On Saturday 18 June 2005 01:43, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On 6/18/05, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... But is it really the case that PostgreSQL developers are being
paid to code because PG is BSDed and proprietary forks are possible?
... There is no harm in being BSDed, but I question that
On Saturday 18 June 2005 01:36, Tom Lane wrote:
Dave Page dpage@vale-housing.co.uk writes:
Personally I prefer the first or last, as default implies to me that
it's a kindof general use database - which, as Tom points out it could
be, however I think it's better to encourage users to only
Tom Lane wrote:
What is important is that it is possible, and useful, to build Postgres
in a completely non-GPL environment. If that were not so then I think
we'd have some license issues. But the fact that building PG in a
GPL-ized environment creates a GPL-ized binary is not a problem from
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sat 6/18/2005 6:36 AM
To: Dave Page
Cc: Andreas Pflug; Christopher Kings-Lynne; Magnus Hagander; Josh Berkus;
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Utility database (Was: RE: Autovacuum in the backend)
I was gradually drifting toward this idea. Do we really need
the blessing of the postgresql core to make this happen? ISTM
we don't.
I think not, but I would perhaps make things easier ;-)
But what if we all just agreed that we would use a common
database called pg_addons, and that
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I was gradually drifting toward this idea. Do we really need
the blessing of the postgresql core to make this happen? ISTM
we don't.
I think not, but I would perhaps make things easier ;-)
But what if we all just agreed that we would use a common
database called
Hi all,
CREATE TYPE my_type AS (
a int,
b int,
c int,
d int,
e int
);
CREATE FUNCTION text_to_my_type(text)
RETURNS my_type
AS 'my_lib.so'
LANGUAGE 'C' IMMUTABLE STRICT;
CREATE CAST (text AS my_type) WITH FUNCTION text_to_my_type (text);
SELECT
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 09:18:34PM +1000, John Hansen wrote:
SELECT ('1:2:3:4:5'::text::my_type).*;
This results in the text_to_my_type(text) function being called no less
than 5 times. Once for each element.
Is this the desired behaviour, or a bug?
It's a known behavior with functions
Michael Fuhr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wrote:
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 9:56 PM
To: John Hansen
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Returning Composite Types from C functions
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 09:18:34PM +1000, John Hansen wrote:
SELECT
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Thus, sys_shared, def_share, user_commons are all sorts of names
that suggest that this is some sort of default/shared area.
I like the first. The second and third seem less obvious to me.
'default_shared' should definitely get the point across,
Peter Galbavy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, is there an effort to not require GNU make then ?
No, that's not relevant. GNU make is a tool, not part of the end
result.
A more interesting question is Autoconf, which we also depend on
as a build tool, and which does copy parts of itself into the
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 10:03:38PM +1000, John Hansen wrote:
There is a workaround tho, so should be fixable:
SELECT (a.b).* FROM (SELECT ('1:2:3:4:5'::text::my_type) AS b) AS a;
Or am I missing something?
I don't know enough about PostgreSQL internals so I'll have to defer
to the
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is a workaround tho, so should be fixable:
SELECT (a.b).* FROM (SELECT ('1:2:3:4:5'::text::my_type) AS b) AS a;
Or am I missing something?
Try it ;-)
regards, tom lane
---(end of
Yes, it worked for me,...
But my point is the workaround shouldn't be nescessary
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 11:36 PM
To: John Hansen
Cc: Michael Fuhr; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Returning
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SELECT (a.b).* FROM (SELECT ('1:2:3:4:5'::text::my_type) AS
b) AS a;
Or am I missing something?
Try it ;-)
Yes, it worked for me,...
It depends on your test case, but in many situations the planner will
flatten that into the same result as the
[ redirected back to hackers, since it seems this is far from a finished
discussion ]
Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What is the purpose of this database? A generalized, shared resource for tool
makers and add-on packages to store information in PostgreSQL, or a working
database
On Friday 17 June 2005 08:55, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Michael Glaesemann wrote:
On Jun 17, 2005, at 4:34 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
And for an app issuing
hundreds or thousands of queries per minute (or even second) a
warning could
effectively be a showstopper. It could require disabling
Robert Treat wrote:
I think it is worth restating in stronger language, the potential overhead of
raising notices or warning in such a large number of queries will be an
upgrading show stopper for some people. (To the extent that for some, the
release where this is a mandatory warning will
Michael Fuhr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe one of the developers can comment on why your example calls
the function only once and mine calls it multiple times per row,
even though they look similar.
Look at the EXPLAIN results --- one case gets flattened into a single
plan node and the other
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 08:43:01 +0100,
Peter Galbavy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
What is important is that it is possible, and useful, to build Postgres
in a completely non-GPL environment. If that were not so then I think
we'd have some license issues. But the fact that
I've moved this thread from pgsql-bugs to pgsql-hackers; here are
the original messages:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-06/msg00105.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-06/msg00107.php
As I mentioned in my followup to the bug report, a simple fix would
appear to be
Am Samstag, den 18.06.2005, 10:12 -0400 schrieb Tom Lane:
[ redirected back to hackers, since it seems this is far from a finished
discussion ]
...
pg_addons or pg_tools or something like that seems like a fine name *for
the purpose of a tools-only database* ... but that is only one of the
Am Samstag, den 18.06.2005, 08:41 -0600 schrieb Michael Fuhr:
I've moved this thread from pgsql-bugs to pgsql-hackers; here are
the original messages:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-06/msg00105.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-06/msg00107.php
As I
Now that Heikki's two-phase-commit patch is in, we have a bit of a
problem in the pg_locks view: prepared transactions can hold locks,
but you can't tell which prepared transaction is holding which lock.
