<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>select * from depesz; &#187; postgresql</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.depesz.com/index.php/tag/postgresql/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.depesz.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:33:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Setting WAL Replication</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/11/setting-wal-replication/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/11/setting-wal-replication/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:57:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[failover]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg_standby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pitr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[replication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[standby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1640</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are several approaches on replication/failover &#8211; you might have heard of Slony, Londiste, pgPool and some other tools.
WAL Replication is different from all of them in one aspect &#8211; it doesn&#8217;t let you query slave database (until 9.0, in which you actually can run read only queries on slave.
Since you can&#8217;t run queries on [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/11/setting-wal-replication/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dynamic updates of fields in NEW in PL/pgSQL</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/10/dynamic-updates-of-fields-in-new-in-plpgsql/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/10/dynamic-updates-of-fields-in-new-in-plpgsql/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:26:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dynamic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[field]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impossible]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[irc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plpgsql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[record]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trigger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[triggers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dynamic updates of fields in NEW in PL/pgSQL
Today, on #postgresql on IRC, strk asked about updating fields in NEW record, in plpgsql, but where name of the field is in variable.
After some time, he sent his question to hackers mailing list. And he got prompt reply that it&#8217;s not possible.
Well, I dare to disagree.

First, big [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/10/dynamic-updates-of-fields-in-new-in-plpgsql/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ERROR:  invalid byte sequence for encoding</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/07/error-invalid-byte-sequence-for-encoding/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/07/error-invalid-byte-sequence-for-encoding/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Mar 2010 19:29:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charset]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[encoding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[error]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[latin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[utf]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1628</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One common problem that a lot of people seem to have is when they encounter error message like this:
# \i test.sql
psql:test.sql:1: ERROR:  invalid byte sequence for encoding &#34;UTF8&#34;: 0xb3
Why it happens? What can be done about it? Let&#8217;s see.

First, we need some theory, so you will understand background.
As you perhaps know, computers generally use [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/07/error-invalid-byte-sequence-for-encoding/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CHAR(x) vs. VARCHAR(x) vs. VARCHAR vs. TEXT &#8211; UPDATED 2010-03-03</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/02/charx-vs-varcharx-vs-varchar-vs-text/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/02/charx-vs-varcharx-vs-varchar-vs-text/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:33:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[char]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constraint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[datatype]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[length]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[text]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trigger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[varchar]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1610</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fight!
But more seriously &#8211; people tend to use various data types, and there have been some myths about them, so let&#8217;s see how it really boils down.
First of all &#8211; All those data types are internally saved using the same C data structure &#8211; varlena.
Thanks to this we can be nearly sure that there are [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/02/charx-vs-varcharx-vs-varchar-vs-text/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Installing PostgreSQL</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/26/installing-postgresql/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/26/installing-postgresql/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 01:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[howto]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[install]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[installation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1601</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First of all &#8211; I base information in this post on Linux, so if you are using another operating system &#8211; it&#8217;s quite likely that it will not help you.
Second &#8211; if you&#8217;re using Linux, you have probably some package manager &#8211; dpkg, rpm, pacman, poldek, whatever. Right? So, it should be easy to install [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/26/installing-postgresql/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 9.0 &#8211; extended frames for window functions</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/17/waiting-for-9-0-extended-frames-for-window-functions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/17/waiting-for-9-0-extended-frames-for-window-functions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 14:14:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[frames]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[window functions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1599</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 12th of February Tom Lane http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2010-02/msg00142.php patch by Hitoshi Harada:
Log Message:
-----------
Extend the set of frame options supported for window functions.
&#160;
This patch allows the frame to start from CURRENT ROW (in either RANGE or
ROWS mode), and it also adds support for ROWS n PRECEDING and ROWS n FOLLOWING
start and end points.  (RANGE value PRECEDING/FOLLOWING [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/17/waiting-for-9-0-extended-frames-for-window-functions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 9.0 &#8211; string_agg</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/17/waiting-for-9-0-string_agg/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/17/waiting-for-9-0-string_agg/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 11:29:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aggregate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[string_agg]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1597</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 1st of Februyary, Takahiro Itagaki committed a patch by Pavel Stehule which adds string_agg aggregate:
Log Message:
-----------
Add string_agg aggregate functions. The one argument version concatenates
the input values into a string. The two argument version also does the same
thing, but inserts delimiters between elements.
&#160;
Original patch by Pavel Stehule, reviewed by David E. Wheeler and me.

