Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Would there be objections to me expanding on the syslog
sections in the docs?
No, but ...
# Log all 'postgres' events to /var/log/pgsql
!postgres
*.* /var/log/pgsql
# Nothing after this line
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
*.* /var/log/pgsql
With linux is better do:
*.* -/var/log/pgsql
the - instruct syslog to not flush on the disk each line received.
BTW in general your instructions are platform dependend
Andrew Dunstan writes:
I have been wondering if moving to XML for config files might be a good
idea - and if there are going to be GUIs that write them that gives some
more impetus to the idea.
What I would like to see done is keeping the GUC data, that is, the name,
the properties, and the
Tom Lane writes:
Gimme a break, guys. There *was* discussion, eg here,
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2003-06/msg01092.php
and the patch was posted for review, see this thread:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-06/msg00420.php
I confused this with the private
--On Tuesday, September 30, 2003 13:44:04 +0800 Christopher Kings-Lynne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Guys,
[snip]
* Mention something about system log rotator? Or is that too
platform-specific?
newsyslog (FreeBSD base, http://www.courtesan.com/ (Portable) )
is useful. newsyslog may be in the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Seun Osewa) wrote:
COMMIT; -- COMMIT SYNC; (guarantees atomic, consistent, durable
write)
COMMIT NOSYNC; -- (sacrifice durability of non-critical transaction
for overall speed). So, the question is what people, especially those
who have done DBMS work, think about this!
I
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
I think the INSTALL file needs to be updated. Its list of configure
options doesn't seem to mention --enable-thread-safety. I don't know
what else...
That is done by Peter as part of updating HISTORY once we update SGML.
I would rebuild it right now but the
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
I have been wondering if moving to XML for config files might be a good
idea - and if there are going to be GUIs that write them that gives some
more impetus to the idea.
What I would like to see done is keeping the GUC data, that is, the
I will be in Washington DC for the next two days. I will be reading my
email, but not as frequently.
--
Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Seun Osewa) wrote:
So I want to ask, what is databases have a 'COMMIT NOSYNC;' option?
Then we can really improve transaction-per-second performance for a
database that has lots of non-critical transactions while not
jeopardising the durability
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) would write:
Since there's no performance difference at pg_dump time, I can't see any
advantage to freezing your decision then.
This parallels the common suggestion of throwing an ANALYZE in at the
bottom of a pg_dump script.
Stephan Szabo wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Stephan Szabo wrote:
If we go that direction, why don't we just make a GUC variable to
disable constraint checking. Is that what this will do, or is it more
limited. I know it breaks referential integrity, but we
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How many folks are going to remember to do this? Why make it hard for
them? Someone is going to forget too easily. Why is this restore
taking so long? Oh, I forgot that switch. Or they put it in a login
file and forget it is
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I assume it would be only setable by the super-user.
That might be a good restriction too (on top of my speculation about not
allowing it in postgresql.conf). Only allow it to be SET per-session,
We don't have a way to make something
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Fact is, folks are doing it anyway by modifying pg_class. I know one
guy who did it in a transaction so he was the only one to see the
triggers disabled! The PostgreSQL cookbook page has an example too.
People are always asking how to do this. Why not just make it setable
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 08:08:01PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:41:48PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
Today's cvs doesn't compile. I think it is due to
Forgot one question. WHich platform do you use?
NetBSD - to quote cvs blame:
1.42 (eeh 30-Dec-99): typedef
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Since there's no performance difference at pg_dump time, I can't see any
advantage to freezing your decision then.
I understand, and if everyone used pg_restore, then adding a flag to
pg_restore to do this would make sense. However,
I get no response on developer.postgresql.org
cheers
andrew
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christopher Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Seun Osewa) wrote:
So I want to ask, what is databases have a 'COMMIT NOSYNC;' option?
Another possibility in this would be to have not one, but TWO
backends.
One database, on one port, is
Hello,
With the recent stint of pg_upgrade statements and the impending
release of 7.4 what
do people think about having a dedicated maintenance team for 7.3? 7.3
is a pretty
solid release and I think people will be hard pressed to upgrade to 7.4.
Of course
a lot of people will, but I have
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Jan Wieck wrote:
Stephan Szabo wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
I see where Stephan is coming from, but in my mind disabling consistency
checks ought to be a feature reserved to the DBA (ie superuser), who
presumably has some clue about the tradeoffs
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
That might be a good restriction too (on top of my speculation about not
allowing it in postgresql.conf). Only allow it to be SET per-session,
We don't have a way to make something unsetable in postgresql.conf right
now, do we?
