Re: [HACKERS] bad performance on irix

2002-03-25 Thread Pete Forman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro) writes: we're running on sgi powerchallenge, 8 r1 4-way smp, and we're getting bad performance from postgres, throughput increases from 1 to 5 streams, but from 5 and above there is no further increase, performance analysis show high

[HACKERS] initdb dies during IpcSemaphoreCreate under BSD jail

2002-03-25 Thread Joel Burton
(posted last week to pgsql-general; no responses there, so I'm seeing if anyone here can contribute. Thanks!) I'm working on a site hosted in a BSD Jail; they have MySQL installed but, of course, I'd rather use PostgreSQL. It installs fine but can't initdb; get the following: Fixing

Re: [HACKERS] Antw: Re: patch for include/utils/datetime.h to target NetWare

2002-03-25 Thread Thomas Lockhart
Your assumption is correct. All I need is what you described: #ifdef __CYGWIN__ to #if defined(__CYGWIN__) || defined(N_PLAT_NLM) Great. I'll include that in a set of patches I'm working on. Sorry that the patchfile didn't include the context. I will make sure that this doesn't happen any

Re: [HACKERS] initdb dies during IpcSemaphoreCreate under BSD jail

2002-03-25 Thread Vince Vielhaber
On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Joel Burton wrote: (posted last week to pgsql-general; no responses there, so I'm seeing if anyone here can contribute. Thanks!) I'm working on a site hosted in a BSD Jail; they have MySQL installed but, of course, I'd rather use PostgreSQL. It installs fine but

Re: [HACKERS] pg_control contents

2002-03-25 Thread Tom Lane
Thomas Lockhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If LOCALE_NAME_BUFLEN changes size between writing and reading the control file, the CRC *could* still be calculated correctly. There might be some value to storing sizeof(ControlFileData) explicitly, so that that CRC calculation could be made. But I

[HACKERS] Patch for xlog.c

2002-03-25 Thread Ulrich Neumann
Hello everybody, If possible please add the following patch to better support NetWare. best regards Ulrich Neumann Novell Worldwide Developer Support begin 666 xlog.patch M+2TM(%QP9W-Q;#R+F]R9UQSF-8F%C:V5N9%QA8V-EW-=')A;G-A;5QX M;]G+F,)36]N($IA;B`Q-`Q-CHU-3HU.`R,#`R#0HK*RL@7'!GW%L-S(N

[HACKERS] Patch for pqsignal.h

2002-03-25 Thread Ulrich Neumann
Hello everybody, i've found a little bug in pqsignal.h. Attached is the patch. (AuthBlockSig wasn't defined in one case). This problem is not specific to a special platform, it may target several platfroms. best regards Ulrich Neumann Novell Worldwide Developer Support begin 666

Re: [HACKERS] Patch for pqsignal.h

2002-03-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Please check current CVS or snapshot. I believe this is fixed. --- Ulrich Neumann wrote: Hello everybody, i've found a little bug in pqsignal.h. Attached is the patch. (AuthBlockSig wasn't defined in one case). This

[HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Marc G. Fournier
Just before anyone asks where it is ... I'm just rolling v7.2.1 up right now and will let everyone know once its ready for a download ... I'll do up an announce in the morning unless anyone finds a flaw in it ... ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5:

Re: [HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Marc G. Fournier
Try her out and let me know if there are any problems ... the build looks clean, sizes all look right ... if no visible probs, will announce in the mroning ... On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote: Just before anyone asks where it is ... I'm just rolling v7.2.1 up right now and will

Re: [HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Tom Lane
Other than the documentation issues, I confirm the tarball looks good from here. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [HACKERS] SET NULL / SET NOT NULL

2002-03-25 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have throught of at least two problems with changing nullability. The first is primary keys. I have to prevent people setting a column involved in a PK to null, right? Probably so. What about temporary tables - is there any reason

Re: [HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Marc G. Fournier writes: Try her out and let me know if there are any problems ... the build looks clean, sizes all look right ... ... but the contained documentation is for 7.3. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of

[HACKERS] build of 7.2.1 on SCO Openserver and Unixware 7.1.1

2002-03-25 Thread Nicolas Bazin
Sorry for the package, but the following patch need to be applied to get the new verion compiled on SCO Openserver 5.0.5 and Unixware 7.1.1 pgsql-7.2.1.diff Description: Binary data ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our

[HACKERS] PostgreSQL cross-reference using LXR

2002-03-25 Thread Joe Conway
Has anyone ever considered setting up LXR to cross-reference pgsql source on developer.postgresql.org or maybe techdocs.postgresql.org? I have seen it used in a couple of projects (originally written for the Linux kernel; lxr.php.net is another user), and it seems pretty useful. I set one up

Re: [HACKERS] SET NULL / SET NOT NULL

2002-03-25 Thread Tom Lane
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What about temporary tables - is there any reason they shouldn't be able to modify a temporary table? I don't see one. What about indices? Will twiddling the nullability break indices on a table in any way? No, not as long as you aren't

Re: [HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marc G. Fournier writes: Try her out and let me know if there are any problems ... the build looks clean, sizes all look right ... ... but the contained documentation is for 7.3. On the subject of contained documentation, I notice ***

Re: [HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marc G. Fournier writes: Try her out and let me know if there are any problems ... the build looks clean, sizes all look right ... ... but the contained documentation is for 7.3. On the subject of contained documentation, I

Re: [HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian writes: Is this right, or should majorversion still be 7.2? Right offhand the latter seems correct ... I wasn't sure what to do here. I figured if the docs were regenerated, it should say 7.2.1, and if they aren't, then they will stay as 7.2. But neither explanation

Re: [HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Bruce Momjian writes: Is this right, or should majorversion still be 7.2? Right offhand the latter seems correct ... I wasn't sure what to do here. I figured if the docs were regenerated, it should say 7.2.1, and if they aren't, then they will stay as 7.2.

Re: [HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But neither explanation warrants setting majorversion to 7.2.1. Why? Why shouldn't the documentation match the release number? Did you look at how majorversion is used? Setting it to 7.2.1 is *clearly* wrong. regards, tom lane

Re: [HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But neither explanation warrants setting majorversion to 7.2.1. Why? Why shouldn't the documentation match the release number? Did you look at how majorversion is used? Setting it to 7.2.1 is *clearly* wrong. Oh, I see, there

Re: [HACKERS] Rolling v7.2.1 ...

2002-03-25 Thread Justin Clift
Bruce Momjian wrote: snip Why? Why shouldn't the documentation match the release number? Shouldn't major version still be 7.2, and version be 7.2.1. i.e. 7.2.1 is a minor release/update/subversion of 7.2? Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift -- Bruce Momjian