Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-09-13 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut writes: > It looks like the --with-system-tzdata case is somewhat broken now in > initdb: > creating configuration files ... could not open directory > "./pg-install/share/timezone": No such file or directory Sigh. That's what I get for assuming that case was simple enough

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-09-13 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On ons, 2011-09-07 at 17:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander writes: > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 23:52, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> Although there's always more than one way to skin a cat. Consider > >>> this idea: > >>> > >>> 1. The hard

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-09-07 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander writes: > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 23:52, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Although there's always more than one way to skin a cat.  Consider >>> this idea: >>> >>> 1. The hard-wired default for timezone is always UTC (or something >>> else

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-09-07 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 23:52, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I wrote: >>> Robert Haas writes: I am (and, I think, Alvaro is also) of the opinion that the behavior here is still not really right. >> >>> I don't see a practical way to do better un

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-09-06 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: >> Robert Haas writes: >>> I am (and, I think, Alvaro is also) of the opinion that the behavior >>> here is still not really right. > >> I don't see a practical way to do better unless we can find a less >> horridly inefficient way of imp

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-09-06 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> I am (and, I think, Alvaro is also) of the opinion that the behavior >> here is still not really right. > I don't see a practical way to do better unless we can find a less > horridly inefficient way of implementing identify_system_timezone(). Although there's a

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-09-06 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Bruce Momjian writes: >>> Was this dealt with? >> Yes, as much as I think is reasonable anyway.  See >> commit e05b866447899211a0c2df31bf0671faac4fc3e5. > I am (and, I think, Alvaro is also) of the opinion that the behavi

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-09-06 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: >> Was this dealt with? > > Yes, as much as I think is reasonable anyway.  See > commit e05b866447899211a0c2df31bf0671faac4fc3e5. I am (and, I think, Alvaro is also) of the opinion that the behavior here is still not really

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-09-06 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian writes: > Was this dealt with? Yes, as much as I think is reasonable anyway. See commit e05b866447899211a0c2df31bf0671faac4fc3e5. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-09-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > If you have the timezone configured to a non-default value in > > postgresql.conf, and you comment it out and reload, it says: > > > LOG: parameter "TimeZone" removed from configuration file, reset to default > > > ...but at least when I tested it, it d

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-31 Thread Jim Nasby
On May 26, 2011, at 12:41 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Yes, I think the lock-up is better than weird behavior. Maybe we should > add a short note in a postgresql.conf comment to this effect, so that it > doesn't surprise anyone that deletes or comments out the line. +1 on both counts. -- Jim C. Na

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-26 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of dom may 22 23:09:47 -0400 2011: > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Robert Haas writes: > >> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> But also, 99.999% of the time > >>> it would be completely wasted effort because the DBA

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-22 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> But also, 99.999% of the time >>> it would be completely wasted effort because the DBA wouldn't remove the >>> postgresql.conf setting at all, ever. > >> Well, by that

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-22 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> But also, 99.999% of the time >> it would be completely wasted effort because the DBA wouldn't remove the >> postgresql.conf setting at all, ever. > Well, by that argument, we ought not to worry about masterminding what >

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-22 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> If not, then how about jiggering things somehow so that only one >> server process needs to run the hack?  Perhaps it can drop the result >> in a file or shared memory or something from which the remaining >> backends can read it out without havi

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-22 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> What would make everybody happy is to find a way of identifying the >> system timezone that isn't such a massive, expensive kluge. Any ideas? > ...reads the code... > Good grief. What an incredibly ugly hack. Is there s

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-22 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> We could do that, but the issue that this code is trying to avoid is >>> that identify_system_timezone can easily add several seconds to the >>> postmaster startup tim

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-19 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> We could do that, but the issue that this code is trying to avoid is >> that identify_system_timezone can easily add several seconds to the >> postmaster startup time.  So one of the reasons why someone would be >> putting

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-19 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> So I think you whacked this around some more to get a *somewhat* more >> sensible behavior, but ISTM that the behavior here still not really >> right.  Should we select a timezone at startup time even if we don't >> immedi

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-19 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > So I think you whacked this around some more to get a *somewhat* more > sensible behavior, but ISTM that the behavior here still not really > right. Should we select a timezone at startup time even if we don't > immediately need it, so that this can work correctly if we reve

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-05-19 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> If you have the timezone configured to a non-default value in >> postgresql.conf, and you comment it out and reload, it says: > >> LOG:  parameter "TimeZone" removed from configuration file, reset to default > >> ...but at l

Re: [HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-04-06 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > If you have the timezone configured to a non-default value in > postgresql.conf, and you comment it out and reload, it says: > LOG: parameter "TimeZone" removed from configuration file, reset to default > ...but at least when I tested it, it didn't actually appear to reset

[HACKERS] timezone GUC

2011-04-06 Thread Robert Haas
If you have the timezone configured to a non-default value in postgresql.conf, and you comment it out and reload, it says: LOG: parameter "TimeZone" removed from configuration file, reset to default ...but at least when I tested it, it didn't actually appear to reset it to the default. assign_t