Re: [HACKERS] Why are triggers semi-deferred?

2003-07-12 Thread Philip Warner
At 10:38 AM 12/07/2003 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote: deferred after trigger row 1 deferred after trigger #2 row a deferred after trigger row 2 deferred after trigger #2 row b I'd vote for this; ie. make them execute in the same order they would execute if they were not deferred. Otherwise you op

[HACKERS] vacuumdb can't be canceled

2003-07-12 Thread Kenji Sugita
Vacuumdb command can't be canceled by Control-C and VACUUM is still running. When wrong database name is specified to vacuumdb, cancellation is required to stop VACUUM FULL which runs long. Option -c of psql forget to set signal handler for 7.3 or prior. Vacuumdb have no signal handler of cancella

Re: [HACKERS] weird problem

2003-07-12 Thread Gavin Sherry
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > Just saw this on our demo server: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/htdocs/webdb/conf# /usr/local/pgsql-7.3.3/bin/psql -p5473 > phppgadmin > psql: FATAL: cannot open segment 1 of relation > pg_trigger_tgrelid_tgname_index (target block 8310112): No suc

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] PG crash on simple query, story continues

2003-07-12 Thread Maksim Likharev
Possible, but if before almost every tenth query crash the server now it stays, that's only I care about. -Original Message- From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 2:05 PM To: Maksim Likharev Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [

Re: [HACKERS] php with postgres

2003-07-12 Thread Joe Conway
ivan wrote: ok, but php should build this lang for postgres i think so, we should talk with php group ? I have been talking with several people about this on-and-off for a while now. If I can find some time in the next few months, I will probably write it (if no one beats me to it). I'm thinking

Re: [HACKERS] php with postgres

2003-07-12 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: ivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12 July 2003 23:02 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [HACKERS] php with postgres > > > > > ok, but php should build this lang for postgres i think > so, we should talk with php group ? I doubt the

Re: [HACKERS] Handling protocol not supported error message when working with protocol 2 and 3

2003-07-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Francisco Figueiredo Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm finishing the implementation of the protocol 3.0 and now I'm working > in how to connect to server using protocol 3.0 when the server doesn't > support it 7.3- . I'd suggest using the same methods libpq does. You do have to be prepare

[HACKERS] Handling protocol not supported error message when working with protocol2 and 3

2003-07-12 Thread Francisco Figueiredo Jr.
Hi all, I'm finishing the implementation of the protocol 3.0 and now I'm working in how to connect to server using protocol 3.0 when the server doesn't support it 7.3- . As suggested in a previous mail about how to handle with both protocol versions, I'm trying first to connect using version 3

Re: [HACKERS] php with postgres

2003-07-12 Thread ivan
On Sat, 12 Jul 2003, Dave Page wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: ivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 12 July 2003 22:34 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [HACKERS] php with postgres > > > > > > > > what do you think about plphp ? > > I know a few people that would pro

Re: [HACKERS] php with postgres

2003-07-12 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: ivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12 July 2003 22:34 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [HACKERS] php with postgres > > > > what do you think about plphp ? I know a few people that would probably welcome it. Regards, Dave. -

[HACKERS] php with postgres

2003-07-12 Thread ivan
what do you think about plphp ? ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] PG crash on simple query, story continues

2003-07-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Maksim Likharev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So following modification seems to fixed all PG (7.3/7.3.3)crashes on > Solaris ( NON C LOCALE ) Given that the problem is Solaris' tendency to write more data than the specified output buffer length allows, I'd think this is still risking a core dum

Re: [HACKERS] agg/order-by question

2003-07-12 Thread Sailesh Krishnamurthy
> "Bruno" == Bruno Wolff, writes: Bruno> You might try this in 7.4. I am pretty sure a change was Bruno> made a couple of weeks ago to let group by work with either Bruno> sort order. Also hash aggragates have been available for Bruno> quite a while in 7.4. This is a better pl

[HACKERS] new src :>

2003-07-12 Thread ivan
hi, now i writed support for writing and reading files by select. i created function like in stdio.h iv_fopen (cstring,cstring), iv_fread , etc the FILE * struct is replaced by OID value you can download src from http://www.psycho.pl/public/src/pgsql/files.tar.bz2 and sample to to have /etc/passw

Re: [HACKERS] Why are triggers semi-deferred?

2003-07-12 Thread Philip Warner
At 11:51 PM 1/06/2003 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: Does anyone have answers for these? I read the thread and don't 100% understand it all. My belief is that at least ROW triggers need fixing (7.3 doesn't have statement, not sure about 7.4). Currently, if you write a plpgsql procedure which calls

Re: [HACKERS] agg/order-by question

2003-07-12 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 00:39:06 -0700, Sailesh Krishnamurthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Consider the explain for the following queries .. > > sample=# explain select a, count(*) from foo group by a order by a; >QUERY PLAN > --

Re: [HACKERS] initcap incompatibility issue

2003-07-12 Thread nolan
> > It sounds like Oracle is simply regexing for anything that ISN'T a letter > > to initcap right after it. If that's the case, you could just regex too. > > Or more likely, use the appropriate ctype.h function (isalpha, probably). Having tested it, Oracle capitalizes after all non-alphanumeri

Re: [HACKERS] Transaction handling in extended query mode and Sync

2003-07-12 Thread Carlos Guzman Alvarez
Hello: Sorry for late response... I could finally get Npgsql to talk protocol 3.0 version :) It is not 100% but it is near... Great !! I'm going to open my code at sourceforge :) I give it a try in a test similar to yours... I didn't send the create database commands just the row insertion. in

[HACKERS] agg/order-by question

2003-07-12 Thread Sailesh Krishnamurthy
Consider the explain for the following queries .. sample=# explain select a, count(*) from foo group by a order by a; QUERY PLAN - Aggregate (cost=69.83..77.33 rows=100 width=4) -> Group

Re: [HACKERS] table-level and row-level locks.

2003-07-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Jenny -" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Iam trying to acquire rowlevel locks in > postgresql. I try doing this: >  'select * from students where name='Larry' for update; > But by looking at the holding array of proclock , I've noticed that by doing > this only > AccessShareLock gets acquired wh