473,889 Members | 1,358 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Is my MySQL Gaining ?

Dear all,

Their was a huge rore about MySQL recently for something in java functions
now theirs one more

http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/News-5.0.x.html

Does this concern anyone.

What I think is PostgreSQL would have less USP's (Uniqe Selling Points
though we dont sell) now.

What do you think yes we PostgreSQL users need some introspection.

Regards,
Vishal Kashyap.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html

Nov 12 '05
175 11565
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprom pt.com> writes:
How about just a "Getting Started with PostgreSQL" guide... Python
is like this. They have the "real" documentation but they also have a
introductory tutorial. We could have a brief document (100 pages or
less) that talks about the basic concepts of PostgreSQL...


How would this differ from the existing Tutorial?

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to ma*******@postg resql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Nov 12 '05 #91
> > Our "clients" use legacy medical office software that 99% runs
on Windows. We offer add-ons (tailored mini-versions of our
main application :-) and thus get OSS (Python, PostgreSQL,
wxWindows, sometimes Linux itself) into their offices and onto
their networks. Most of the time the main difficulty is to figure
out how to offer PostgreSQL in their environment (yes, we know
about CygWin).

("clients" because we don't do business as in selling stuff)
I know in a lot of environments this would not be via, especially a medical one
where information is sensitive but have you considered using a hoster to house
your app/database and then writing (windows) clients (with secure backends)? Well, this is just for test driving so no sensitive data is of
any concern.
There are a number of hosters including myself that would probably be more that
willing to partner with you see how with can be does so that it an acceptable
scenario all the way around.

I am talking about potential users looking at GnuMed. I am
just a developer, I am not interested in selling anything to
anyone. I am, however, interested in making it easier for them
to have a look at that piece of code. Which involves
connecting to a PostgreSQL instance somewhere some way or other.

Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddres sHere" to ma*******@postg resql.org)

Nov 12 '05 #92
I already had in the first post I replied to, but at the risk of
sounding redundant, I'll say it again.

Views: When I came to PG I didn't know what they were, saw no point to
them (still don't) why do you need a function to provide details of a
query when a more complicated query gives the same data? Are they
designed for people who don't like to type long queries?

Stored Procedures: Sounds good in principle, but in what ways can I
benefit most (I understand this now) at the time of moving to PG, I
couldn't see the difference between writing my code in an a Stored Proc
or an API.

Triggers: make perfect sense now, but didn't used to when I didn't know
what they were.

This isn't definitive list but more of a flavour of the obstacles I hit
when I first met PG. If I hadn't persevered (and many may not) I'd have
ended up with a PG server full of DBs designed and built as if they were
on a MySQL server.

Yes, the topics are covered fleetingly in the tutorial, but do such
important topics only warrant 3 pages of text between the lot of them?
It's great that the subjects are present, but it seems to be in more of
a kind of "Whilst We're on the Subject of Databases" kind of passing
comment.

Maybe I'm asking for the Moon on a Stick, but it didn't feel like I was :)

T.

Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
On Monday 29 December 2003 15:25, Tony wrote:

By that logic then, we can probably ditch the PG Tutorial altogether and
provide a quick ref card of PG commands and keywords, with a few pages
on how PG is different should be plenty.

The bisggest problem that I faced when moving to PG was the complete
lack of any cetralised information source for this information. Sure
there are tutorials on the web, first track them down, then convert
their use to PG then collate them, then make some sense of it all.
This is the kind of aloofness that I have mentioned previously, just
because it doesn't belong, doesn't mean it's not needed, and it only
needs to be written once. Although I know some of the concepts and I'm
beginning to grock them, I'm still trying to collate enough to satisfy
my needs.

Assuming yo *do* want to grow the PG community and attract people from
other systems, the easier the transition for them, the less likely they
are to look elsewhere for something that appears easier. Easier
doesn't always mean easier to use, sometimes it can mean easier to get
to grips with.


*Sigh*.. You just read my first remark which you could have bypassed but
anyways..

What do you think of offer I made? I was slightly disappointed to see that you
missed it..

I am not removing my original message. Please read and let me know what do you
think..
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:

For one thing, these thing do not belong to postgresql documentation.

