Thread

  1. Status on Jan Wieck

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-20T13:35:51Z

    I know people were wondering about Jan, so I just talked to him via
    e-mail, and he has been busy on a big project.
    
    -- 
      Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
      maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
      +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
      +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
    
    
  2. Re: [HACKERS] Status on Jan Wieck

    Vadim Mikheev <vadim@krs.ru> — 1999-09-20T13:40:45Z

    Bruce Momjian wrote:
    > 
    > I know people were wondering about Jan, so I just talked to him via
    > e-mail, and he has been busy on a big project.
    
    Is he going to implement RI for 6.6?
    
    Vadim
    
    
  3. Re: [HACKERS] Status on Jan Wieck

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-20T14:12:04Z

    > Bruce Momjian wrote:
    > > 
    > > I know people were wondering about Jan, so I just talked to him via
    > > e-mail, and he has been busy on a big project.
    > 
    > Is he going to implement RI for 6.6?
    
    OK, let's CC him with the question.  Jan, can you do referential
    integrity for 6.6?
    
    -- 
      Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
      maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
      +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
      +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
    
    
  4. Re: [HACKERS] Status on Jan Wieck

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-20T15:33:29Z

    > Bruce Momjian wrote:
    > > 
    > > I know people were wondering about Jan, so I just talked to him via
    > > e-mail, and he has been busy on a big project.
    > 
    > Is he going to implement RI for 6.6?
    
    Jan, you know we miss you when you have your own subject thread on the
    hackers list.
    
    -- 
      Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
      maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
      +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
      +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
    
    
  5. Re: [HACKERS] Status on Jan Wieck

    Jan Wieck <jwieck@debis.com> — 1999-09-20T16:57:09Z

    >
    > Bruce Momjian wrote:
    > >
    > > I know people were wondering about Jan, so I just talked to him via
    > > e-mail, and he has been busy on a big project.
    >
    > Is he going to implement RI for 6.6?
    
        Depends on WHEN 6.6 is planned to go into feature-freeze.
    
    
    Jan
    
    --
    
    #======================================================================#
    # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
    # Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
    #========================================= wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #
    
    
    
    
  6. Re: [HACKERS] Status on Jan Wieck

    Vadim Mikheev <vadim@krs.ru> — 1999-09-20T17:23:56Z

    Jan Wieck wrote:
    > 
    > >
    > > Bruce Momjian wrote:
    > > >
    > > > I know people were wondering about Jan, so I just talked to him via
    > > > e-mail, and he has been busy on a big project.
    > >
    > > Is he going to implement RI for 6.6?
    > 
    >     Depends on WHEN 6.6 is planned to go into feature-freeze.
    
    Well, I believe that we have at least 3 months before 1st beta.
    We need in DIRTY READs for RI and I'll implement them.
    If you'll not be able to do RI itself then we might
    change refint.c to use DIRTY READs and so avoid LOCK TABLE 
    on application level (i.e. restore pre-6.5 refint.c using).
    
    Vadim
    
    
  7. Re: [HACKERS] Status on Jan Wieck

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-20T17:39:19Z

    > >
    > > Bruce Momjian wrote:
    > > >
    > > > I know people were wondering about Jan, so I just talked to him via
    > > > e-mail, and he has been busy on a big project.
    > >
    > > Is he going to implement RI for 6.6?
    > 
    >     Depends on WHEN 6.6 is planned to go into feature-freeze.
    
    You tell us...  We clearly could wait if you have some idea on a
    timeframe.  There has been no talk of a 6.6 release schedule yet.  Vadim
    is still working on logging, and Tom Lane is working too.
    
    -- 
      Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
      maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
      +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
      +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
    
    
  8. Re: [HACKERS] Status on Jan Wieck

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-20T18:14:51Z

    > >     Depends on WHEN 6.6 is planned to go into feature-freeze.
    > 
    > Well, I believe that we have at least 3 months before 1st beta.
    > We need in DIRTY READs for RI and I'll implement them.
    > If you'll not be able to do RI itself then we might
    > change refint.c to use DIRTY READs and so avoid LOCK TABLE 
    > on application level (i.e. restore pre-6.5 refint.c using).
    
    Yikes.  Three months.  That puts us at release in mid-January.
    
    -- 
      Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
      maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
      +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
      +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
    
    
  9. Re: [HACKERS] Status on Jan Wieck

    Peter Mount <peter@retep.org.uk> — 1999-09-20T18:50:43Z

    On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
    
    > > >
    > > > Bruce Momjian wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > I know people were wondering about Jan, so I just talked to him via
    > > > > e-mail, and he has been busy on a big project.
    > > >
    > > > Is he going to implement RI for 6.6?
    > > 
    > >     Depends on WHEN 6.6 is planned to go into feature-freeze.
    > 
    > You tell us...  We clearly could wait if you have some idea on a
    > timeframe.  There has been no talk of a 6.6 release schedule yet.  Vadim
    > is still working on logging, and Tom Lane is working too.
    
    I want to get as much of the JDBC api done for 6.6 as well, so I think
    there is going to be a lot of new stuff in it.
    
    Peter
    
    --
           Peter T Mount peter@retep.org.uk
          Main Homepage: http://www.retep.org.uk
    PostgreSQL JDBC Faq: http://www.retep.org.uk/postgres
     Java PDF Generator: http://www.retep.org.uk/pdf
    
    
    
  10. Re: [HACKERS] Status on Jan Wieck

    Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> — 1999-09-20T21:29:09Z

    On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Jan Wieck wrote:
    
    > >
    > > Bruce Momjian wrote:
    > > >
    > > > I know people were wondering about Jan, so I just talked to him via
    > > > e-mail, and he has been busy on a big project.
    > >
    > > Is he going to implement RI for 6.6?
    > 
    >     Depends on WHEN 6.6 is planned to go into feature-freeze.
    
    After you implement RI? :)  Since we've gone the -STABLE branch
    fixes/releases route, 6.6 is less of a panic, so if you have some sort of
    a timeline for this, its *very* easy to work around it :)
    
    Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
    Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
    primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 
    
    
    
  11. Re: [HACKERS] Status on Jan Wieck

    Jan Wieck <wieck@debis.com> — 1999-09-21T09:11:22Z

    >
    > > >     Depends on WHEN 6.6 is planned to go into feature-freeze.
    > >
    > > Well, I believe that we have at least 3 months before 1st beta.
    > > We need in DIRTY READs for RI and I'll implement them.
    > > If you'll not be able to do RI itself then we might
    > > change refint.c to use DIRTY READs and so avoid LOCK TABLE
    > > on application level (i.e. restore pre-6.5 refint.c using).
    >
    > Yikes.  Three months.  That puts us at release in mid-January.
    
        Three  months  - sounds fine. I just posted another few ideas
        on the issue. After rereading it, I'm sure now that doing  RI
        with  the  rulesystem  would  open  a  horrible can of worms.
        Especially in the case a trigger procedure is using  a  query
        which in turn triggers a deferred rule.
    
        Each  trigger  invocation  (maybe for thousands of rows) will
        execute it's own queries, resulting in a  separate  parsetree
        for the deferred actions.  Where to hold them? Parsetrees can
        be huge!
    
        I'm sure now that remembering the CTID's of the  tuples  that
        must get reread to fire the trigger is the smaller problem.
    
        I  need a little break in my current project - thus I'll take
        a look at it NOW!
    
    
    Jan
    
    --
    
    #======================================================================#
    # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
    # Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
    #========================================= wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #