I have seen that a bug related to duplicated keys is in 7.4rc2. As far
as I have seen a bug like that has already been discovered during the
7.3 era. Is this bug going to be fixed?
Here s the description:
DROP TABLE public.testtabelle;
begin;
CREATE TABLE public.testtabelle
(
c000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seriously, I have wondered if it might be a good idea to assemble a
small hit team that would take some high profile open source
projects and make sure they worked with Postgres. Bugzilla would be
the most obvious candidate, but there are certainly others. I suspect
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 00:50, Neil Conway wrote:
Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We can't resize shared memory because we allocate the whole thing in
one big hump - which causes the shmmax problem BTW. If we allocate
that in chunks of multiple blocks, we only
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 18:55, Jan Wieck wrote:
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 00:50, Neil Conway wrote:
Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We can't resize shared memory because we allocate the whole thing in
one big hump - which causes the shmmax problem
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Seriously, I have wondered if it might be a good idea to assemble a
small hit team that would take some high profile open source projects
and make sure they worked with Postgres. Bugzilla would be the most
obvious candidate, but there are certainly others. I suspect
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 19:19, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Seriously, I have wondered if it might be a good idea to assemble a
small hit team that would take some high profile open source projects
and make sure they worked with Postgres. Bugzilla would be the most
Shridhar Daithankar writes:
So forming a new group is quite beneficial?
No, we don't need one group, we need many individuals (or possibly small
groups) to get in contact with their second favorite projects and hang out
there.
I think so too.. I have been planning to do that for dbmail and
Kiyoshi Sawada [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
2. Regression Failur stats . FAILED .
3. Not running stats buffer process and stats collector process.
So why not? Try looking in the postmaster log for errors related to
stats collector startup. (pstat is irrelevant, btw.)
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have seen that a bug related to duplicated keys is in 7.4rc2. As far
as I have seen a bug like that has already been discovered during the
7.3 era. Is this bug going to be fixed?
We do not have, and never have had, deferred
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Seriously, I have wondered if it might be a good idea to assemble a
small hit team that would take some high profile open source projects
and make sure they worked with Postgres. Bugzilla would be the most
obvious candidate, but there are
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Shridhar Daithankar writes:
So forming a new group is quite beneficial?
No, we don't need one group, we need many individuals (or possibly small
groups) to get in contact with their second favorite projects and hang out
there.
I meant lets form a group within advocacy
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 09:42, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Shridhar Daithankar writes:
I think so too.. I have been planning to do that for dbmail and egroupware
but haven't got around it..
When I said I've been doing a bit of that, I meant the developers of
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 18:55, Jan Wieck wrote:
And how does a newly mmap'ed segment propagate into a running backend?
It wouldn't. Just like we allocate fixed amount of shared memory at startup
now, we would do same for mmaped segments. Allocate maximum
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Your suggestion elsewhere of pick your second favourite app is likely
to result in a more scattergun approach. Also, if it had the imprimatur
of the PostgreSQL community to some extent appraoches to projects might
be more welcome - Dear open-source-project-manager, on
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Your suggestion elsewhere of pick your second favourite app is likely
to result in a more scattergun approach. Also, if it had the imprimatur
of the PostgreSQL community to some extent appraoches to projects might
be more welcome - Dear
Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If the parent postmaster mmaps anonymous memory segments and shares them with
children, postgresql wouldn't be dependent upon any kernel resourse aka
shared memory anymore.
Anonymous memory mappings aren't shared, at least not unless you're
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
---
Hello,
My name is and I work with postgresql group. Recently we/postgresql
advocay/general group have decided to form a group of people who would help
other projects w.r.t postgresql.
So feel free to ask me questions. I can
PostgreSQL seems to maintance the unique index when updating each row.
If the insert sequence is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, when doing
UPDATE testtabelle SET c001 = c001 - 1
It happens to process rows 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 in the same order as you insert.
Thus we see the UPDATE finished successfully. But, if
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
---
Hello,
My name is and I work with postgresql group. Recently we/postgresql
advocay/general group have decided to form a group of people who would help
other projects w.r.t postgresql.
So feel free to ask me
Hello,
I have a problem with compile PostgreSQL from cvs with tag REL7_4_STABLE
Error is 'ECPG_ARRAY_NONE is not declared' (in execute.c)
HEAD (7.5.devel) compile fine
Please help
Regards
Haris Peco
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: don't forget
Tom Lane writes:
Actually, I think that that may be expected behavior depending on the
vintage of the kernel. Note the following comment in
StreamServerPort():
Can we make the warning less misleading if IPV6_V6ONLY does not exist?
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane writes:
Actually, I think that that may be expected behavior depending on the
vintage of the kernel. Note the following comment in
StreamServerPort():
Can we make the warning less misleading if IPV6_V6ONLY does not exist?
Possibly. How
Do we have any data on how many people download the partial tarballs
(-base, -opt, etc.)? I have a feeling that more people are confused by
them than use them.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Do we have any data on how many people download the partial tarballs
(-base, -opt, etc.)? I have a feeling that more people are confused by
them than use them.
on ftp.postgresql.org itself, since June 4th:
2812
Marc G. Fournier writes:
Do we have any data on how many people download the partial tarballs
(-base, -opt, etc.)? I have a feeling that more people are confused by
them than use them.
on ftp.postgresql.org itself, since June 4th:
Interesting. Note that in most cases people download
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Marc G. Fournier writes:
Do we have any data on how many people download the partial tarballs
(-base, -opt, etc.)? I have a feeling that more people are confused by
them than use them.
on ftp.postgresql.org itself, since June 4th:
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 14:29, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Marc G. Fournier writes:
Do we have any data on how many people download the partial tarballs
(-base, -opt, etc.)? I have a feeling that more people are confused by
them than use them.
on ftp.postgresql.org itself, since June
On 11 Nov 2003, at 20:44, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Do we have any data on how many people download the partial tarballs
(-base, -opt, etc.)? I have a feeling that more people are confused by
them than use them.
Even if they weren't useful for anything else, I think there's value in
the
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Marko Karppinen wrote:
I agree that the partial tarballs can confuse an ftp user, though. I
think a good solution to this would be to put them one level deeper,
into a subfolder. The full tarball would then be the only thing a casual
user would encounter, but the
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/README.dist-split
to reduce the confusion, that would be great. I've just symlink'd it into
the source directories as the .message, so that its displays when you
enter the directory ...
Does anyone actually read
Dear Tom Lane.
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:18:48 -0500 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kiyoshi Sawada [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
2. Regression Failur stats . FAILED .
3. Not running stats buffer process and stats collector process.
So why not? Try looking in the postmaster log for
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/README.dist-split
to reduce the confusion, that would be great. I've just symlink'd it into
the source directories as the .message, so that its displays when you
Is there a TODO here?
---
Tom Lane wrote:
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the BufferDesc struct, there seem to be two ways to mark a buffer
page as dirty: setting the BM_DIRTY bit mask in the 'flags' field of
Patch applied to HEAD and 7.4CVS. Thanks.
---
David Wheeler wrote:
Clearly I can't spell.
Regards,
David
--- postgresql-7.4RC1/contrib/start-scripts/PostgreSQL.darwin Mon Dec
9 13:26:07 2002
+++
Even if they weren't useful for anything else, I think there's value in the
developers having to consider what is optional and what is not. This need
for constant review probably reduces the chance of bloat, over time even
in the full tarball.
How about dropping the partial tarballs and using the
Kiyoshi Sawada [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:18:48 -0500 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why not? Try looking in the postmaster log for errors related to
stats collector startup. (pstat is irrelevant, btw.)
LOG: could not bind socket for statistics collector:
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Even if they weren't useful for anything else, I think there's value in the
developers having to consider what is optional and what is not. This need
for constant review probably reduces the chance of bloat, over time even
in the full
Greg Stark wrote:
Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If the parent postmaster mmaps anonymous memory segments and shares them with
children, postgresql wouldn't be dependent upon any kernel resourse aka
shared memory anymore.
Anonymous memory mappings aren't shared, at least not
What facilities are/will be available for hot(online) backups with the
7.4 release? PITR, something else? TIA.
--
Austin Gonyou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Coremetrics, Inc.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
Dear community,
for some reason the post I sent yesterday night still did not show up on
the mailing lists. I have set up some links on the developers side under
http://developer.postgresql.org/~wieck/slony1.html
The concept will be the base for some of my work as a Software Engineer
here at
Jan Wieck wrote:
http://developer.postgresql.org/~wieck/slony1.html
Very interesting read. Nice work!
We want to build this system as a community project. The plan was from
the beginning to release the product under the BSD license. And we think
it is best to start it as such and to ask for
On Nov 11, 2003, at 12:11 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
Jan Wieck wrote:
http://developer.postgresql.org/~wieck/slony1.html
Very interesting read. Nice work!
Ditto. I'll read it a bit closer later, but after a quick read it
seems quite complete and well thought out. I especially like
that sequences
Joe Conway wrote:
Jan Wieck wrote:
http://developer.postgresql.org/~wieck/slony1.html
Very interesting read. Nice work!
We want to build this system as a community project. The plan was from
the beginning to release the product under the BSD license. And we think
it is best to start it as such
Jan Wieck wrote:
If you mean to configure the system to replicate rows to different
destinations (slaves) based on arbitrary qualifications, no. I had
thought about it, but it does not really fit into the datacenter and
failover picture, so it is not required to meet the goals and adds
44 matches
Mail list logo