But I don't believe there is shortage of material on these topics on web
and in print.

However if you are refering to explaining these things, w.r.t. postgresql,
I would be more than happy to churn out some extremely basic tutorials.

Can you tell us what all you need? Rephrasing, if you know these(and some
other) concpets by now, what all you missed while learning postgresql?

It may sound like stupid question but unlearning things out of imagination
is not easy...:-)


Shridhar
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddres sHere" to ma*******@postg resql.org)


Nov 12 '05 #93
Keith,

Oh, there it is, in tiny print.

Dave
On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 15:03, Keith C. Perry wrote:
Quoting Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.c om>:
Jeff,

I agree; we have an apparent lack of awareness of many things. IMO this
is more indicative of a lack of a unified presence than anything else.
part of the project is on gborg, part of the project is on advocacy,
.... etc.

How would a newbie know to go look for advocacy.postgr esql.org ?.

Dave
On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 10:18, Jeff Eckermann wrote:
This has been an interesting thread, with lots of well
considered contributions. The consensus seems to be
"PostgreSQL is plenty good enough and more, we just
need more people to know it, and an easier learning
path".

What bothers me a little here is an apparent lack of
awareness of the work of the Advocacy Group. They
have been organized for a little over one full release
cycle, but have already begun to achieve some
impressive things. The release of version 7.4 saw a
well prepared press release, which was subsequently
picked up by journalists and featured (often lifted
word for word) in articles in a variety of IT industry
publications around the world. The effect was to get
our marketing material in front of the eyes of many
readers, without them having to go looking for it at
all. When did that happen before?

I cite that as just one example of what can be
achieved by an organized and co-ordinated approach,
which is just what the Advocacy Group is working on.
The scope for more development along these lines is
huge, all that is needed is the passage of time, and
hopefully more contributions from more people. I
recommend to all those whose interest was caught by
this thread to check out the pgsql-advocacy list, if
you have not already done so, and think about what you
might be able to add. In answer to the obvious
question, I have been lurking on that list for a
while, and intend to make a contribution where I feel
fitted to do so.

Maybe we need to invent some new solutions, but for
advocacy at least, we already have one.

--- Ericson Smith <er**@did-it.com> wrote:
> A documentation system like the one over at
> http://php.net, would be
> fantastic for Postgresql. There could be lookups
> based on SQL commands,
> Functions, and Sitewide Searches. This alone would
> go a long way to
> expose PHP to "the masses".
>
> In terms of using MySQL or Postgresql, lets all face
> it, most data
> storage work could be easily and efficiently handled
> by text files,
> since there needs to be just infrequent inserts and
> updates, and mostly
> reads. The majority of interfaces exposed on the web
> follow this
> paradigm, and include:
> * Content management
> * Catalogs
> * Shopping cart stuff
> * User management
>
> Yes, our powerful and easy to use PG can do all of
> that too, but SQLite,
> Sleepycat DBM files and MySQL can do it as well.
> There are going to be
> even more migrations for Oracle to MySQL than from
> Oracle to PG, because
> so many of those Oracle installations were overkill
> in the first place.
> Our place is in that hoary back end that runs the
> world, the un-sexy
> part of any organization that no one outside of the
> Development team, or
> System Administrators know about.
>
> Getting mindshare is a different problem. That
> requires PG to have a
> full time effective press person. This press person
> would need to be in
> touch with the press constantly to tell them things
> like:
> * PG is a great back for windows clients using
> ODBC/MS Access/Excel
> * PG is a "real" database comparable to Oracle
> * PG costs nothing
> * Free support is fabulous, and paid support is
> available
> * Development is constant
>
> In the end, I believe that PG needs to move into an
> organizational
> structure so that its considerable assets can be
> fully realized, its
> wonderful developers may be fully compensated, and
> commercial users (our
> bread and butter), can have an official place to
> help sponsor features
> of the system and so on. All this is more than a
> website. Someone posted
> pictures of the PG booth at a show recently. It was
> nice, but there was
> this one sad guy shrouded in darkness -- I felt
> depressed, because
> that's how PG advocacy felt.
>
> Warm regards,
> Ericson Smith
> DBA/Developer
>
+-----------------------+----------------------------+
> | http://www.did-it.com | "When I'm paid, I always
> |
> | er**@did-it.com | follow the job through.
> |
> | 516-255-0500 | You know that." -Angel
> Eyes|
>
+-----------------------+----------------------------+
>
>
>
>
> Karsten Hilbert wrote:
>
> >>I'm in a similar situation. My app is currently
> PG-only (although I
> >>_might_ be able to get it work with Firebird
> eventually). Currently I have
> >>to sell Linux to prospective clients in addition
> to my app. A native
> >>Windows version would make my life a bit easier.
> >>
> >>
> >Same here.
> >
> >Our "clients" use legacy medical office software
> that 99% runs
> >on Windows. We offer add-ons (tailored
> mini-versions of our
> >main application :-) and thus get OSS (Python,
> PostgreSQL,
> >wxWindows, sometimes Linux itself) into their
> offices and onto
> >their networks. Most of the time the main
> difficulty is to figure
> >out how to offer PostgreSQL in their environment
> (yes, we know
> >about CygWin).
> >
> >("clients" because we don't do business as in
> selling stuff)
> >
> >Karsten Hilbert, MD
> >
> >www.gnumed.org
> >
> >
> > begin:vcard
> fn:Ericson Smith
> n:Smith;Ericson
> org:Did-it.com;Programm ing
> adr:#304;;55 Maple Avenue;Rockvill e
> Center;NY;11570 ;USA
> email;internet: er**@did-it.com
> title:Web Developer
> tel;work:516-255-0500
> tel;cell:646-483-3420
> note:Nothing special!
> x-mozilla-html:FALSE
> url:http://www.did-it.com
> version:2.1
> end:vcard
>
> >
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
>
_______________ _______________ ____
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddres sHere" to ma*******@postg resql.org)

