On Sat, 26 Jun 2004, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> (This is suspiciously similar to SAVEPOINTs). Another nice idea would
> be to be able to name subtransactions and rollback to a name, which
> would bring savepoints even nearer.
Sounds exactly like savepoints. What is the difference and why don't we d
On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 12:42:28AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> - discussion whether we want a different syntax for subxacts, like
> SUBBEGIN/SUBCOMMIT/SUBABORT instead of BEGIN/COMMIT/ABORT. Please
> comment on this point.
It has been suggested a couple of times that we should use a diffe
Regression tests weren't appropriate?
Didn't like em ... as you observed, there were parallelization issues,
and in any case I'm not convinced they were testing anything very likely
to break.
Either way, I plan to dedicate tomorrow to completing pg_dump support
for all those new functions, hopeful
Didn't like em ... as you observed, there were parallelization issues,
and in any case I'm not convinced they were testing anything very likely
to break.
Oh well, your call :)
Chris
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Regression tests weren't appropriate?
Didn't like em ... as you observed, there were parallelization issues,
and in any case I'm not convinced they were testing anything very likely
to break.
regards, tom lane
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 08:54:57AM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I would be fine with changing the lifetime if an EXECUTE failure did not
> abort the current transaction. Then I could simply watch the return
> code of the statement execution and prepare the statement on
> demand...from my point
Support renaming of tablespaces, and changing the owners of
aggregates, conversions, functions, operators, operator classes,
schemas, types, and tablespaces. Fold the existing implementations
of alter domain owner and alter database owner in with these.
Regression tests weren't appropriate?
Chris
We need has_tablespace_privilege()
http://candle.pha.pa.us/main/writings/pgsql/sgml/functions-misc.html#FUNCTIONS-MISC-ACCESS-TABLE
Chris
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> It occurs to me that a lot of the problem would go away if we allowed
> DEALLOCATE of a nonexistent statement to not be an error (seems like
> a NOTICE would be be plenty). Then you could just unconditionally
> DEALLOCATE anything you were abou
thanx"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,I seem to recall that HyperThreading and PostgreSQL != good stuff...There was a whole bunch of stuff recently on this... google the archives.Sincerely,Joshua D. DrakeJaime Casanova wrote:> Hi all,> > Can anyone tell me if postgresql has proble
Hello,
I seem to recall that HyperThreading and PostgreSQL != good stuff...
There was a whole bunch of stuff recently on this... google the archives.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
Jaime Casanova wrote:
Hi all,
Can anyone tell me if postgresql has problems with xeon processors?
If so, there is any fi
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hello,
You all are behind... Python is king.
Just to throw more fuel on the fire. Relvar inheritance is,
according to Chris Date, one of the two Great Blunders in database
engineering over the past twenty years.
Multiple Domain Inheritance: Yes
Relation Variable Inheritanc
Hello,
You all are behind... Python is king.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
Gaetano Mendola wrote:
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Greg,
You don't like Java/C#. I do.
What appear here is that you hate C++.
I'm a C++ developer since long time now, and I can not use JAVA and or C#
just for a couple of reason:
1)
Hi all,
Can anyone tell me if postgresql has problems with xeon processors?
If so, there is any fix or project of fix it?
Thanx in advance,
Jaime Casanova
Do You Yahoo!?
Todo lo que quieres saber de Estados Unidos, América Latina y el resto del Mundo.
Visíta Yahoo! Noticias.
Oliver wrote:
> If PREPAREd statements did DEALLOCATE on transaction rollback, the
> driver would have to track the set of statements that were first
> PREPAREd in the current transaction so it can fix the state on the
> driver side if the transaction rolls back. This is a lot of extra
> complexity
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Greg,
You don't like Java/C#. I do.
What appear here is that you hate C++.
I'm a C++ developer since long time now, and I can not use JAVA and or C#
just for a couple of reason:
1) Java was supposed to be platform compatible: in thereality is not really true.
2) I can not us
Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
There was also the middleware argument--some intermediate software layer
may be in control of bracketing. But in such cases, can you even rely
on two independent transactions executing in the same session? You'd
need to assume that to make the current semantics work in
"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK, looks like the error below is a Win32 thing. The patch attached
> #ifdef'd out the permissions check on the private key file as it won't
> work under Windows anyway (a similar check in postmaster.c has has
> already been ifdef'd out for the same reason)
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 10:02:29AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> It occurs to me that a lot of the problem would go away if we allowed
> DEALLOCATE of a nonexistent statement to not be an error (seems like
> a NOTICE would be be plenty). Then you could just unconditionally
> DEALLOCATE anything you w
"Jeroen T. Vermeulen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. Add a "soft" bit to prepared-statement plans
> 2. Add rollback bookkeeping for prepared statements, which sets the bit
> 3. Accept identical re-preparations of "soft" statements, clearing the bit
That sounds awfully ugly :-(
It occurs to me t
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 04:19:36PM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I am using PostgreSQL as a backend for legacy COBOL applications and
> have written a driver which maps the COBOL I/O statements to SQL
> statements. To save a little bit on parsing time and for various other
> reasons these SQL s
Jeroen wrote:
> Granted, that's probably going to force the issue. I do wonder
though:
> one of the arguments in favour of the current semantics is that the
> problems can be worked around using nested transactions. Then what
were
> people doing before nested transactions, in Tom's scenario where
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 02:00:12AM -, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> I was originally unhappy with the current situation, but now I think
> it is the best. Any changes will also cause a huge further headache
> for driver/application writers, as we already have a released version
> (and probabl
23 matches
Mail list logo