Re: followup on previous

I just seem to recall a discussion where we decided to 'standardise' on
PostgreSQL...I'm not fussed tho.

Chris

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
Cc: "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] followup on previous


>
> Thomas liked Postgres rather than PostgreSQL in the docs, and I think
> that's where it came from.  I use Postgres in speaking, and PostgreSQL
> in writing, so I guess either is OK.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > Just a slight nitpick, shouldn't this line:
> >
> > # - Previous Postgres Versions -
> >
> > Be this:
> >
> > # - Previous PostgreSQL Versions -
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if
your
> >       joining column's datatypes do not match
> >
>
> -- 
>   Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
>   pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
>   +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
>   +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania
19073
>