Re: [HACKERS] 7.4 build problem on Linux Vserver
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Dave Page wrote:
> > "Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > gcc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes
> > > -Wmissing-declarations prod -I../../src/include -D_GNU_SOURCE
> > > -I/usr/include -c -o path.o path.c
> > > gcc: cannot specify -o with -c or -S and multiple compilations
> >
> > How is "prod" getting into that command line? I suspect it's
> > coming from an environment variable like PROFILE or CFLAGS ...
>
> Aha - the vserver code uses a var called PROFILE which is set to prod
> (meaning production). Unsetting has allowed the compile to run as
> normal.
>
> Thanks Tom.
>
> Regards, Dave.
And thanks to you Dave for finding this before I even found the time to
search for it.
I'm cc this to the vserver list so they are aware of the issue.
Rod
--
"Open Source Software - You usually get more than you pay for..."
"Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL"
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] postgresql-7.4 make error: tuptoaster.c: In function
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, julius wrote:
> im not sure if this is the correct mailing list, please correct me if it is not.
> my gcc is version 3.2, configure runs fine i deativated readline-support...but this
> error occours:
>
> gcc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations
> -I../../../../src/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o tuptoaster.o tuptoaster.c
> tuptoaster.c: In function `toast_delete_datum':
> tuptoaster.c:973: `F_OIDEQ' undeclared (first use in this function)
I ran into the same thing when working with RPMs and the tarball(s).
This happened in a vserver (http://www.linux-vserver.org/) not in the main
server. No solution at this time. In fact I caved and used the pre-built
RPMs. :-) Good luck.
Rod
--
"Open Source Software - You usually get more than you pay for..."
"Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL"
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] Learning PostgreSQL
On Sun, 5 Oct 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Neil Conway wrote: > > On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 17:45, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Neil Conway wrote: > > > > Depending on what part of the source you're interested in, a book on > > > > DBMS implementation might also be useful, such as > > > > > Wow, $100. > > > > Well, it's a CS textbook -- I have several textbooks this semester that > > are > $100. > > > > > Does it cover internals? > > > > Yeah, although it's more of a broad survey of DB-related topics, so the > > internals coverage isn't that in-depth. It talks about storage/indexing > > (the heap, ISAM/B+-tree indexes, hash indexes, etc.), query evaluation, > > query optimization, transaction management & concurrency control. > > > > That book just happens to be the one on my desk, but there are plenty of > > alternatives that cover the same subject matter. > > > > Perhaps you could add this to the developer's FAQ? > > Yes, is this the book we should recommend? I know we have Gray's > transaction book on there already. I just got a message from Wiley about new tech books but can't justify a desk copy as I only teach part time at a two year college and not database. But ... I looked at a sample chapter and saw PostgreSQL as the RDBMS. That was a plus in my book. The author is Richard Watson and I feel I know the name but can't place him. http://he-cda.wiley.com/WileyCDA/HigherEdTitle/productCd-0471347116,courseCd-IS1900.html Rod -- "Open Source Software - Sometimes you get more than you paid for..." ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] Update on replication
I just got my copy of SysAdmin Magazine and was surprised to see an article about Usogres -- The PostgreSQL Replication Tool. I don't remember seeing it mentioned on this or the General list. Though I just started reading the article and don't have a firm grasp on it yet, I do remember a discussion of replication using this technique - described in the first two paragraphs. Fyi, Rod -- "Open Source Software - Sometimes you get more than you paid for..." ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [HACKERS] postgresql performance tuning document ?
On Thu, 8 Aug 2002, Nigel J. Andrews wrote: > > I see files truncated at 1Gb on my Linux server: > > > > -rw---1 postgres users855490560 Aug 6 20:53 795261707.2 > > -rw---1 postgres users943259648 Aug 8 23:34 823049708 > > -rw---1 postgres users1073741824 Aug 6 20:53 795261707.1 > > -rw---1 postgres users1073741824 Aug 6 20:53 795261707 > > > > I'm wondering if postgresql doesn't have LARGE_FILES support ? I'm a user not a hacker but I seem to remember a discussion on this before. Part of the design was to break the files at approx. 1GByte partly or wholly to avoid any OS file size limitation. Rod -- "Open Source Software - Sometimes you get more than you paid for..." ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Re: [HACKERS] Why is MySQL more chosen over PostgreSQL?
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, Chris Humphries wrote: > well that and people tend to drift towards an easy answer, > like php... amazing how that combo is so popular... hrrmm... Well people seem to get so ... about php that I didn't want to touch that topic. Rod -- "Open Source Software - Sometimes you get more than you paid for..." ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] Why is MySQL more chosen over PostgreSQL?