Generally it&#8217;s [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/17/waiting-for-9-0-string_agg/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 9.0 &#8211; removal of 0000000001.history check</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/02/waiting-for-9-0-removal-of-0000000001-history-check/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/02/waiting-for-9-0-removal-of-0000000001-history-check/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 14:35:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg_standby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pitr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[restore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[restore_command]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[standby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1594</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I tend to write about new features in new versions of PostgreSQL, but this patch actually fixes one of the things that annoy me a lot, so here it goes:
On 26th of January, Simon Riggs committed:
Log Message:
-----------
Fix longstanding gripe that we check for 0000000001.history at start of
archive recovery, even when we know it is never [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/02/waiting-for-9-0-removal-of-0000000001-history-check/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 9.0 &#8211; table and index sizes</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/02/waiting-for-9-0-table-and-index-sizes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/02/waiting-for-9-0-table-and-index-sizes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:33:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg_indexes_size]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg_relation_size]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg_table_size]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg_total_relation_size]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[size]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1592</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 19th of January Tom Lane committed really brilliant patch:
Log Message:
-----------
Add pg_table_size() and pg_indexes_size() to provide more user-friendly
wrappers around the pg_relation_size() function.
&#160;
Bernd Helmle, reviewed by Greg Smith

Why is it brilliant? Because I&#8217;m lazy. And I think it&#8217;s a virtue, and not flaw.
Let&#8217;s consider this example:
create table x (
    id serial primary key,
 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/02/waiting-for-9-0-table-and-index-sizes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 9.0 &#8211; Streaming replication</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/01/waiting-for-9-0-streaming-replication/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/01/waiting-for-9-0-streaming-replication/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:49:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hot standby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pitr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[replication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[standby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[streaming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1586</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The BIG feature. The feature that made PostgreSQL leap from 8.4 to 9.0. Patch was written by Fujii Masao, and committed by Heikki Linnakangas on 15th of January 2010:
Log Message:
-----------
Introduce Streaming Replication.
&#160;
This includes two new kinds of postmaster processes, walsenders and
walreceiver. Walreceiver is responsible for connecting to the primary server
and streaming WAL to disk, while [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/02/01/waiting-for-9-0-streaming-replication/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for &#8230; 9.0</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/21/waiting-for-9-0/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/21/waiting-for-9-0/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:00:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1584</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve written 29 posts about new features in 8.5. And now core team decided to name it 9.0. Great. And now I have to make changes in all of these posts.
Just kidding &#8211; change is simple &#8211; I just added tag &#8220;pg90&#8243; and that&#8217;s all.
Change from 8.5 to 9.0 emphasizes significance of new features in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/21/waiting-for-9-0/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>explain.depesz.com &#8211; stats after a year</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/13/explain-depesz-com-stats-after-a-year/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/13/explain-depesz-com-stats-after-a-year/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:07:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[explain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[explain.depesz.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stats]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1580</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just checked, and apparently explain.depesz.com is online for over a year now. First plans was added on 2008-12-04 13:20:43+01.
Since then there have been 3602 plans added, 770 of them were set to be private (not displayed on previous explains page.
Longest plan has 2267194 characters (yes, 2.2 megabytes of explain analyze output!), but it&#8217;s not [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/13/explain-depesz-com-stats-after-a-year/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; VACUUM FULL change</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/11/waiting-for-8-5-vacuum-full-change/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/11/waiting-for-8-5-vacuum-full-change/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jan 2010 23:30:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cluster]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maintenance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reindex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vacuum]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1578</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some time ago Josh Berkus wrote about possible changes in VACUUM FULL.
Now these changes came to life. By now, I mean 6th of January, when Takahiro Itagaki committed his patch:
Log Message:
-----------
Support rewritten-based full vacuum as VACUUM FULL. Traditional
VACUUM FULL was renamed to VACUUM FULL INPLACE. Also added a new
option -i, --inplace for vacuumdb to perform [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/11/waiting-for-8-5-vacuum-full-change/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; Hot Standby</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/08/waiting-for-8-5-hot-standby/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/08/waiting-for-8-5-hot-standby/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:07:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[availability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hot standby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pitr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[replication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[slony]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1576</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 19th of December Simon Riggs committed a patch that will quite likely be the single most-talked-about change in PostgreSQL 8.5:
Log Message:
-----------
Allow read only connections during recovery, known as Hot Standby.
&#160;
Enabled by recovery_connections = on (default) and forcing archive recovery
using a recovery.conf. Recovery processing now emulates the original
transactions as they are replayed, providing full locking [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/08/waiting-for-8-5-hot-standby/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; PL/pgSQL by default</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/07/waiting-for-8-5-plpgsql-by-default/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/07/waiting-for-8-5-plpgsql-by-default/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 11:55:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plpgsql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1574</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 18th of December Bruce Momjian committed very important, but relatively small, patch:
Log Message:
-----------
Install server-side language PL/pgSQL by default.
There is no point in showing it, commit log tells all &#8211; basically from 8.5 on PL/pgSQL will be enabled by default in all databases.
There was time when people rejected &#8220;stored procedure&#8221; suggestions, because they didn&#8217;t have [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/07/waiting-for-8-5-plpgsql-by-default/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; ordered aggregates</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/06/waiting-for-8-5-ordered-aggregates/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/06/waiting-for-8-5-ordered-aggregates/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2010 14:26:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aggregate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[array_agg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1568</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 15th of December Tom Lane committed patch by Andrew Gierth (aka RhodiumToad), which adds interesting capability:
Log Message:
-----------
Support ORDER BY within aggregate function calls, at long last providing a
non-kluge method for controlling the order in which values are fed to an
aggregate function.  At the same time eliminate the old implementation
restriction that DISTINCT was only [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/06/waiting-for-8-5-ordered-aggregates/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; buffers info for explain</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/05/waiting-for-8-5-buffers-info-for-explain/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/05/waiting-for-8-5-buffers-info-for-explain/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:55:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[buffers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[explain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1566</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today small, but (at least for me) really useful patch. Committed on 15th of December by Robert Haas, and written by Itagaki Takahiro, this patch does:
Log Message:
-----------
Add an EXPLAIN (BUFFERS) option to show buffer-usage statistics.
&#160;
This patch also removes buffer-usage statistics from the track_counts
output, since this (or the global server statistics) is deemed to be a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/05/waiting-for-8-5-buffers-info-for-explain/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; exclusion constraints</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/03/waiting-for-8-5-exclusion-constraints/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/03/waiting-for-8-5-exclusion-constraints/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jan 2010 21:51:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constraint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exclude]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hotel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rooms]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1563</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 7th of December, Tom Lane committed patch by Jeff Davis that adds general exclusion constraints:
Log Message:
-----------
Add exclusion constraints, which generalize the concept of uniqueness to
support any indexable commutative operator, not just equality.  Two rows
violate the exclusion constraint if &#34;row1.col OP row2.col&#34; is TRUE for
each of the columns in the constraint.
&#160;
Jeff Davis, reviewed by [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/03/waiting-for-8-5-exclusion-constraints/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; PL/Perl DO</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/02/waiting-for-8-5-plperl-do/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/02/waiting-for-8-5-plperl-do/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jan 2010 12:21:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[do]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plperl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1561</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just recently I wrote about DO command in PostgreSQL 8.5, and now (since 29th of November) we have DO with PL/Perl support.
Written by Joshua Tolley and committed by Tom Lane, the patch:
Log Message:
-----------
Add support for anonymous code blocks (DO blocks) to PL/Perl.
&#160;
Joshua Tolley, reviewed by Brendan Jurd and Tim Bunce

