Re: [HACKERS] Help with finding checkpoint code

2002-08-31 Thread J. R. Nield
It is called by a special child process of the postmaster after a signal. Search for PMSIGNAL_DO_CHECKPOINT in xlog.c and in postmaster.c. The checkpoint process gets started out of sigusr1_handler(). On Sat, 2002-08-31 at 23:27, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I am trying to find when WAL log files are

Re: [HACKERS] Help with finding checkpoint code

2002-08-31 Thread Alvaro Herrera
En Sat, 31 Aug 2002 23:27:08 -0400 (EDT) Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > I am trying to find when WAL log files are rotated. The message is: > > 2002-02-11 21:18:13 DEBUG: recycled transaction log file 0005 > > and it is printed in MoveOfflineLogs(), and MoveOffline

[HACKERS] Help with finding checkpoint code

2002-08-31 Thread Bruce Momjian
I am trying to find when WAL log files are rotated. The message is: 2002-02-11 21:18:13 DEBUG: recycled transaction log file 0005 and it is printed in MoveOfflineLogs(), and MoveOfflineLogs() is only called by CreateCheckPoint(), but I can't see where CreateCheckPoint() is called

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE CAST requires immutable cast function?

2002-08-31 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Perhaps there's a case for prohibiting volatile casts (as opposed to > stable ones), but I don't really see it. I'd prefer to just remove > this restriction. Comments? Volatile casts can blow up. I am sure that is the reasoning. ;-) -- Bruce Momjian

[HACKERS] CREATE CAST requires immutable cast function?

2002-08-31 Thread Tom Lane
It says here that CREATE CAST insists the cast function be immutable. This seems wrong to me, in view of the fact that we have numerous built-in casts that don't adhere to that rule --- for example, timestamptz(date) is not immutable because it depends on the timezone setting. Perhaps there's a c

Re: [ODBC] [HACKERS] ODBC Driver moved to GBorg ...

2002-08-31 Thread Marc G. Fournier
This is all in Vince's area ... On 23 Aug 2002, Greg Copeland wrote: > I must be blind. I don't see links to gborg anywhere on the developer > or main site web pages. Perhaps more obvious a sister site link would > be of value. > > The only link I found was under "User's Lounge" and then "Po

[HACKERS] pgindent

2002-08-31 Thread Bruce Momjian
Just a reminder that once all the patches are in, I need to run pgindent. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| N

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3 beta schedule

2002-08-31 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > As someone's suggestion, we are going to continue accepting patches > through Sunday night, EDT, which will give us Monday to make sure all > the patches are in. I will have the HISTORY/release.sgml ready by then. > > At that point, we can collect an

[HACKERS] 7.3 beta schedule

2002-08-31 Thread Bruce Momjian
As someone's suggestion, we are going to continue accepting patches through Sunday night, EDT, which will give us Monday to make sure all the patches are in. I will have the HISTORY/release.sgml ready by then. At that point, we can collect any other open items, like doc updates, and start to se

[HACKERS] AutoCommit GUC breaks CLI tools...

2002-08-31 Thread Sean Chittenden
This is pretty chump and easy to get around, but it took me a sec to figure this out. Anyway, the short and skinny being that with the new AutoCommit GUC turned off, create(lang|db) won't work until you bail out of the transaction. A quick hack would be to insert an "ABORT;" in each of the CLI t

Re: [HACKERS] [pgaccess-developers] pgaccess 0.98.8 beta 1 - the show starts

2002-08-31 Thread Bruce Momjian
Iavor Raytchev wrote: > That is why the pgaccess development team decided to release the > pgaccess 0.98.8 beta 1 on the day when the PostgreSQL 7.3 beta is > expected to be released - Sunday, September the 1st. While beta for PostgreSQL officially begins on Sunday, I don't think we will have a P

Re: [HACKERS] Accessing original TupleDesc from SRF

2002-08-31 Thread Tom Lane
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But BuildDescForRelation leaves initializes the tupdesc like this: >desc = CreateTemplateTupleDesc(natts, UNDEFOID); > The UNDEFOID later causes an assertion failure in heap_formtuple when > you try to use the tupdesc to build a tuple. So far, I have

Re: [HACKERS] [7.3-devl] Timezones on RH 7.3 and Null

2002-08-31 Thread Gordon Runkle
On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 22:24, Joe Conway wrote: > Well a "real" fix sounded like a lot of work, and no one had the right > combination of time/desire/knowledge/skill to go implement it. The > "workaround" fix was discussed in this more recent thread: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hack

Re: [HACKERS] source code indexer

2002-08-31 Thread Bruce Momjian
Nigel J. Andrews wrote: > On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Laurette Cisneros wrote: > > > > > HI all, > > > > Sorry to interrupt your busy list. > > > > I was wondering if you could recommend a good source code db/indexer that > > could be used to search through the postgresql code? > > I think I must be

Re: [HACKERS] Accessing original TupleDesc from SRF

2002-08-31 Thread Joe Conway
Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>Attached adds: >> + TupleDesc queryDesc; /* descriptor for planned query */ >>to ReturnSetInfo, and populates ReturnSetInfo for every function call to >> ExecMakeTableFunctionResult, not just when fn_retset. > > I thought "expectedDes

[HACKERS] pgaccess 0.98.8 beta 1 - the show starts

2002-08-31 Thread Iavor Raytchev
Hello everybody, This e-mail contains pgaccess strategic information. Best, Iavor -- www.pgaccess.org PGACCESS STRATEGY IN THE EVE OF POSTGRESQL 7.3 - 1. pgaccess 0.98.8 beta 1 - As the new policy of PostgreSQL is to keep away everything that

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed GUC Variable

2002-08-31 Thread Gavin Sherry
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > That's a pretty good idea. Now, what format will the argument take: text > > (NOTICE, ERROR, DEBUG, etc) or integer? The increasing severity is clear > > with numbers but the correlation to NOTICE, ERROR etc is un

Re: [HACKERS] [INTERFACES] pgaccess - where to store the own data

2002-08-31 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
> > What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own data is > > stored in the database pgaccess works with? > > > > I don't particularly like it. Oracle deals with this by having a > database unto itself as a management repository (Oracle Enterprise > Manager, OEM, I believe). You regis