On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 12:57:18PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 08:34:24PM -0500, Noah Misch wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:28:58PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
BEGIN;
TRUNCATE vistest;
SAVEPOINT s1;
COPY vistest FROM stdin CSV FREEZE;
ERROR:
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 09:51:13AM -0500, Noah Misch wrote:
OK, so, should we change the error message:
cannot perform FREEZE because of transaction activity after table
creation or truncation
to
cannot perform FREEZE because the table was not created or
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
Well, so you are saying that there really isn't any use-visible logic
for those messages to be different,
No, and in fact the whole block of code is badly written because it
conflates two unrelated tests. I guess somebody was trying to save
a couple of
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 12:09:05PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
Well, so you are saying that there really isn't any use-visible logic
for those messages to be different,
No, and in fact the whole block of code is badly written because it
conflates two
On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 10:12:54AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 09:51:13AM -0500, Noah Misch wrote:
Let's touch on the exception in passing by using the phrase last
truncated,
giving this wording for both the second and the third COPY FREEZE error
sites:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 08:34:24PM -0500, Noah Misch wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:28:58PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:08:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
! ereport(ERROR,
!
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:28:58PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:08:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
! ereport(ERROR,
!
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:28:58PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:08:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
! ereport(ERROR,
!
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-23 14:02:46 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
the freezing does not happen:
FWIW, and I won't annoy anyone further after this email, now that its
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-23 14:02:46 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
the freezing does not happen:
FWIW, and I won't annoy
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:30:40AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-23 14:02:46 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
FWIW, and I won't annoy anyone further after this email, now that its
deterministic, I still think that this should be an ERROR not a WARNING.
As the FREEZE is just an optimization, I thought
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
FWIW, and I won't annoy anyone further after this email, now that its
deterministic, I still think that this should be an
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
FWIW, and I won't annoy anyone further after this email, now that its
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
FWIW, and I won't annoy anyone further after this
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:55:12AM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
OK, updated patch attached that throws an error with a more specific
message.
*
* As noted above rd_newRelfilenodeSubid is not set in all cases
* where we can apply the optimization, so in those rare cases
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:42 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:48:37AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
FWIW, and I won't annoy anyone further after
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:30:58PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
OK, updated patch attached that throws an error with a more specific
message.
*
* As noted above rd_newRelfilenodeSubid is not set in all cases
*
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
! ereport(ERROR,
!
(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE,
! errmsg(cannot perform FREEZE
because of previous table activity in the
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:08:56PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
! ereport(ERROR,
!
(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE,
! errmsg(cannot
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 02:02:46PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
the freezing does not happen:
Requests copying the data with rows already frozen, just as they
would be after running the commandVACUUM FREEZE/
On 1/24/13 5:09 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 02:02:46PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
the freezing does not happen:
As no one wanted to write this patch, I have developed the attached
version.
I think it
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 05:30:22PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 1/24/13 5:09 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 02:02:46PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
the freezing does not happen:
As no one wanted
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
Didn't we want to issue the user some kind of feedback?
As no one wanted to write this patch, I have developed the attached
version.
Please note the comment directly above where you patched.
The proposed message doesn't seem to me to be following the
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 06:55:17PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
Didn't we want to issue the user some kind of feedback?
As no one wanted to write this patch, I have developed the attached
version.
Please note the comment directly above where you
On 2013-01-23 14:02:46 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
the freezing does not happen:
FWIW, and I won't annoy anyone further after this email, now that its
deterministic, I still think that this should be an ERROR not a WARNING.
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
the freezing does not happen:
Requests copying the data with rows already frozen, just as they
would be after running the commandVACUUM FREEZE/ command.
This is intended as a performance option for initial
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
the freezing does not happen:
Requests copying the data with rows already frozen, just as they
would be after running the commandVACUUM
29 matches
Mail list logo
