Re: Talk schedule for next six months (RC1)

Hello!

Here's the talks for the next six months:

* 2/21/08 - Extreme Database Makeover: RT (Mark, Jeff, David)
* 3/20/08 - Managing internet services: using the right tool for the
job (Ed Sawicki)
* 4/17/08 - Ruby on Rails Essentials for PostgreSQL Enthusiasts (David)
* 6/19/08 - The Relational Model (Jeff)
* 5/15/08 - Pythoneering with PostgreSQL (Jason)
* 7/17/07 - Pre OSCON/PgDay meeting - TBD
* 7/20/08 - PDXPUG PgDay at the Convention Center

--

Are we still good for the Extreme Database Makeover? I've got some
time Saturday morning (or possibly Sunday) if anyone wants to get
together and plan. I'll be at Cubespace on Saturday from ~9a-2p.

-selena

--
Selena Deckelmann
PDXPUG - Portland PostgreSQL Users Group
http://pugs.postgresql.org/pdx
http://www.chesnok.com/daily

On Jan 29, 2008 9:50 PM, Selena Deckelmann <selenamarie(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
> * 2/21/08 - Extreme Database Makeover: RT (Mark, Jeff, David)
>
> --
>
> Are we still good for the Extreme Database Makeover? I've got some
> time Saturday morning (or possibly Sunday) if anyone wants to get
> together and plan. I'll be at Cubespace on Saturday from ~9a-2p.
>

I'm still good for it. I must say I'm the not familiar with RT though, so
someone who is better be there too. ;) Otherwise someone else better have a
backup makeover contestant.

Regards,
Mark

On Jan 29, 2008, at 21:57, Mark Wong wrote:

> I'm still good for it. I must say I'm the not familiar with RT
> though, so someone who is better be there too. ;) Otherwise someone
> else better have a backup makeover contestant.

I've used it a lot, but have avoided getting to know the database
schema. Jeff, you've figured it out though, yeah?

Best,

David

On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 20:26 -0800, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2008, at 21:57, Mark Wong wrote:
>
> > I'm still good for it. I must say I'm the not familiar with RT
> > though, so someone who is better be there too. ;) Otherwise someone
> > else better have a backup makeover contestant.
>
> I've used it a lot, but have avoided getting to know the database
> schema. Jeff, you've figured it out though, yeah?

Well, to some degree I have. It's pretty difficult to follow, because
there are many ID fields, and it doesn't make a lot of sense. It's kind
of like using void pointers for everything.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

On Feb 4, 2008 9:09 AM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 20:26 -0800, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> > On Jan 29, 2008, at 21:57, Mark Wong wrote:
> >
> > > I'm still good for it. I must say I'm the not familiar with RT
> > > though, so someone who is better be there too. ;) Otherwise someone
> > > else better have a backup makeover contestant.
> >
> > I've used it a lot, but have avoided getting to know the database
> > schema. Jeff, you've figured it out though, yeah?
>
> Well, to some degree I have. It's pretty difficult to follow, because
> there are many ID fields, and it doesn't make a lot of sense. It's kind
> of like using void pointers for everything.

What if we printed out the schema (I guess there's a .dot file in the
docs tree), and I brought a big roll of paper to sketch the new schema
on and we worked on it that way?

With computerized-assist, of course.

-selena

--
Selena Deckelmann
PDXPUG - Portland PostgreSQL Users Group
http://pugs.postgresql.org/pdx
http://www.chesnok.com/daily

On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 09:42 -0800, Selena Deckelmann wrote:
> > Well, to some degree I have. It's pretty difficult to follow, because
> > there are many ID fields, and it doesn't make a lot of sense. It's kind
> > of like using void pointers for everything.
>
> What if we printed out the schema (I guess there's a .dot file in the
> docs tree), and I brought a big roll of paper to sketch the new schema
> on and we worked on it that way?

I think it would be helpful.

Honestly, I think we're just going to scratch the surface. I think it
will be a good exercise though.

Regards,
Jeff Davis