I am getting lots of errors on pgadmin.postgresql.org
Dave
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Yes, I don't see writing to two files vs. one to be any win, especially
when we need to fsync both of them. What I would really like is to
avoid the double I/O of writing to WAL and to the data file; improving
that would be a huge win.
You mean,
On Sun, 2002-06-23 at 21:29, J. R. Nield wrote:
If is impossible to do what you want. You can not protect against...
Wow. The number of typo's in that last one was just amazing. I even
started with one.
Have an nice weekend everybody :-)
;jrnield
--
J. R. Nield
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Some have expressed that this could be quite slow for large databases,
and want a type of:
SET CONSTRAINTS UNCHECKED;
However, others don't believe constraints other than foreign keys
should go unchecked.
Well, at the moment remember taht all that other SET CONSTRAINTS commands
only
Sorry to nag about this so late, but I fear that the new command SET LOCAL
will cause some confusion later on.
SQL uses LOCAL to mean the local node in a distributed system (SET LOCAL
TRANSACTION ...) and the current session as opposed to all sessions (local
temporary table). The new SET LOCAL
On Thu, 20 Jun 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
OK, I have finally decided that our archive searching stinks. I have
emails in my mailbox that don't appear in the archives.
Our main site, http://archives.postgresql.org/ doesn't archive the
'patches' list. (It isn't listed on the main site, and
On Sun, 2002-06-23 at 15:36, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Yes, I don't see writing to two files vs. one to be any win, especially
when we need to fsync both of them. What I would really like is to
avoid the double I/O of writing to WAL and to the data file; improving
that would be a huge win.
If
Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Recently I tried to use the new 7.02.0001 Win32 ODBC driver in the new
(beta) Unicode mode in conjunction with MS Access 2000 and a UNICODE
encoded database stored in a PostgreSQL 7.2.1 database running on a
Well, good points. I know there were some people who wanted a clearer
syntax, so I supplied it. Seems you don't. I would like to hear from
someone else who doesn't like the improved syntax before I consider
changing things back.
I was thinking of writing a command line tool like 'pgtune' that looks at
the stats views and will generate SQL code for, or do automatically the
following:
* Dropping indices that are never used
* Creating appropriate indices to avoid large, expensive sequential scans.
This would put us in the
I get
cvs [server aborted]: cannot write /cvsroot/CVSROOT/val-tags: Permission denied
This seems to be a server message.
I see the same thing when trying to update a tree to this branch using
local cvs on mcvsup.postgresql.org. The file is owned by scrappy and has
no group write permissions.
"Julian Mehnle, Linksystem Muenchen" wrote:
Hi all!
Recently I tried to use the new 7.02.0001 Win32 ODBC driver in the new
(beta) Unicode mode in conjunction with MS Access 2000 and a "UNICODE"
encoded database stored in a PostgreSQL 7.2.1 database running on a
Linux system.
I noticed
Hi,
I added the code to make IDENT authentification work even if the
responses are DES encrypted. The changes are contained in the attached
tar.gz file.
There is a readme included in the tar.gz which explains things. The tar
file contains the following files:
ident-des.patch
J. R. Nield wrote:
On Sun, 2002-06-23 at 15:36, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Yes, I don't see writing to two files vs. one to be any win, especially
when we need to fsync both of them. What I would really like is to
avoid the double I/O of writing to WAL and to the data file; improving
that
Curt Sampson wrote:
On 23 Jun 2002, J. R. Nield wrote:
So since we have all this buffering designed especially to meet our
needs, and since the OS buffering is in the way, can someone explain to
me why postgresql would ever open a file without the O_DSYNC flag if the
platform supports
I've actually already done almost all the work for converting BETWEEN to a
node but I have a couple of questions:
Should I use a boolean in the node to indicate whether it is SYMMETRIC or
ASYMMETRIC, or should I use some sort of integer to indicate whether it is
SYMMETRIC, ASYMMETRIC or
On 23 Jun 2002, J. R. Nield wrote:
If is impossible to do what you want. You can not protect against
partial writes without writing pages twice and calling fdatasync
between them while going through a generic filesystem.
