Re: [HACKERS] xmlconcat as variadic function

2008-11-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane wrote: Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 19:34 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: My point is it's a user-visible change --- maybe a subtle one, but still a change that in principle could break some app somewhere --- and no good reason has been put forward for making

Re: [HACKERS] Block-level CRC checks

2008-11-18 Thread Gregory Stark
Paul Schlie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Gregory Stark wrote: However you still have a problem that someone could come along and set the hint bit between calculating the CRC and actually calling write. The double-buffering will solve that. Or simply require that

Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)

2008-11-18 Thread KaiGai Kohei
The length of HeapTupleData is determined during heap_form_tuple(), and it is unchanged later. Thus, we have to interpose here, as object identifier doing. Currently yes. Is there a reason not to? Do we rely on the tuple length staying same after those operations? Just considering multiple

[HACKERS] support extending indexscan,heapscan and customizing plan

2008-11-18 Thread zhuxiang
Hi, we currently want to employ PG and Gin Index for light-weight full text search engine. however, we encounter a problem that Gin Index is not quick enough for relevence, because it must scan all heaptuples which statisfy the condition, then invoke ts_rank to compute the rank of tuple.

Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)

2008-11-18 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 16:51 +0900, KaiGai Kohei wrote: Anyway, I've started to work with the prior approach. Sounds good. Now we have less than two weeks remained in the CommitFest:Nov, so we have no time to be spent uselessly. SUSE? The u might be a large-letter. Sorry, I wasn't

Re: [HACKERS] Transactions and temp tables

2008-11-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Emmanuel Cecchet wrote: Emmanuel Cecchet wrote: As I have not found yet an elegant solution to deal with the DROP CASCADE issue, here is a simpler patch that handles temp tables that are dropped at commit time. This is a good first step and we will try to elaborate further to support ON

Re: [HACKERS] Updated posix fadvise patch v19

2008-11-18 Thread Gregory Stark
Robert Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - However, having said that, it looks as if there is still a bit of experimentation going on in terms of what you actually want the patch to do. There are a couple of things that say FIXME or XXX, and at least one diff hunk that adds code surrounded by

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] libpq does not manage SSL callbacks properly when other libraries are involved.

2008-11-18 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote: Russell Smith wrote: Will this be back patched when it's committed? This is not something we would typically backpatch because of the danger of introducing some unexpected change in libpq. We can provide a patch to anyone who needs it, or if the community wants it

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] db_user_namespace, md5 and changing passwords

2008-11-18 Thread Magnus Hagander
Bruce Momjian wrote: Magnus Hagander wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am unsure of exactly where this thing hacks into the authentication stream, but is it really only MD5 that fails? The problem with md5 is that the username is part of the encryption salt

Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)

2008-11-18 Thread KaiGai Kohei
Simon Riggs wrote: On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 16:51 +0900, KaiGai Kohei wrote: Anyway, I've started to work with the prior approach. Sounds good. The matters currently I faces: * In the approach.1 (add tdhassecurity to TupleDesc) An explosion of the number of points to be patched. :( * In the

Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)

2008-11-18 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 21:40 +0900, KaiGai Kohei wrote: A concern is why you suggested this feature at the last half of the November. :( I gave you my feedback as soon as I read the Wiki article. Even then I didn't understand some aspects of the patch design, which was unfortunate. But these

[HACKERS] Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)

2008-11-18 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Alvaro Herrera napsal(a): Zdenek Kotala wrote: Alvaro Herrera napsal(a): Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Hmm, you're right. I think it can be made to work by storing the *end* offset of each chunk. To find the chunk containing offset X, search for the first chunk with end_offset X. FWIW I'm

Re: [HACKERS] Solaris ident authentication using unix domain sockets

2008-11-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Garick Hamlin wrote: I have a patch that I have been using to support postgresql's notion of ident authentication when using unix domain sockets on Solaris. This patch basically just adds support for using getupeercred() on Solaris so unix sockets and ident auth works just like it

[HACKERS] Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)

2008-11-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Zdenek Kotala wrote: Just a very quick look on your patch. See my comments: ... 2) PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION should be bump The patch doesn't change the page layout AFAICS. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

[HACKERS] Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)

2008-11-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Zdenek Kotala wrote: Heikki Linnakangas napsal(a): Zdenek Kotala wrote: Just a very quick look on your patch. See my comments: ... 2) PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION should be bump The patch doesn't change the page layout AFAICS. It is good question what is and what is not page layout. I think