Yeah,
Stephan Szabo wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Jan Wieck wrote:
Stephan Szabo wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
I see where Stephan is coming from, but in my mind disabling consistency
checks ought to be a feature reserved to the DBA (ie superuser), who
presumably has some clue about
Dave Page wrote:
Hi,
In src/backend/parser/parse.h there is a copyright that reads as below.
Note the bottom section that says that the GPL is only excepted for
files generated by Bison *from* this file. This implies to me that this
file is GPL'd, and therefore shouldn't be in the tarball (or
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Hmm, that is a good point. It would be cleaner to throw a can't
serialize failure than have the RI triggers run under a different
snapshot. I am not sure if we can implement that behavior easily,
though. Can you
On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 01:44, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
* Mention that you might want to turn log_pid and log_timestamp off
since syslog logs them anyway
i think that debug_pretty_print is somewhat pointless too, as syslog
tends to wrap lines automagically... could be others.
* Mention
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
I see where Stephan is coming from, but in my mind disabling consistency
checks ought to be a feature reserved to the DBA (ie superuser), who
presumably has some clue about the tradeoffs involved. I don't think
ordinary users should be able to do it. If
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As a side note, in the partial implementation I'd already done, I noticed
a potential problem if the person doing the alter table didn't have read
permissions on the pktable. I'd written it to bail and do the slow check
in that case (well actually in
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As a side note, in the partial implementation I'd already done, I noticed
a potential problem if the person doing the alter table didn't have read
permissions on the pktable. I'd written it to bail and do the
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Hmm, that is a good point. It would be cleaner to throw a can't
serialize failure than have the RI triggers run under a different
snapshot. I am not sure if we can
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[ some fair points ]
I've asked the Red Hat folks who did the detail design to respond to
this. I'm not sure if they had specific use-cases in mind for those
behaviors, or were just trying to make the feature useful for manual
invocation. I would
I said:
If we want to preserve this behavior for IF et al, I don't think there
is any practical way to apply SQL-level type coercion as I had wanted.
We could instead make the code act like it's assigning to a plpgsql
boolean variable --- but it will apply plpgsql's textual conversion
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stephan Szabo wrote:
The problem I have with a super-user only solution is that it doesn't
solve the problem for restores in general.
OK. Let's explore that. What does ownership mean?
It does not normally mean the ability to bypass consistency
Stephan Szabo wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
I see where Stephan is coming from, but in my mind disabling consistency
checks ought to be a feature reserved to the DBA (ie superuser), who
presumably has some clue about the tradeoffs involved. I don't think
ordinary users should be
Bruce Momjian kirjutas T, 30.09.2003 kell 02:16:
Tom Lane wrote:
! Faster regular expression code
We could tout more functionality too, since the new regex package
has a lot of advanced stuff that wasn't there before.
Added more powerful
This wording covers nicely
It seems some junior electrician in Panama pulled the wrong circuit
breaker ... and then the mail.postgresql.org server spent an
unreasonable number of hours fsck'ing. (Why is Marc a FreeBSD fan
anyway? Don't ask me, I work for Red Hat.) Anyhow, due to the loss
of project communications for
Just use FreeBSD 5 - background fsck.
Chris
Tom Lane wrote:
It seems some junior electrician in Panama pulled the wrong circuit
breaker ... and then the mail.postgresql.org server spent an
unreasonable number of hours fsck'ing. (Why is Marc a FreeBSD fan
anyway? Don't ask me, I work for Red
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just use FreeBSD 5 - background fsck.
Apparently Marc doesn't think FreeBSD 5 is stable enough to use yet.
(Having lit the touchpaper, I shall now retire to a safe distance ;-))
regards, tom lane
Apparently Marc doesn't think FreeBSD 5 is stable enough to use yet.
(Having lit the touchpaper, I shall now retire to a safe distance ;-))
Well now I have to get into this ;). I would like to offer some lighter
fluid
and state that this wouldn't have been a problem if we were using
RH-9
Hi,
In src/backend/parser/parse.h there is a copyright that reads as below.
Note the bottom section that says that the GPL is only excepted for
files generated by Bison *from* this file. This implies to me that this
file is GPL'd, and therefore shouldn't be in the tarball (or pgAdmin
where
Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In src/backend/parser/parse.h there is a copyright that reads as below.
Note the bottom section that says that the GPL is only excepted for
files generated by Bison *from* this file. This implies to me that this
file is GPL'd,
No. The text in question is
41 matches
Mail list logo