--
Dave Cramer
519 939 0336
ICQ # 1467551
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org


Dave,

I'm not trying to be curt with you or anything but a serious questions, did you
not see the links on the right side of http://www.postgresql.org under where it
says websites?

--
Dave Cramer
519 939 0336
ICQ # 1467551
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

Nov 12 '05 #94
Quoting "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprom pt.com>:
This concerns me. This is the second time recently someone has said something
is NOT documented and it it turn out it is.

So my question is (no offense to anyone) are the web sites not "clear"

enough to
find information quickly or are people just being lax/lazy when they are

searching.


Well, at anything greater than 1024x768 the "docs" link on the main site
is near invisible. The font size is fine, but combined with the color scheme
and location, it can be hard to spot... Mainly, I think because the page
is so busy.


Agreed- I was hoping some else would say that.
If you look at the front page the first thing you see is News which is fine,
but IMHO the first thing should be the nav bar comes before News but
News is big, bold print.

Also searching the PostgreSQL docs is a useless venture. I just typed in
trigger and hit search.... 20 seconds later I am still waiting.
I mentioned that earlier in this thread.
Why don't we just add Google search to the page?

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake
That and it is possible to propose a new layout. Something that is somewhat
consistant across the major sites (www,gborg,tech doc,advocacy)? And yes, I'd be
will to do some work on that.


--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC - S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming, shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-222-2783 - jd@commandpromp t.com - http://www.commandprompt.com

--
Keith C. Perry, MS E.E.
Director of Networks & Applications
VCSN, Inc.
http://vcsn.com

_______________ _______________ ______
This email account is being host by:
VCSN, Inc : http://vcsn.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to ma*******@postg resql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Nov 12 '05 #95
The documentation needs to be opened up and interlinked a lot more. For
instance, one of the things that makes the PHP site work well, is
linking to related functions at the end of each function's description, eg:
http://us2.php.net/manual/en/function.pg-fetch-all.php

However, check our PG documentation page about the "CREATE SEQUENCE"
command:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/curre...esequence.html

That would be a prime page for linking to the sequence manupulation
functions. So as a result of this omission, we get many basic sequence
questions on the mailing list again and again. Now we would be forced
over to Google, if the internal search engine was not working. Assume I
am a newbie wanting to know how to get the last value for a sequence.. I
would type "last inserted value" into the search engine... In this
particular case, I got back no results.

Lets face it, Postgresql is great, but the docs are not. PHP was easy to
learn because of great function reference, interlinking (leads to
feature discovery) and excellent user contributed tips which are edited.
To this day, I still refer to my Postgresql Manual, because it is
actually faster to find information that way instead of on the website.
On the other hand, I never have to refer to a PHP dead tree manual.

In my humble opinion, here's what the documentation needs to make the
uptake of Postgresql better:
* A separate page for every Postgresql function
* Interlinking between related functions
* Interlinking between SQL Commands pages and function pages
* More examples of Pl/pgSQL functions
* A custom search engine to address the above -- not just sitewide search
* More encouragement of user posting to each manual page
* Comprehensive migration section (Oracle => PG, MySQL =>PG), not just
Pl/pgSQL examples!

I dunno, maybe as users of Postgresql, we could pool together some money
($50 each as a new year present), and get the PHP documentation guys to
help us out? They might be more inclined to, since they are dropping
MySQL from inclusion in PHP. My first $50 is ready to go if someone
organizes this stuff and gives me a Paypal email address to send funds
to. Everyone here has a vested interest in Postgresql (heck, my job
depends on it).

Let's give the documentation writers an applause, but at this point, it
really needs to move to the next level folks. Now let me get back to
migrating to 7.4 :-)

Warmest regards,
Ericson Smith
Tracking Specialist/DBA
+-----------------------+----------------------------+
| http://www.did-it.com | "When I'm paid, I always |
| er**@did-it.com | follow the job through. |
| 516-255-0500 | You know that." -Angel Eyes|
+-----------------------+----------------------------+

Dave Cramer wrote:
Keith,

Oh, there it is, in tiny print.

Dave
On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 15:03, Keith C. Perry wrote:

Quoting Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.c om>:
Jeff,

I agree; we have an apparent lack of awareness of many things. IMO this
is more indicative of a lack of a unified presence than anything else.
part of the project is on gborg, part of the project is on advocacy,
.... etc.

How would a newbie know to go look for advocacy.postgr esql.org ?.

Dave
On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 10:18, Jeff Eckermann wrote:
This has been an interesting thread, with lots of well
considere d contributions. The consensus seems to be
"PostgreS QL is plenty good enough and more, we just
need more people to know it, and an easier learning
path".

What bothers me a little here is an apparent lack of
awareness of the work of the Advocacy Group. They
have been organized for a little over one full release
cycle, but have already begun to achieve some
impressiv e things. The release of version 7.4 saw a
well prepared press release, which was subsequently
picked up by journalists and featured (often lifted
word for word) in articles in a variety of IT industry
publication s around the world. The effect was to get
our marketing material in front of the eyes of many
readers, without them having to go looking for it at
all. When did that happen before?

I cite that as just one example of what can be
achieved by an organized and co-ordinated approach,
which is just what the Advocacy Group is working on.
The scope for more development along these lines is
huge, all that is needed is the passage of time, and
hopefully more contributions from more people. I
recommend to all those whose interest was caught by
this thread to check out the pgsql-advocacy list, if
you have not already done so, and think about what you
might be able to add. In answer to the obvious
question, I have been lurking on that list for a
while, and intend to make a contribution where I feel
fitted to do so.

Maybe we need to invent some new solutions, but for
advocacy at least, we already have one.

--- Ericson Smith <er**@did-it.com> wrote:
>A documentation system like the one over at
>http://php.net, would be
>fantasti c for Postgresql. There could be lookups
>based on SQL commands,
>Function s, and Sitewide Searches. This alone would
>go a long way to
>expose PHP to "the masses".
>
>In terms of using MySQL or Postgresql, lets all face
>it, most data
>storage work could be easily and efficiently handled
>by text files,
>since there needs to be just infrequent inserts and
>updates, and mostly
>reads. The majority of interfaces exposed on the web
>follow this
>paradigm , and include:
>* Content management
>* Catalogs
>* Shopping cart stuff
>* User management
>
>Yes, our powerful and easy to use PG can do all of
>that too, but SQLite,
>Sleepyca t DBM files and MySQL can do it as well.
>There are going to be
>even more migrations for Oracle to MySQL than from
>Oracle to PG, because
>so many of those Oracle installations were overkill
>in the first place.
>Our place is in that hoary back end that runs the
>world, the un-sexy
>part of any organization that no one outside of the
>Developmen t team, or
>System Administrators know about.
>
>Getting mindshare is a different problem. That
>requires PG to have a
>full time effective press person. This press person
>would need to be in
>touch with the press constantly to tell them things
>like:
>* PG is a great back for windows clients using
>ODBC/MS Access/Excel
>* PG is a "real" database comparable to Oracle
>* PG costs nothing
>* Free support is fabulous, and paid support is
>availabl e
>* Development is constant
>
>In the end, I believe that PG needs to move into an
>organizati onal
>structur e so that its considerable assets can be
>fully realized, its
>wonderfu l developers may be fully compensated, and
>commerci al users (our
>bread and butter), can have an official place to
>help sponsor features
>of the system and so on. All this is more than a
>website. Someone posted
>pictures of the PG booth at a show recently. It was
>nice, but there was
>this one sad guy shrouded in darkness -- I felt
>depresse d, because
>that's how PG advocacy felt.
>
>Warm regards,
>Ericson Smith
>DBA/Developer
>
>
>
+-----------------------+----------------------------+
>| http://www.did-it.com | "When I'm paid, I always
>|
>| er**@did-it.com | follow the job through.
>|
>| 516-255-0500 | You know that." -Angel
>Eyes|
>
>
>
+-----------------------+----------------------------+
>
>
>Karsten Hilbert wrote:
>
>
>
>>>I'm in a similar situation. My app is currently
>>>
>>>
>PG-only (although I
>
>
>>>_might _ be able to get it work with Firebird
>>>
>>>
>eventually ). Currently I have
>
>
>>>to sell Linux to prospective clients in addition
>>>
>>>
>to my app. A native
>
>
>>>Window s version would make my life a bit easier.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Same here.
>>
>>Our "clients" use legacy medical office software
>>
>>
>that 99% runs
>
>
>>on Windows. We offer add-ons (tailored
>>
>>
>mini-versions of our
>
>
>>main application :-) and thus get OSS (Python,
>>
>>
>PostgreSQL ,
>
>
>>wxWindows , sometimes Linux itself) into their
>>
>>
>offices and onto
>
>
>>their networks. Most of the time the main
>>
>>
>difficul ty is to figure
>
>
>>out how to offer PostgreSQL in their environment
>>
>>
>(yes, we know
>
>
>>about CygWin).
>>
>>("clients " because we don't do business as in
>>
>>
>selling stuff)
>
>
>>Karsten Hilbert, MD
>>
>>www.gnumed.org
>>
>>
>>begin:vca rd
>>
>>
>fn:Erics on Smith
>n:Smith;Er icson
>org:Did-it.com;Programm ing
>adr:#304;; 55 Maple Avenue;Rockvill e
>Center;NY; 11570;USA
>email;inte rnet:er**@did-it.com
>title:We b Developer
>tel;work:5 16-255-0500
>tel;cell:6 46-483-3420
>note:Nothi ng special!
>x-mozilla-html:FALSE
>url:http://www.did-it.com
>version:2. 1
>end:vcar d
>
>
>
>---------------------------(end of
>broadcas t)---------------------------
>TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
>
>
>
___________ _______________ ________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddres sHere" to ma*******@postg resql.org)

--
Dave Cramer
519 939 0336
ICQ # 1467551
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

Dave,

I'm not trying to be curt with you or anything but a serious questions, did you
not see the links on the right side of http://www.postgresql.org under where it
says websites?

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html

Nov 12 '05 #96


Tony wrote:
I already had in the first post I replied to, but at the risk of
sounding redundant, I'll say it again.

Views: When I came to PG I didn't know what they were, saw no point
to them (still don't) why do you need a function to provide details of
a query when a more complicated query gives the same data? Are they
designed for people who don't like to type long queries?


They are designed for several things IMHO.

1. So I don't have to type long queries.
2. So I can have a base query and just append where clauses, joins
etc... as I need.
3. So I can provide permissions based on the view, not the table itself
-- thus lending to a more flexible acl model.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake
--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC - S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming, shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-222-2783 - jd@commandpromp t.com - http://www.commandprompt.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Nov 12 '05 #97
Tony wrote:
I already had in the first post I replied to, but at the risk of
sounding redundant, I'll say it again.

Views: When I came to PG I didn't know what they were, saw no point
to them (still don't) why do you need a function to provide details of
a query when a more complicated query gives the same data? Are they
designed for people who don't like to type long queries?

Personally I find views useful because I can hide the details of the
database internals from the application. Hence they provide an
"interface" level abstraction. This is very important if you want to
isolate the database and application development.

I've never seen that stated in a document.
Stored Procedures: Sounds good in principle, but in what ways can I
benefit most (I understand this now) at the time of moving to PG, I
couldn't see the difference between writing my code in an a Stored
Proc or an API.
I don't understand what you mean here/


This isn't definitive list but more of a flavour of the obstacles I
hit when I first met PG. If I hadn't persevered (and many may not)
I'd have ended up with a PG server full of DBs designed and built as
if they were on a MySQL server.

Yep - I see that alot.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

Nov 12 '05 #98
On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 15:51:00 -0500,
Ericson Smith <er**@did-it.com> wrote:

Lets face it, Postgresql is great, but the docs are not. PHP was easy to
learn because of great function reference, interlinking (leads to
feature discovery) and excellent user contributed tips which are edited.
To this day, I still refer to my Postgresql Manual, because it is
actually faster to find information that way instead of on the website.
On the other hand, I never have to refer to a PHP dead tree manual.
Once you know where to look for stuff it isn't that hard to find things.

This is one of the advantages of reading through the whole manual once
to get an idea of whats there.

When I need to look things up for Postgres I use a local copy of the web
based documentation.
In my humble opinion, here's what the documentation needs to make the
uptake of Postgresql better:
* A separate page for every Postgresql function
I don't like this. It will make scrolling through a group of related
functions harder. Name anchors can be used to allow links directly to
functions.
* A custom search engine to address the above -- not just sitewide search
* More encouragement of user posting to each manual page


Do you see these two points as applying to only the copy of the
documentation on the Postgres web site, or do you see this being distributed
either with the database (as the current documentation is) or as
a separate item (like some of the clients are)?

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to ma*******@postg resql.org

Nov 12 '05 #99
SNIP
Many of these subjects already *are* covered in the Tutorial. Just
looking in the 7.4 table of contents, I see

3. Advanced Features
3.1. Introduction
3.2. Views
3.3. Foreign Keys
3.4. Transactions
3.5. Inheritance
3.6. Conclusion

The discussions are skimpy and could use fleshed out a little, no doubt.
(Anyone who wants to contribute material is surely welcome to.)

SNIP
This concerns me. This is the second time recently someone has said something
is NOT documented and it it turn out it is.

So my question is (no offense to anyone) are the web sites not "clear"
enough to
find information quickly or are people just being lax/lazy when they are
searching.


No offence.. but..

Not clear enough? Not sure. What I do think is that some pages do not go
into greater detail where they could and imo should.

I have presented this before as an example. If you install PG you're
supposed to create a user postgres but nobody writes about what shell that
user needs and even if that user is supposed to have a shell at all..
homedir etc?? dunno..
Another example? alright, data types. I found a very helpful list at the
website but I didn't see the limitations per type (maximum lenght like
MySQL says varchar max 255), or is it hidden somewhere on the PG website?.

While working on PG with PHP I noticed several warnings and notices. The PG
docs did mention all of them but not if they are good or bad so the hunting
continues via google.
FWIW, if you feed the message to the PG search it doesn't return anything.

It would certainly help if the docs would clarify if something is good or bad.

Some messages ago I saw someone writing about something like "this is the
manual not handholding". IMO there is a difference between a well written
and complete manual and handholding.
Having said that, I realise it's a lot of work to keep good documentation
into synch with development..

If find the search on Postgresql.org slow and not always very logical, but
I think that has been said before..

B.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

Nov 12 '05 #100

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.