Re: [HACKERS] TABLE command

2008-11-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane wrote: Hmm. Given the current infrastructure for \h, the only way to do that would be to make a separate ref page for WITH, which feels like the wrong thing. And the objection I have to TABLE is not the code but the apparent need to give it its own ref page (as we already did for

Re: [HACKERS] Updated posix fadvise patch v19

2008-11-18 Thread Robert Haas
For the FIXMEs I don't have any problem leaving them in place. They're warnings to future coders working in the same area of what they may have to do to make the code more general. That's fine with me. I think it's fine to document possibilities for future development, but sometimes it's hard

[HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello I am thinking about allowing 2D array from multicolumn subselect (all columns have to share same type, ofcourse). Is there some real limit, why this functionality is disallowed? Regards Pavel Stehule -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to

[HACKERS] Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)

2008-11-18 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Heikki Linnakangas napsal(a): Zdenek Kotala wrote: Heikki Linnakangas napsal(a): Zdenek Kotala wrote: Just a very quick look on your patch. See my comments: ... 2) PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION should be bump The patch doesn't change the page layout AFAICS. It is good question what is and

Re: [HACKERS] Updated posix fadvise patch v19

2008-11-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Gregory Stark wrote: The XXX is something that probably needs to be fixed but it's just a question of what header file to put a declaration in. I couldn't find a good choice but perhaps someone else has an idea? For the FIXMEs I don't have any problem leaving them in place. They're warnings to

Re: [HACKERS] Updated posix fadvise patch v19

2008-11-18 Thread Gregory Stark
Robert Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Looking forward to v20. Here you go! I addressed all the nitpicks and added comments. I also stripped out the sequential i/o posix_fadvises. I'm kind of sad to see them go since it did seem like a nice way to give more info to the OS even if no OSes today

[HACKERS] Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)

2008-11-18 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Heikki Linnakangas napsal(a): Zdenek Kotala wrote: Heikki Linnakangas napsal(a): Zdenek Kotala wrote: Just a very quick look on your patch. See my comments: ... 2) PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION should be bump The patch doesn't change the page layout AFAICS. It is good question what is and

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello I am thinking about allowing 2D array from multicolumn subselect (all columns have to share same type, ofcourse). Is there some real limit, why this functionality is disallowed? Seems like you could just write

Re: [HACKERS] TABLE command

2008-11-18 Thread Tom Lane
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 04:01:58PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I was looking into that and I figured using the \G expression in Perl REs would be useful for this (to find multiple refnames). But this was introduced in Perl 5.000, and we claim to

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread David Fetter
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:29:53AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello I am thinking about allowing 2D array from multicolumn subselect (all columns have to share same type, ofcourse). Is there some real limit, why

Re: [HACKERS] Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)

2008-11-18 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Zdenek Kotala wrote: If I'm thinking more, it is not probably CATALOG_VERSION_NO as well. Because toast table is created on demand. It is not in BKI. It's not catversion in the sense that there's no catalog change, but it certainly requires a

Re: [HACKERS] Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)

2008-11-18 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Zdenek Kotala wrote: If I'm thinking more, it is not probably CATALOG_VERSION_NO as well. Because toast table is created on demand. It is not in BKI. It's not catversion in the sense that there's no catalog change, but it certainly requires a catversion bump due to internal changes.

Re: [HACKERS] TABLE command

2008-11-18 Thread David Fetter
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 04:01:58PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Hmm. Given the current infrastructure for \h, the only way to do that would be to make a separate ref page for WITH, which feels like the wrong thing. And the objection I have to TABLE is not the code but the

Re: [HACKERS] TABLE command

2008-11-18 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 10:36 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 04:01:58PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I was looking into that and I figured using the \G expression in Perl REs would be useful for this (to find multiple refnames). But

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Sam Mason
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 07:37:44AM -0800, David Fetter wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:29:53AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: Seems like you could just write SELECT ARRAY[col1, col2, col3] instead of SELECT col1, col2, col3. If I understand this right, Pavel is thinking that

Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)

2008-11-18 Thread Tom Lane
KaiGai Kohei [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'll try your approash in first, as follows: This seems a vast amount of uglification to avoid adding an argument to CreateTemplateTupleDesc. We do that kind of thing all the time --- it is a simple and reliable change to make. When designing a patch, you