I agree with this.
The best disk array will not protect you if the
Rod Taylor writes:
I'm also looking at the SQL99 INFORMATION_SCHEMA views. Is anyone
already defining these? Is someone interested in picking this up?
I've
got some definitions in a contrib-style directory but have not yet
mapped them to PostgreSQL.
I have a few of the basics done,
On Sat, 22 Jun 2002, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
However, others don't believe constraints other than foreign keys
should go unchecked.
That said, is this functionality wanted outside of pg_dump /
pg_restore?
pg_dump should reload a database as it was stored in the previous database.
Bruce Momjian writes:
I thought there were complaints that the old COPY syntax just had too
many features stuffed in too many unusual places,
Haven't ever seen one. This command has no precedent in other products,
only years of going virtually unchanged in PostgreSQL. Changing it now
and
I'm looking at implementing IS DISTINCT FROM, among other things.
...
I was thinking to implement this by simply expanding these rules within
gram.y to be a tree of comparison tests.
Please, please, do not do that. Make a new expression node tree type,
instead. We've made this mistake
Version 7.2.1, RH 7.3, installed from RPM.
Following error occurs:
amber_ws= delete from samples;
server closed the connection unexpectedly
This probably means the server terminated abnormally
before or while processing the request.
The connection to the server was lost.
J. R. Nield wrote:
So since we have all this buffering designed especially to meet our
needs, and since the OS buffering is in the way, can someone explain to
me why postgresql would ever open a file without the O_DSYNC flag if the
platform supports it?
We sync only WAL, not the other
It doesn't match perfectly in that one field is ignored as being
(afaict) redundant for us. The basic definition from SQL99 is
CREATE CAST(from AS to) WITH FUNCTION func(args) [AS ASSIGNMENT]
I can map this to something equivalent to
CREATE FUNCTION to(from) RETURNS to AS 'select
Thomas Lockhart writes:
It doesn't match perfectly in that one field is ignored as being
(afaict) redundant for us. The basic definition from SQL99 is
CREATE CAST(from AS to) WITH FUNCTION func(args) [AS ASSIGNMENT]
I can map this to something equivalent to
CREATE FUNCTION to(from)
FAQ updated in section 4.8: My queries are slow or don't make use of the
indexes. Why?
is returned. In fact, though MAX() and MIN() don't use indexes,
it is possible to retrieve such values using an index with ORDER BY
and LIMIT:
PRE
SELECT col
FROM tab
ORDER BY col
Just a quick heads up ... I've asked Rackspace to investigate *why* the
server crashes every 24-48hrs, and given them carte-blanche to get it
fixed ... they are planning on swapping out/in hardware, as right now that
appears to be where the error messages are indicating ...
I upgrade from PG 7.1.3 to 7.2, and I am trying to restore my dbs but I
keep getting:
[nsadmin@roam backup-20020622]$ pg_restore all-good.dmp
pg_restore: [archiver] input file does not appear to be a valid archive
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2:
Please, please, do not do that. Make a new expression node tree type,
instead. We've made this mistake before (eg for BETWEEN) and I don't
want to do it again.
I've actually already done almost all the work for converting BETWEEN to a
node but I have a couple of questions:
Should I use a
should already be fixed ...
On 23 Jun 2002, Dave Cramer wrote:
I am getting lots of errors on pgadmin.postgresql.org
Dave
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2002.06.23 01:23 Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Some have expressed that this could be quite slow for large
databases,
and want a type of:
SET CONSTRAINTS UNCHECKED;
However, others don't believe constraints other than foreign keys
should go unchecked.
Well, at the moment
-Original Message-
From: Dave Cramer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 24 June 2002 01:25
To: PostgreSQL Hacker
Subject: [HACKERS] pgadmin.postgresql.org displaying errors
I am getting lots of errors on pgadmin.postgresql.org
Dave
Looks OK now...