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] > e) Inertia. MySQL got more popular way back when; the reasons may no longer > apply, but nobody is going to move to PostgreSQL without _compelling_ reason, > and you'll have to show something _really compelling_. I would like to add one other thought. There are many web site designers that get thrust into being a web site programmer. Without an understanding of database design and a novice programmers (?) view of the process the benefits of letting the database (RDBMS) do the database work isn't recognized. They code it all in the CGI. Rod -- "Open Source Software - Sometimes you get more than you paid for..." ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [HACKERS] Password sub-process ...
On Fri, 26 Jul 2002, Jan Wieck wrote: > What would be good is IMHO to have GRANT|REVOKE CONNECT which defaults > to REVOKE, so only superusers and the DB owner can connect, but that the > owner later can change it without the need to edit hba.conf. Oh, yes. Me too please. I think something close to this is coming with schemes - well at least my take on it indicates that. Rod -- "Open Source Software - Sometimes you get more than you paid for..." ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [HACKERS] Use of /etc/services?
On Sat, 8 Jun 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > This is inconsistent with the official IANA assignment which reads Thanks. I'll update my services file and check all those I come into contact with. I'll check if a new install if Redhat 7.3 has the correct entries this weekend. > postgresql 5432/tcp# PostgreSQL Database > postqresql 5432/udp# PostgreSQL Database > # Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > (The spelling might have been fixed by now.) It is corrected. > You should probably file a bug report for your OS. Interesting. I've never done this before. Most of the problems like this I see after someone else has repored them. Maybe I'll get my 5 minutes of fame. Cheers, Rod -- Please don't tell my mother I'm a System Administrator. She thinks I play piano in a bordello. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [HACKERS] Use of /etc/services?
I see PostgreSQL in /etc/services on an upgraded Redhat Linux 7.3 system. Don't think it was me adding it since I didn't have PG running on the system. Rod -- Please don't tell my mother I'm a System Administrator. She thinks I play piano in a bordello. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] Re: Notes about int8 sequences
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > Hmm. That's a possibility. There's some potential for trouble if an > application is expecting an int4 result from "SELECT nextval()" and > gets int8 instead, but if we think we could live with that... I assume there will be the same limitations as you mentioned in your original message. Ie. some systems don't have an 8-byte-int C datatype so would still have the 2^31 limit. > Actually, if we thought we could live with that, my inclination would be > to blow off int4-based sequences altogether, and just redefine SEQUENCE > objects as operating on INT8. Interesting thought, eh? More than interesting ... excellant. Bigger is better, right? Cheers, Rod -- Remove the word 'try' from your vocabulary ... Don't try. Do it or don't do it ... Steers try! Don Aslett ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
Re: [HACKERS] Foreign Key Columns And Indices
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > Just a quick question, when a column of a table is defined to be a foreign > key, is it implicitly indexed, or does one still need to explicitly CREATE > INDEX? I don't think you can actually declare the column in the table as a foreign key. A foreign key is a column or columns in another table. For a single column in the other table I'm pretty sure that column must be 'not null' and 'unique'. An index - other than to inforce uniqueness (currently how it's done in PostgreSQL?) - has nothing to do with the foreign key. Being a mere mortal - not a demi-god of PostgreSQLness - this could be an over simplification or totally out to lunch. Rod --
Re: GreatBridge RPMs (was: Re: [HACKERS] question)
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > In general, RPMs only work on systems that are the same as the one they > were built on, for various degrees of "same". If you're not picking up > the RPMs from your distributor or you're sure that the builder used the > same version as you have, it's always prudent to rebuild from the source > RPM. That should work, unless the package spec makes some unportable > assumptions, such as different file system layouts. But that is often > only an annoyance, not a real problem. While trying to get the FrontPage Extensions installed on a RedHat/Apache system I ran into to different version numbering systems between RedHat and Mandrake. Major pain. One called for perl 5.6.0-xxx and the other perl 5.60-xxx. After several hours of screwing around with it I took a break. Fortunately before I spent any more time on it the client I was going to do it for decided to not run them with Apache. I'm glad to see GreatBridge will be providing RPM's for many distributions. Though I do tend to re-compile from source I've found that those mdk's don't work too good with RHL. Rod --
Re: [HACKERS] Re: Beta2 ... ?
On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Lamar Owen wrote: > Ok, consider my mind changed. :-). My only concerns were, due to some > feedback I have gotten, is that people would treat the RPM release as > _productions_ rather than beta -- but maybe I'm just being paranoid. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean someone isn't out to get you! But like Tom says - a beta in the name - should do it (and will for me). Lamar, Is it possible to put some variables in the spec file so I can turn off compiling the python and tcl portions. Of course I seem to remember a thread to a similar effect floating through but can't remember what the outcome was. TIA, Rod --
