<?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; pg90</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.depesz.com/tag/pg90/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.depesz.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:35:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 9.0 &#8211; Final Post ?</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2010/07/12/waiting-for-9-0-final-post/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/2010/07/12/waiting-for-9-0-final-post/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jul 2010 23:39:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[final]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[release]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1756</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As of now, I am happy user of 9.1devel version of PostgreSQL: =$ psql -c 'select version()' version --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PostgreSQL 9.1devel on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc-4.4.real (Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5) 4.4.3, 64-bit (1 row) So, I guess no new features will make it to 9.0 &#8211; after all, 9.0 is currently already beta3. If you want [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2010/07/12/waiting-for-9-0-final-post/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 9.0 &#8211; pg_upgrade</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2010/05/19/waiting-for-9-0-pg_upgrade/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/2010/05/19/waiting-for-9-0-pg_upgrade/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 10:55:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg_dump]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg_restore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg_upgrade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[upgrade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[version]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1700</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On May, 12ve, Bruce Momjian committed new contrib module for 9.0 &#8211; pg_upgrage. As I understand &#8211; this is what was available before as pg-migrator. If you&#8217;re not familiar with it &#8211; it&#8217;s a tool that allows upgrade of $PGDATA from some version to some version. What&#8217;s the use case? Let&#8217;s assume you have this [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2010/05/19/waiting-for-9-0-pg_upgrade/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 9.0 &#8211; extended frames for window functions</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2010/02/17/waiting-for-9-0-extended-frames-for-window-functions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 committed 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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2010/02/17/waiting-for-9-0-string_agg/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2010/02/17/waiting-for-9-0-string_agg/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 9.0 &#8211; removal of 0000000001.history check</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2010/02/02/waiting-for-9-0-removal-of-0000000001-history-check/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2010/02/02/waiting-for-9-0-table-and-index-sizes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2010/02/01/waiting-for-9-0-streaming-replication/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2010/02/01/waiting-for-9-0-streaming-replication/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for &#8230; 9.0</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2010/01/21/waiting-for-9-0/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2010/01/21/waiting-for-9-0/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; VACUUM FULL change</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2010/01/11/waiting-for-8-5-vacuum-full-change/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2010/01/11/waiting-for-8-5-vacuum-full-change/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; Hot Standby</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2010/01/08/waiting-for-8-5-hot-standby/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2010/01/07/waiting-for-8-5-plpgsql-by-default/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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; [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2010/01/06/waiting-for-8-5-ordered-aggregates/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2010/01/05/waiting-for-8-5-buffers-info-for-explain/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2010/01/05/waiting-for-8-5-buffers-info-for-explain/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; exclusion constraints</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2010/01/03/waiting-for-8-5-exclusion-constraints/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2010/01/03/waiting-for-8-5-exclusion-constraints/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; PL/Perl DO</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2010/01/02/waiting-for-8-5-plperl-do/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2009/12/29/waiting-for-8-5-application-name-reporting/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2009/12/28/waiting-for-8-5-better-wrapped-output-in-psql/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2009/12/23/waiting-for-8-5-conditional-triggers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2009/12/17/waiting-for-8-5-checking-password-strength/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2009/12/16/waiting-for-8-5-plpgsql-variable-resolution/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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;. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2009/11/18/waiting-for-8-5-triggers-on-columns/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2009/11/17/waiting-for-8-5-named-function-arguments/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2009/11/16/waiting-for-8-5-guc-per-user-and-database/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2009/11/07/waiting-for-8-5-grant-all/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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; &#8216;samehost&#8217; and &#8216;samenet&#8217; in pg_hba.conf</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2009/11/02/waiting-for-8-5-samehost-and-samenet-in-pg_hba-conf/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/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/2009/11/01/waiting-for-8-5-do/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/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 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2009/11/01/waiting-for-8-5-do/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; changes in hstore</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2009/10/15/waiting-for-8-5-changes-in-hstore/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/2009/10/15/waiting-for-8-5-changes-in-hstore/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:18:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contrib]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hstore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1517</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Andrew Gierth (RhodiumToad on irc) wrote, and Tom Lane committed: Assorted improvements in contrib/hstore. &#160; Remove the 64K limit on the lengths of keys and values within an hstore. (This changes the on-disk format, but the old format can still be read.) Add support for btree/hash opclasses for hstore --- this is not so much [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2009/10/15/waiting-for-8-5-changes-in-hstore/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; MOVE {FORWARD,BACKWARD} X</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2009/10/15/waiting-for-8-5-move-forwardbackward-x/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/2009/10/15/waiting-for-8-5-move-forwardbackward-x/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:18:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cursor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cursors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[move]]></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=1513</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 29th of September (I know, there is a backlog &#8211; I&#8217;ll work on it, I promise), Tom Lane committed another patch from Pavel Stehule: Allow MOVE FORWARD n, MOVE BACKWARD n, MOVE FORWARD ALL, MOVE BACKWARD ALL in plpgsql. Clean up a couple of corner cases in the MOVE/FETCH syntax. &#160; Pavel Stehule Description [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2009/10/15/waiting-for-8-5-move-forwardbackward-x/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; Machine readable EXPLAIN</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2009/08/28/waiting-for-8-5-machine-readable-explain/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/2009/08/28/waiting-for-8-5-machine-readable-explain/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[explain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parsing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1488</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After very long discussions, on 10th of August, Tom Lane committed patch by Robert Haas: Log Message: ----------- Extend EXPLAIN to support output in XML or JSON format. &#160; There are probably still some adjustments to be made in the details of the output, but this gets the basic structure in place. &#160; Robert Haas [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2009/08/28/waiting-for-8-5-machine-readable-explain/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting for 8.5 &#8211; Multi-threaded pgbench</title>
		<link>http://www.depesz.com/2009/08/26/waiting-for-8-5-multi-threaded-pgbench/</link>
		<comments>http://www.depesz.com/2009/08/26/waiting-for-8-5-multi-threaded-pgbench/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 09:57:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>depesz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[benchmark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg85]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pg90]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pgbench]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postgresql]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[threads]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.depesz.com/?p=1486</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 3rd of August, Tatsuo Ishii committed patch by ITAGAKI Takahiro: Log Message: ----------- Multi-threaded version of pgbench contributed by ITAGAKI Takahiro, reviewed by Greg Smith and Josh Williams. &#160; Following is the proposal from ITAGAKI Takahiro: &#160; Pgbench is a famous tool to measure postgres performance, but nowadays it does not work well because [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.depesz.com/2009/08/26/waiting-for-8-5-multi-threaded-pgbench/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