Thanks anyway, Dave.
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Should I use a boolean in the node to indicate whether it is SYMMETRIC or
ASYMMETRIC, or should I use some sort of integer to indicate whether it is
SYMMETRIC, ASYMMETRIC or DEFAULT (ASYMMETRIC). That way the reverse in
rules and views could
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The only thing I've been able to think of that seems like it might
improve matters is to make the WAL writing logic aware of the layout
of buffer pages --- specifically, to know that our pages generally
contain an uninteresting hole in the middle, and
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Yes, I don't see writing to two files vs. one to be any win, especially
when we need to fsync both of them. What I would really like is to
avoid the double I/O of writing to WAL and to the data file; improving
that would be a huge win.
I don't
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was thinking of writing a command line tool like 'pgtune' that looks at
the stats views and will generate SQL code for, or do automatically the
following:
* Dropping indices that are never used
* Creating appropriate indices to avoid
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
I was thinking of writing a command line tool like 'pgtune' that looks at
the stats views and will generate SQL code for, or do automatically the
following:
* Dropping indices that are never used
* Creating appropriate indices to avoid large, expensive
Manfred Koizar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is od_pagesize in any way more or less opaque than pd_lower, pd_upper,
pd_special, etc? If it is, why?
I surmise that there was once some idea of supporting multiple page
sizes simultaneously, but it's not real clear why the macros
Tom Lane wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Yes, I don't see writing to two files vs. one to be any win, especially
when we need to fsync both of them. What I would really like is to
avoid the double I/O of writing to WAL and to the data file; improving
that would be a
o
I have a problem with an 7.1.3 database that has probably overflowed
the oid counter. The startup halts with these messages
DEBUG: database system was interrupted at 2002-06-24 21:19:43 EEST
DEBUG: CheckPoint record at (156, 1692817164)
DEBUG: Redo record at (156, 1692775580); Undo record
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
Can we link to the fts site?
The only thing I can help with is the fts link, but I'm hesitant to
link to something that disappears. If it's going to be here and not
go away again I'll be happy to add it.
The only reason it disappeared was
J. R. Nield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Also, postgreSQL can't recover from any other type of block corruption,
while the commercial systems can.
Say again?
Would it not be the case that things like read-ahead, grouping writes,
and caching written data are probably best done by PostgreSQL,
SQL uses LOCAL to mean the local node in a distributed system (SET LOCAL
TRANSACTION ...) and the current session as opposed to all sessions (local
temporary table). The new SET LOCAL command adds the meaning this
transaction only. Instead we could simply use SET TRANSACTION, which
would
James Thornton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I upgrade from PG 7.1.3 to 7.2, and I am trying to restore my dbs but I
keep getting:
[nsadmin@roam backup-20020622]$ pg_restore all-good.dmp
pg_restore: [archiver] input file does not appear to be a valid archive
How did you make the dump file
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002 17:16:09 EDT, the world broke into rejoicing as
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
FAQ updated in section 4.8: My queries are slow or don't make use of the
indexes. Why?
is returned. In fact, though MAX() and MIN() don't use indexes,
it is possible to
Fernando Nasser of Red Hat reminded me that it really makes no sense
for ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN and ALTER TABLE RENAME COLUMN to behave
non-recursively --- that is, they should *always* affect inheritance
children of the named table, never just the named table itself.
After a non-recursive
Thomas Lockhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So the closest you could
map it to would be
ALTER FUNCTION to(from) IMPLICIT CAST
That would require that the function to be used as the cast have the
same name as the underlying PostgreSQL conventions for casting
functions. The implementation I've
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sorry to nag about this so late, but I fear that the new command SET LOCAL
will cause some confusion later on.
Okay...
SQL uses LOCAL to mean the local node in a distributed system (SET LOCAL
TRANSACTION ...) and the current session as opposed to
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Does anyone know what the major barriers to infinite log replay are in
PostgreSQL? I'm trying to look for everything that might need to be
changed outside xlog.c, but surely this has come up before. Searching
the archives hasn't revealed much.
