Re: [HACKERS] Decent VACUUM (was: Buglist)

2003-08-25 Thread Tom Lane
Manfred Koizar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Good point. What about: Whenever a backend *deletes* a tuple it > inserts a reference to its page into the RSM? Then an entry in the > RSM doesn't necessarily mean that the referenced page has reclaimable > space, but it would still be valueable infor

Re: [HACKERS] Decent VACUUM (was: Buglist)

2003-08-25 Thread Tom Lane
Manfred Koizar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > better. AFAICS Vivek's problem is that it is hard enough to hold a > good part of the working set in the cache, and still his disks are > saturated. Now a VACUUM not only adds one more process to disk I/O > contention, but also makes sure that the work

[HACKERS] SSL Connections

2003-08-25 Thread Carlos Guzman Alvarez
Hello: I'm developing a TLS library in C# for my PostgreSQL ADO.NET Data Provider, i can work well using the openssl test server, using: openssl s_server -accept 443 -key server.key -cert server.crt -tls1 -bugs But when i try to use it for connect to postgresql (7.4 on Windows+Cygwin) i get al

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 7.4 Beta 1 + SSL + Cygwin

2003-08-25 Thread Jason Tishler
Thomas, On Sun, Aug 24, 2003 at 04:55:42PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 11:10:05AM -0500, Thomas Swan wrote: > > On 8/8/2003 5:49 AM, Jason Tishler wrote: > > >Is this just the "--with-openssl" option? Does it build cleanly > > >under Cygwin? If so, would you like me to

[HACKERS] NOTICE vs WARNING

2003-08-25 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Can someone explain in succinct and general terms what the difference between a NOTICE and a WARNING is? I'm currently examining the validity of notice and warning messages throughout the backend, but I find these categories to be applied inconsistently. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [HACKERS] I am back

2003-08-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Gavin Sherry wrote: > On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I have to decide if I should continue in that role for the project. I > > do think it is important for our visibility and for growing the > > community. > > That really should be up to you. Conferences are a great way to lift

[HACKERS] LOCK.tag(figuring out granularity of lock)

2003-08-25 Thread Jenny -
following is taken from postgresql-7.3.2/src/backend/storage/lmgr/readme: "If we are setting a table level lock both the blockId and tupleId (in an item pointer this is called the position) are set to invalid, if it is a page level lock the blockId is valid, while the tuple

Re: [HACKERS] I am back

2003-08-25 Thread Gavin Sherry
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I have to decide if I should continue in that role for the project. I > do think it is important for our visibility and for growing the > community. That really should be up to you. Conferences are a great way to lift the project's profile, and Postgre

Re: [HACKERS] UnixWare on Current CVS: Success!

2003-08-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Larry Rosenman wrote: > On Aug 17 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Did something changed on today's cvs. > > > > src/template/unixware is wrong on last line: THREAD_CFLAGS += -D_REENTRANT > > should be THREAD_CFLAGS="$THREAD_CFLAGS -D_REENTRANT" > No it shouldn't > > The original patch w

[HACKERS] I am back

2003-08-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
I have finished the training in Atlanta, and I am back on the job; going through email now. Seems I have events scheduled every month or every other month for the forseeable future. I have Mexico in September, Germany in November, and Denmark in January. I also have possible events for October a

Re: [HACKERS] Single-file DBs WAS: Need concrete 'Why Postgres

2003-08-25 Thread Andrew Dunstan
This makes sense to me. I sense a TODO item :-) (My dim and possibly incorrect memory of administering Ingres around 10 years ago was that it supported both raw devices and file system based databases. We opted for a file system base, for reasons others have mentioned here, but I seem to recall w

Re: [HACKERS] UnixWare on Current CVS: Success!

2003-08-25 Thread Larry Rosenman
Didn't seem to. Did you see my posts from fri/sat on -hackers? I included what DID work for me. LER --On Sunday, August 24, 2003 19:21:57 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Larry Rosenman wrote: On Aug 17 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Did something changed on today's cvs. > >

Re: [HACKERS] UnixWare on Current CVS: Success!

2003-08-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
NP. We will get this fixed. I am still thinking about it, and will do something when I get to that email. I am trying to avoid having a template/* variable for each *_r function, but that may be required. The "try for *_r library and continue if you can't find it" just seems too risky. We mig

Re: [HACKERS] UnixWare on Current CVS: Success!

2003-08-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, I now realized this code is shell script, not Makefile content. Code changed to: THREAD_CFLAGS = "$THREAD_CFLAGS -D_REENTRANT" --- Larry Rosenman wrote: > Didn't seem to. Did you see my posts from fri/sat on

Re: Parsing speed (was Re: [HACKERS] pgstats_initstats() cost)

2003-08-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> ... If that's > >> what we think we want, we'd better put it on the wish-list for 7.5. > > > If we had a Parse function, then we at phpPgAdmin could allow Reports to > > contain parameters, and detect as such, and then w

Re: [HACKERS] UnixWare on Current CVS: Success!

2003-08-25 Thread Larry Rosenman
--On Sunday, August 24, 2003 23:17:07 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I am working my way through my email to that ***ISSUE*** (*** looks kind of silly, doesn't it). If you are putting those stars there because I am not working on that issue fast enough for you, well ... I poste

Re: [HACKERS] UnixWare on Current CVS: Success!

2003-08-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
I am working my way through my email to that ***ISSUE*** (*** looks kind of silly, doesn't it). If you are putting those stars there because I am not working on that issue fast enough for you, well ... --- Larry Rosenman wr

Re: [HACKERS] UnixWare on Current CVS: Success!

2003-08-25 Thread Larry Rosenman
--On Sunday, August 24, 2003 22:49:00 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: OK, I now realized this code is shell script, not Makefile content. Code changed to: THREAD_CFLAGS = "$THREAD_CFLAGS -D_REENTRANT" Ok, but we are **STILL** broke for the --enable-thread-safety flag due to y