Re: [HACKERS] Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)

2008-11-18 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Alvaro Herrera napsal(a): Zdenek Kotala wrote: If I'm thinking more, it is not probably CATALOG_VERSION_NO as well. Because toast table is created on demand. It is not in BKI. It's not catversion in the sense that there's no catalog change, but it certainly requires a catversion bump due to

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Pavel Stehule
2008/11/18 David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:29:53AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello I am thinking about allowing 2D array from multicolumn subselect (all columns have to share same type,

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Pavel Stehule
2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 07:37:44AM -0800, David Fetter wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:29:53AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: Seems like you could just write SELECT ARRAY[col1, col2, col3] instead of SELECT col1, col2, col3. If I understand this right,

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] libpq does not manage SSL callbacks properly when other libraries are involved.

2008-11-18 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bruce Momjian wrote: This is not something we would typically backpatch because of the danger of introducing some unexpected change in libpq. We can provide a patch to anyone who needs it, or if the community wants it backpatched I can certainly do

Re: [HACKERS] Block-level CRC checks

2008-11-18 Thread Paul Schlie
Gregory Stark wrote: Paul Schlie writes: Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Gregory Stark wrote: However you still have a problem that someone could come along and set the hint bit between calculating the CRC and actually calling write. The double-buffering will solve that. Or simply require

Re: [HACKERS] Updated posix fadvise patch v19

2008-11-18 Thread Gregory Stark
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There are probably no rigid rules on this, but my interpretation of these tags is usually this: XXX -- not sure if this is the best way to do this, needs ideas TODO -- specific ideas for improvement FIXME -- broken, must be fixed to be usable I

Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)

2008-11-18 Thread KaiGai Kohei
Tom Lane wrote: KaiGai Kohei [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'll try your approash in first, as follows: This seems a vast amount of uglification to avoid adding an argument to CreateTemplateTupleDesc. We do that kind of thing all the time --- it is a simple and reliable change to make. When

[HACKERS] Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)

2008-11-18 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Heikki Linnakangas napsal(a): Zdenek Kotala wrote: Just a very quick look on your patch. See my comments: ... 2) PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION should be bump The patch doesn't change the page layout AFAICS. It is good question what is and what is not page layout. I think that toast

Re: [HACKERS] Updated posix fadvise patch v19

2008-11-18 Thread Robert Haas
One thing which is bothering me is that the guc assign hook is throwing an error if you set effective_io_concurrency when your system's posix_fadvise is deemed inadequate (either unavailable or from an old version of glibc). I'm starting to think it shouldn't throw an error, just not set the

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Sam Mason
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 05:20:27PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I've used this syntax before and got a surprising message back. I'd expect to be able to do the following: ARRAY((SELECT col1, col2 FROM (VALUES ('a',1), ('b',2)) x(col1,col2)));

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Sam Mason
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 05:19:12PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: there are some not necessary limits, because we should some operations: postgres=# select array(select * from foo); ERROR: subquery must return only one column LINE 1: select array(select * from foo); The current limitation

Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)

2008-11-18 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 01:42 +0900, KaiGai Kohei wrote: Simon, I'm sorry, if my expression felt you uncomfortable. No worries at all. I know exactly how you feel. Good Luck. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Block-level CRC checks

2008-11-18 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Aidan Van Dyk wrote: And I don't think anyone's going to have a good answer either way unless we get real numbers. But I don't know of any way to get at these numbers right now. 1) How many writes happen on buffer pages that are hint dirty but not really dirty? 2) How much IO

Re: [HACKERS] Block-level CRC checks

2008-11-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Right now we flip hint bits without taking any kind of lock on the page. That's not quite true. You need to hold a shared lock on heap page to examine the visibility of a tuple, and that's when the hint bits are set. So we always hold at least a shared lock on the page

Re: [HACKERS] Block-level CRC checks

2008-11-18 Thread Aidan Van Dyk
* Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081118 12:25]: I don't think it's a matter of hoy many writes or how much IO. The question is locks. Right now we flip hint bits without taking any kind of lock on the page. If we're going to WAL-log each hint bit change, then we will need to lock the

Re: [HACKERS] Block-level CRC checks

2008-11-18 Thread Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Alvaro Herrera wrote: Right now we flip hint bits without taking any kind of lock on the page. That's not quite true. You need to hold a shared lock on heap page to examine the visibility of a tuple, and that's when the hint bits are set. So we