This
Josh Berkus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, first off, quote_literal isn't in the documentation under
Functions and Operators.So this is the first I've heard about it
-- or probably anyone else outside the core team. How long has it
been around?
Awhile; however, the only documentation
J. R. Nield wrote:
This I don't quite understand. Assuming you're using a SCSI drive
(and this mostly applies to ATAPI/IDE, too), you can do naught but
align block writes to the structure of the underlying device. When you
initiate a SCSI WRITE command, you start by telling the device at
On Sun, 2002-06-23 at 23:40, Curt Sampson wrote:
On 23 Jun 2002, J. R. Nield wrote:
If is impossible to do what you want. You can not protect against
partial writes without writing pages twice and calling fdatasync
between them while going through a generic filesystem.
I agree with
Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perform has nothing to do with ORACLE. It was added because people tried
to call other procedures and didn't want any result back.
Well, in that case we can do what we want with it.
Does anyone object to making it set FOUND?
Given the lack of objection,
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
Ah, I see --- more or less make all of utils/adt/ available to be
linked into clients.
That is a Good Idea in principle. In practice, ...
Yeah, it'd be a huge amount of work. For starters, all that code
relies on the backend environment for error handling
Jean-Michel,
It seems clear that several teams are working without central point
management
and contact:
snip
- Marketing: MySQL sucks and has a team of marketing sending junk technical
emails and writing false benchmarks. Who is in charge of marketing at
PostgreSQL? Where can I find a
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Does anyone know what the major barriers to infinite log replay are in
PostgreSQL? I'm trying to look for everything that might need to be
changed outside xlog.c, but surely this has come up before. Searching
the archives hasn't
Thomas Lockhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've got another issue with casting which I've run into while testing
this feature; afaict invoking an explicit CAST() in SQL does not
guarantee that the function of the expected name would be called, if
that function does not have the implicit flag
Julian Mehnle wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Recently I tried to use the new 7.02.0001 Win32 ODBC driver
in the new (beta) Unicode mode in conjunction with MS Access
2000 and a "UNICODE" encoded database stored in a PostgreSQL
Daniel Kalchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have a problem with an 7.1.3 database that has probably overflowed
the oid counter. The startup halts with these messages
DEBUG: database system was interrupted at 2002-06-24 21:19:43 EEST
DEBUG: CheckPoint record at (156, 1692817164)
DEBUG:
I see no real reason why we should not require casting functions to
follow the Postgres naming convention --- after all, what else would
you name a casting function?
We do require casting functions to follow the Postgres naming
convention. istm to be a waste of time to have the CREATE CAST()
I said:
Thomas Lockhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've got another issue with casting which I've run into while testing
this feature; afaict invoking an explicit CAST() in SQL does not
guarantee that the function of the expected name would be called, if
that function does not have the
On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 17:16, Tom Lane wrote:
I think you have been missing the point...
Yes, this appears to be the case. Thanks especially to Curt for clearing
things up for me.
--
J. R. Nield
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
* Give an error, same as if ONLY foo had been written.
* Assume the user really wants recursion, and do it anyway.
The second seems more user-friendly but also seems to violate the
principle of least surprise. Anyone have an opinion about what to do?
I really prefer the
Tom,
Done; I also added its sister function quote_ident. See the devel
docs at
http://candle.pha.pa.us/main/writings/pgsql/sgml/functions-string.html
Tante Grazie.
--
-Josh Berkus
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and
On 24 Jun 2002, J. R. Nield wrote:
All I'm saying is that the entire postgresql block write must be
converted into exactly one SCSI write command in all cases, and I don't
know a portable way to ensure this.
No, there's no portable way. All you can do is give the admin who
is able to set
Fernando Nasser of Red Hat reminded me that it really makes no sense
for ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN and ALTER TABLE RENAME COLUMN to behave
non-recursively --- that is, they should *always* affect inheritance
children of the named table, never just the named table itself.
Hmm. Good point.
66 matches
Mail list logo
