.
>
> temp tables: difficult to comment on a message that does not include the
> proposed patch.
>
> CLUSTER ALL patch: I have a problem with this, specifically the fact
> that it changes CLUSTER into a multi-transaction operation. That
> renders CLUSTER non-rollbackable and not callable from functions.
> After all the work we went to to make CLUSTER rollbackable, this seems
> like a giant step backward.
>
> CREATE SEQUENCE syntax changes: did we decide whether SQL99's notion of
> a sequence is close enough to ours that migrating to their syntax would
> be a good idea, and not just a source of confusion? I seem to recall
> some doubts being voiced about this (by Peter?), and I'm not sure we
> resolved them.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073