Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 393402E0040 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:43:19 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25430-09 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:43:08 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from rn-out-0910.google.com (rn-out-0910.google.com [64.233.170.189]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 957FD2E002D for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:43:09 -0300 (ADT) Received: by rn-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id e11so998088rng.17 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2008 09:43:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.151.85.20 with SMTP id n20mr1683651ybl.79.1206117788925; Fri, 21 Mar 2008 09:43:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.96.5 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Mar 2008 09:43:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <937d27e10803210943m35421b15vbc06639f09ab5940@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:43:08 +0000 From: "Dave Page" To: "Alvaro Herrera" Subject: Re: Please remove change_the_name email list Cc: "Marc G. Fournier" , "Bruce Momjian" , "PostgreSQL www" In-Reply-To: <937d27e10803210939h23bb971dx8361eff1007fc1e6@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200803182340.m2INecm07382@momjian.us> <20080321163201.GB7717@alvh.no-ip.org> <937d27e10803210939h23bb971dx8361eff1007fc1e6@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200803/456 X-Sequence-Number: 14575 On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Dave Page wrote: > On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > > > Gone, sorry for the delay, thought I had already removed it ... > > > > Ok, I removed change_the_name from the archives too, but a new thing > > called ,change_the_name.0 appeared. > > > > http://archives.postgresql.org/,change_the_name.0/ > > > > I assume this is just something weird arising from the way majordomo > > deletes lists. (The archive appears empty -- I think this is just a bug > > in the archiver processes, triggered by the initial , or the .0 > > extension. I'm not gonna waste time fixing it.) > > I wonder if you deleted it whilst rsync was hitting it? Hmm, no - its on the source server too. I've added it to the excludes list so you can delete it from the archives server. If it's safe to do so, Marc can remove it from the list server if he feels that way inclined. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK Ltd: http://www.enterprisedb.com PostgreSQL UK 2008 Conference: http://www.postgresql.org.uk