DO command basically runs code in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/02/waiting-for-8-5-plperl-do/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; Application name reporting</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/29/waiting-for-8-5-application-name-reporting/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/29/waiting-for-8-5-application-name-reporting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:33:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[application_name]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[logs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[log_line_prefix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[monitoring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1559</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 28th of November Tom Lane committed patch by Dave Page, which adds new capability to system monitoring and logging:
Log Message:
-----------
Add support for an application_name parameter, which is displayed in
pg_stat_activity and recorded in log entries.
&#160;
Dave Page, reviewed by Andres Freund

Description, is pretty simple, but let&#8217;s see how it can be used.
First, let&#8217;s modify postgresql.conf to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/29/waiting-for-8-5-application-name-reporting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; better wrapped output in psql</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/28/waiting-for-8-5-better-wrapped-output-in-psql/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/28/waiting-for-8-5-better-wrapped-output-in-psql/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2009 13:35:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[less]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pager]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[psql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wrapped]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1557</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 22nd of November Tom Lane committed patch by Roger Leigh which fixes my pet peeve:
Log Message:
-----------
Improve psql's tabular display of wrapped-around data by inserting markers
in the formerly-always-blank columns just to left and right of the data.
Different marking is used for a line break caused by a newline in the data
than for a straight wraparound. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/28/waiting-for-8-5-better-wrapped-output-in-psql/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; conditional triggers</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/23/waiting-for-8-5-conditional-triggers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/23/waiting-for-8-5-conditional-triggers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 02:50:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cond]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conditional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conditions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constraint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deferrable]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deferred]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[triggers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1555</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 20th of November Tom Lane committed patch by Takahiro Itagaki which adds interesting functionality:
Add a WHEN clause to CREATE TRIGGER, allowing a boolean expression to be
checked to determine whether the trigger should be fired.
&#160;
For BEFORE triggers this is mostly a matter of spec compliance; but for AFTER
triggers it can provide a noticeable performance improvement, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/23/waiting-for-8-5-conditional-triggers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; checking password strength</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/17/waiting-for-8-5-checking-password-strength/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/17/waiting-for-8-5-checking-password-strength/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:31:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cracklib]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[password]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1553</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 18th of November Tom Lane committed patch by Laurenz Albe which adds very interesting capability:
Add a hook to CREATE/ALTER ROLE to allow an external module to check the
strength of database passwords, and create a sample implementation of
such a hook as a new contrib module &#34;passwordcheck&#34;.
&#160;
Laurenz Albe, reviewed by Takahiro Itagaki