They all show with pid 0. (This should probably come out as a NULL
instead of 0, but I didn't
While cleaning out old mail about two-phase commit, I noticed this
thought from Oliver:
Oliver Jowett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Probably the next question is, do we want a database-side timeout on
how long prepared txns can stay alive before being summarily rolled back?
That sounds very
Hello all
I want to register in an audit table the date and time of the
login/logout of a database user. I have been looking for some function
in the code but I didn't find something like that.
Can you give me some ideas to implement it?. I'm ready to program if
it is necessary. Thanks in
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 11:11:31AM -0500, Juan Pablo Espino wrote:
I want to register in an audit table the date and time of the
login/logout of a database user. I have been looking for some function
in the code but I didn't find something like that.
Are you interested in logging to a table
Thanks for the quick response. Yes I want to retrieve the
login/logout info, but I want to insert this info in a table that I
use as an audit table. Regards
Juan P. Espino
On 6/18/05, Michael Fuhr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 11:11:31AM -0500, Juan Pablo Espino wrote:
I
So, is there an effort to not require GNU make then ?
Neither using GNU make or gcc make to buld a binary make the resulting binary
bound by the GPL.
That is correct because all (well most) of the libraries used by GCC are
LGPL not GPL.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
Tom Lane wrote:
While cleaning out old mail about two-phase commit, I noticed this
thought from Oliver:
Oliver Jowett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Probably the next question is, do we want a database-side timeout on
how long prepared txns can stay alive before being summarily rolled back?
On Sat, 2005-06-18 at 11:46 -0500, Juan Pablo Espino wrote:
Thanks for the quick response. Yes I want to retrieve the
login/logout info, but I want to insert this info in a table that I
use as an audit table. Regards
I suggest putting together a short script to scan the logs periodically
and
Oh-ho, I see it:
(gdb) bt
#0 0x4489fba4 in memcpy () from /usr/lib/libc.so.34.2
#1 0x00326f9c in hash_search (hashp=0xa6e030, keyPtr=0xa5ff90,
action=HASH_ENTER, foundPtr=0x0) at dynahash.c:653
#2 0x003434f0 in pg_tzset (name=0xa5ff90 PST8PDT) at pgtz.c:1039
#3
Tom Lane wrote:
dynahash.c thinks it should always copy 255 bytes of key, since that's
what it was told the key size was ... but in this case the supplied
search key has been allocated very close to the end of the process's
memory, and there are not 255 bytes before the end of memory.
aaah -
Tom, folks,
I'm continuing to see a problem with checkpointing and clock-sweep.
Previously I thought that it was just the long checkpoint intervals on the
standard DBT2 test, but things get worse when you checkpoint more frequently:
60 minute checkpoint:
Stefan Kaltenbrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
dynahash.c thinks it should always copy 255 bytes of key, since that's
what it was told the key size was ... but in this case the supplied
search key has been allocated very close to the end of the process's
memory, and there are
Hi, thanks for the response.
On 6/18/05, Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2005-06-18 at 11:46 -0500, Juan Pablo Espino wrote:
Thanks for the quick response. Yes I want to retrieve the
login/logout info, but I want to insert this info in a table that I
use as an audit table.
Dave Page dpage@vale-housing.co.uk writes:
Keeping people out of template1 is my major concern, however it seemed like
a good way to kill 2 birds with one stone and solve both problems at once.
FWIW here's a me too on keeping people out of template1 by default. I've
more than once
In a moment of sheer brain fade I wrote:
Log Message:
---
Add a time-of-preparation column to the pg_prepared_xacts view, per an
old suggestion by Oliver Jowett. Also, add a transaction column to the
pg_locks view to show the xid of each transaction holding or awaiting
locks; this
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
So this is obviously a major performance problem. It could be fixed by
turning off checkpointing completely, but I don't think that's really
feasable. Any clue on why clock-sweep should be so slammed by checkpoints?
Hm, notice that the processor
[from 2pc post mortem thread on -patches]
Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
Looks suspicious, doesn't it. How long since you last tested on that
machine?
*argl* - it's not 2PC ...
the machine had some issues a week ago or so - but it looks like the
problem occured first here:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
comments welcome (buildfarm exists to help people on this list - if you
want something speak up).
There are a number of buildfarm machines that don't seem to have *ever*
posted a successful run. In some cases this represents a genuine
portability issue
Tom Lane wrote:
Stefan Kaltenbrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OpenBSD has some very useful features for configuration of malloc() -
and on this particular box it has:
G ``Guard''. Enable guard pages and chunk randomization. Each
page size or larger
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Can you please look at
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=malloc.confapropos=0sektion=0manpath=OpenBSD+Currentarch=i386format=html
and tell us which ones you would like turned on? Stefan suggests A F and
G might be useful.
Not A please
Tom Lane wrote:
[ redirected back to hackers, since it seems this is far from a finished
discussion ]
Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What is the purpose of this database? A generalized, shared resource for tool
makers and add-on packages to store information in PostgreSQL, or a
Juan Pablo Espino wrote:
I want to register in an audit table the date and time of the
login/logout of a database user. I have been looking for some function
in the code but I didn't find something like that.
This is the kind of functionality I'd expect to go to the pg_system (or
however it
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
comments welcome (buildfarm exists to help people on this list - if you
want something speak up).
There are a number of buildfarm machines that don't seem to have *ever*
posted a successful run. In some cases this represents
46 matches
Mail list logo