Re: [HACKERS] Simple postgresql.conf wizard

2008-11-18 Thread Josh Berkus
Greg, To give you an idea how overdiscussed this general topic is, I just sent a message to Josh suggesting we might put database size into tiers and set some parameters based on that. Guess what? That was his idea the last time around, I subconsciously regurgitated it:

Re: [HACKERS] Block-level CRC checks

2008-11-18 Thread Tom Lane
Aidan Van Dyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But why can't you wal-log the hint bits from the buffered page. then your consitent. At least as consistent as the original write was. So you're CRC ends up being: Buffer the page Calculate CRC on the buffered page WAL (in bulk) the hint

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Pavel Stehule
2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 05:19:12PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: there are some not necessary limits, because we should some operations: postgres=# select array(select * from foo); ERROR: subquery must return only one column LINE 1: select array(select

Re: [HACKERS] On-list behavior WAS: Simple postgresql.conf wizard

2008-11-18 Thread Josh Berkus
Simon, Stark, others: It seems a strange moderation policy that allows bald insults from some people but not others. And stranger still that you think you should leap to the defence of any person making them. If the comments were meant so lightly, it would seem easy to withdraw them also, with

[HACKERS] Re: Replace plain-memory ordered array by binary tree in ts_stat() function.

2008-11-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
The patch mentioned in the subject leaves this compiler warning: tsvector_op.c: In function ‘insertStatEntry’: tsvector_op.c:815: warning: ‘res’ may be used uninitialized in this function I took a quick look but it is not immediately obvious whether the compiler might actually have a point

Re: [HACKERS] Block-level CRC checks

2008-11-18 Thread Aidan Van Dyk
* Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081118 12:43]: Aidan Van Dyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But why can't you wal-log the hint bits from the buffered page. then your consitent. At least as consistent as the original write was. So you're CRC ends up being: Buffer the page Calculate

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Pavel Stehule
2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 05:20:27PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I've used this syntax before and got a surprising message back. I'd expect to be able to do the following: ARRAY((SELECT col1, col2 FROM

Re: [HACKERS] Block-level CRC checks

2008-11-18 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 12:54 -0500, Aidan Van Dyk wrote: * Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081118 12:43]: Aidan Van Dyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The trouble here is to avoid repeated WAL-logging of the same hint bits. (Alvaro's patch tried to do that by depending on another hint bit in the

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Tom Lane
Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've used this syntax before and got a surprising message back. I'd expect to be able to do the following: ARRAY((SELECT col1, col2 FROM (VALUES ('a',1), ('b',2)) x(col1,col2))); and get the following back {(a,1),(b,2)}. So I think I'm with David. I

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Pavel Stehule
2008/11/18 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've used this syntax before and got a surprising message back. I'd expect to be able to do the following: and get the following back {(a,1),(b,2)}. So I think I'm with David. I concur --- if we support something

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Sam Mason
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 06:55:26PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 05:20:27PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I've used this syntax before and got a surprising message back. I'd expect to be

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Pavel Stehule
2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 06:55:26PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 05:20:27PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I've used this syntax before and got a

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Sam Mason
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 06:22:21PM +, Sam Mason wrote: I've always been taught to design things so that the that the basic semantics should be as simple as possible which maintaining useful this should of course be while! ^ performance. CREATE FUNCTION

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Tom Lane
Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: there are clean rules. you do array from input - when input is 1D array, then result is 2D array, when input is record, then result is 1D array of record. Where should be problem? That seems all right, but it's *not* what you first proposed, and what you

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Pavel Stehule
2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 06:22:21PM +, Sam Mason wrote: I've always been taught to design things so that the that the basic semantics should be as simple as possible which maintaining useful this should of course be while! ^

Re: [HACKERS] is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?