So, the basic idea is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/17/waiting-for-8-5-checking-password-strength/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; PL/pgSQL variable resolution</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/16/waiting-for-8-5-plpgsql-variable-resolution/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/16/waiting-for-8-5-plpgsql-variable-resolution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:55:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[incompatibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plpgsql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[variables]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1551</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 13th of November (I know, backlog again), Tom Lane committed patch which make PostgreSQL more strict about what happens in stored procedures in PL/pgSQL:
Add control knobs for plpgsql's variable resolution behavior, and make the
default be &#34;throw error on conflict&#34;, as per discussions.  The GUC variable
is plpgsql.variable_conflict, with values &#34;error&#34;, &#34;use_variable&#34;,
&#34;use_column&#34;.  The behavior [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/12/16/waiting-for-8-5-plpgsql-variable-resolution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; TRIGGERS on columns</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/18/waiting-for-8-5-triggers-on-columns/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/18/waiting-for-8-5-triggers-on-columns/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 02:48:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[triggers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1548</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 14th of October Tome Lane committed new patch from Itagaki Tahahiro:
Log Message:
-----------
Support SQL-compliant triggers on columns, ie fire only if certain columns
are named in the UPDATE's SET list.
&#160;
Note: the schema of pg_trigger has not actually changed; we've just started
to use a column that was there all along.  catversion bumped anyway so that
this commit [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/18/waiting-for-8-5-triggers-on-columns/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; Named function arguments</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/17/waiting-for-8-5-named-function-arguments/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/17/waiting-for-8-5-named-function-arguments/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:41:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[functions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[named arguments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plpgsql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plpython]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1545</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pavel Stehule &#8211; hero for everybody writing stored procedures, wrote, and later Tom Lane committed patch which adds named arguments for functions:
Log Message:
-----------
Support use of function argument names to identify which actual arguments
match which function parameters.  The syntax uses AS, for example
funcname(value AS arg1, anothervalue AS arg2)
&#160;
Pavel Stehule

So, let&#8217;s see how it works.
CREATE OR [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/17/waiting-for-8-5-named-function-arguments/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; GUC per user and database</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/16/waiting-for-8-5-guc-per-user-and-database/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/16/waiting-for-8-5-guc-per-user-and-database/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 10:47:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[configuration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1543</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 7th of October Alvaro Herrera committed his own patch, which adds quite interesting possibilty:
Log Message:
-----------
Make it possibly to specify GUC params per user and per database.
&#160;
Create a new catalog pg_db_role_setting where they are now stored, and better
encapsulate the code that deals with settings into its realm.  The old
datconfig and rolconfig columns are removed.
&#160;
psql [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/16/waiting-for-8-5-guc-per-user-and-database/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; &#8220;GRANT ALL&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/07/waiting-for-8-5-grant-all/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/07/waiting-for-8-5-grant-all/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:54:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grantall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privileges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[revoke]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1541</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the most common (or perhaps even the most common) question people have regarding PostgreSQL, is how to change privileges for all tables.
Usually they want something like MySQL&#8217;s:
GRANT ... ON database.* TO ...
Which is interesting as it is actually 2 distinct features in one:

grant privileges on all existing tables
automatically grant privileges on all tables [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/07/waiting-for-8-5-grant-all/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; &#8217;samehost&#8217; and &#8217;samenet&#8217; in pg_hba.conf</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/02/waiting-for-8-5-samehost-and-samenet-in-pg_hba-conf/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/02/waiting-for-8-5-samehost-and-samenet-in-pg_hba-conf/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:45:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg_hba]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[samehost]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[samenet]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1537</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[October, finally. &#8220;Only&#8221; 1 month of backlog in new features in 8.5, but I&#8217;m getting there  
So, on 1st of October Tom Lane committed patch by Stef Walter:
Log Message:
-----------
Support &#34;samehost&#34; and &#34;samenet&#34; specifications in pg_hba.conf,
by enumerating the machine's IP interfaces to look for a match.
&#160;
Stef Walter
For some reason I cannot find it in mailing [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/02/waiting-for-8-5-samehost-and-samenet-in-pg_hba-conf/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; DO</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/01/waiting-for-8-5-do/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/01/waiting-for-8-5-do/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 16:09:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[do]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plpgsql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1535</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 22nd of September, Tom Lane committed a patch by Petr Jelinek:
Log Message:
-----------
Implement the DO statement to support execution of PL code without having
to create a function for it.
&#160;
Procedural languages now have an additional entry point, namely a function
to execute an inline code block.  This seemed a better design than trying
to hide the transient-ness [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2009/11/01/waiting-for-8-5-do/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
