Обсуждение: Archive dump for pgsql-jdbc?
Hi all After some recent discussion on the PgJDBC list, it's looking like we need a good way to find all messages in the last few months / year that have patch attachments. While I can download the mboxes for PgJDBC from the archive manager, I'm wondering if this data has already been imported into Pg for fulltext search in the archives, and if so how my chances of getting a dump of the PgJDBC list history are? -- Craig Ringer
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 11:42:14PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote: > Hi all > > After some recent discussion on the PgJDBC list, it's looking like > we need a good way to find all messages in the last few months / > year that have patch attachments. > > While I can download the mboxes for PgJDBC from the archive manager, > I'm wondering if this data has already been imported into Pg for > fulltext search in the archives, and if so how my chances of getting > a dump of the PgJDBC list history are? I am not aware of any such feature. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au> wrote: > Hi all > > After some recent discussion on the PgJDBC list, it's looking like we need a > good way to find all messages in the last few months / year that have patch > attachments. I don't know of anyplace that has this - none of the pg.org systems currently do. The next generation of some of them might ;) But nothing at this point. -- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Thanks Bruce & Magnus I thought the archives search was powered by Pg's full-text search. Sorry to bother you; I'll go batch download and import the mbox files. -- Craig Ringer On 08/27/2012 11:30 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au> wrote: >> Hi all >> >> After some recent discussion on the PgJDBC list, it's looking like we need a >> good way to find all messages in the last few months / year that have patch >> attachments. > > I don't know of anyplace that has this - none of the pg.org systems > currently do. > > The next generation of some of them might ;) But nothing at this point. >
Excerpts from Craig Ringer's message of lun ago 27 23:37:01 -0400 2012: > Thanks Bruce & Magnus > > I thought the archives search was powered by Pg's full-text search. > Sorry to bother you; I'll go batch download and import the mbox files. That's correct, but I don't think there's a flag that says "this message has an attachment". -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Craig Ringer's message of lun ago 27 23:37:01 -0400 2012: >> Thanks Bruce & Magnus >> >> I thought the archives search was powered by Pg's full-text search. >> Sorry to bother you; I'll go batch download and import the mbox files. > > That's correct, but I don't think there's a flag that says "this message > has an attachment". Indeed. The search server only has the FTI data, and very little metadata about the message. And zero about attachments. -- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On 08/28/2012 10:02 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Alvaro Herrera > <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Excerpts from Craig Ringer's message of lun ago 27 23:37:01 -0400 2012: >>> Thanks Bruce & Magnus >>> >>> I thought the archives search was powered by Pg's full-text search. >>> Sorry to bother you; I'll go batch download and import the mbox files. >> That's correct, but I don't think there's a flag that says "this message >> has an attachment". > Indeed. The search server only has the FTI data, and very little > metadata about the message. And zero about attachments. > Aah, thanks. I'd assumed the full message body including attachments was included - but it makes sense to strip them and only include the body. It's all sorted, it landed up being *much* quicker than I expected to batch-download and import the archives. Thanks for checking. -- Craig Ringer