2008-11-18 Thread Sam Mason
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 07:32:33PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2008/11/18 Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: this is what I think you want to do in the context of aggregates: CREATE FUNCTION array_concat_(ANYARRAY,ANYARRAY) RETURNS ANYARRAY AS $$ SELECT array_cat($1,ARRAY[$2]); $$

[HACKERS] solaris libpq threaded build fails

2008-11-18 Thread Andrew Chernow
for anyone interested Solaris 2.5.1 with --enable-thread-safety configure:25848: gcc -o conftest -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv -pthreads -pthreads -D_REENTRANT -D_THREAD_SAFE

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock

2008-11-18 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2008-11-12 at 16:25 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: The alternative I was thinking about involved taking an exclusive buffer lock on the page containing the tuple to be updated in-place. The point being that you have to examine the old tuple contents and decide whether to update after you

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing some DDL Locks to ShareLock

2008-11-18 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: heap_inplace_fetch takes as input tuple which is a palloc'd tuple, extracts from it the tid of the tuple, reads the buffer, locks it, then releases the original tuple. It then returns a copy of the on-block tuple. So all other code the same as before when

Re: [HACKERS] Transactions and temp tables

2008-11-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Somehow this feels pretty baroque, though. Perhaps a better approach would be to add a new AtPrepare_OnCommitActions function to tablecmds.c, that gets called before AtPrepare_Locks. It would scan through the on_commits list, and release all locks for the PREPARE-safe

[HACKERS] Installation oddity -- installer insists that PostgreSQL has failed to start, even though it is started and functioning correctly

2008-11-18 Thread Dann Corbit
Sorry about the HTML post, but I wanted to include the error form. When trying to perform an upgrade with PostgreSQL 8.3.5 over 8.3.4, the installer insists that PostgreSQL has failed to start. However, I can see the processes in memory (it has indeed started) and even attach with PG Admin

Re: [HACKERS] cygwin configure fails with thread-safety

2008-11-18 Thread Magnus Hagander
Andrew Chernow wrote: For cygwin builds, src/test/thread/thread_test.c needs to include sys/param.h to get MAXHOSTNAMELEN. configure is currently failing when --enable-thread-safety is used because of this. See attached patch against head. Applied, thanks. //Magnus -- Sent via

[HACKERS] New shapshot RPMs (Nov 18, 2008) are ready for testing

2008-11-18 Thread Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Hi, I just released new RPM sets, which is based on Nov 18 2008 11:00 PM EEST CVS snapshot. These packages *do* require a dump/reload, even from previous 8.4 packages, because of a catversion update. We have more than 400 testers using these sets. As usual, please find detailed info from:

[HACKERS] async notification patch for dblink

2008-11-18 Thread Marcus Kempe
This patch adds the ability to retrieve async notifications using dblink, via the addition of the function dblink_get_notify. It is written against cvs head, includes documentation and regression testing. It compiles, tests and works well. I would be interested in some feedback on the regression

Re: [HACKERS] auto_explain contrib moudle

2008-11-18 Thread Tom Lane
ITAGAKI Takahiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Here is an update version of contrib/auto_explain patch. Applied with some editorialization, mostly around the GUC stuff. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stop_backup wait bug fix

2008-11-18 Thread Fujii Masao
Hi, On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 10:23 PM, Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Minor bug fix for pg_stop_backup() to prevent it waiting longer than necessary in certain circumstances. Why don't you use XLByteToPrevSeg like pg_xlogfile_name? I think that we should uniform the logic as much as

Re: [HACKERS] Updated posix fadvise patch v19

2008-11-18 Thread Robert Haas
I addressed all the nitpicks and added comments. Woot, yeah for comments. There's a trivial conflict with CVS HEAD due to unrelated changes to AC_CHECK_FUNCS(...kitchen sink...) but that led me to notice something else: can't all this stuff about posix_fallocate be ripped out of configure.in at

Re: [HACKERS] Updated posix fadvise patch v19

2008-11-18 Thread Robert Haas
Obviously that went too soon. In config.sgml, the documentation is good, but suffers from a slightly informal style. There are a lot of places where commas seem appropriate but are not present. Suggested changes by paragraph: 1. Replace last sentence: Raising this value will cause

Re: [HACKERS] Patch Review Complete: Multi-Batch Hash Join Improvements

2008-11-18 Thread Joshua Tolley
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 10:42:21PM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote: On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 23:19 -0700, Joshua Tolley wrote: -- it speeds up joins by fairly significant margins in some cases The original claim in the message you cite says 10-50% for some data distributions. Were you able to observe

[HACKERS] add to documentation - upgrade from tsearch2

2008-11-18 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello I migrated database cluster from 8.1 to 8.3, and I had problem with tsvector domain. I imported tsearch2 module into template1 and then I started import of complete dump - but public.tsvectors wasn't be known - and I got message ERROR: type tsvector is only a shell LINE 5: