Re: [HACKERS] How to crash postgres using savepoints

2004-08-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Did this get through? Hadn't seen anyone comment on it, and I thought it was pretty major :P Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: test=# begin; BEGIN test=# savepoint "A"; SAVEPOINT test=# rollback to a; server closed the connection unexpectedly This probably means the server terminated abnorm

[HACKERS] Have you heard? It's 8.0 ...

2004-08-02 Thread Tom Lane
The recent discussion on -hackers was leaning strongly to the idea that our upcoming release should be called 8.0 not 7.5, and after some small private argument the core committee agrees. We have a number of new features that warrant a major version bump (savepoints, PITR, native Windows port ---

[HACKERS] TODO Items

2004-08-02 Thread Greg Stark
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > TODO item? On that note several prior conversations I had here ended with WIBNI conclusions that really ought to be TODO items, in my humble opinion. Two come to mind off the top of my head resulting in: . "SELECT * FROM x JOIN y USING (b) WHERE a=?"

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: I've been looking at this for a while now, and will probably give it a go for 7.6/8. Let me know when you do, I'd be interested in collaborating. Command Prompt, if would help could help sponsor this project. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake Chris -- Command Prompt, Inc

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Philip Warner
At 02:00 PM 3/08/2004, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: I'd be interested in collaborating. Sounds good. Philip Warner| __---_ Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |/ - \ (A.B.N. 75 008 659 498)

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I've been looking at this for a while now, and will probably give it a go for 7.6/8. Let me know when you do, I'd be interested in collaborating. Chris ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Philip Warner
At 01:17 PM 3/08/2004, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Would be a bit of work though. I've been looking at this for a while now, and will probably give it a go for 7.6/8. Philip Warner| __---_ Albatross C

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Another reason to combine pg_dumpall into pg_dump... No argument here. Are you thinking of that? Yeah. Would be a bit of work though. Chris ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Josh Berkus
Chris, > Another reason to combine pg_dumpall into pg_dump... No argument here. Are you thinking of that? -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

[HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
P O S T G R E S Q L 7 . 5 O P E NI T E M S Current at ftp://momjian.postgresql.org/pub/postgresql/open_items. Changes --- PITR backup status file win32 binary version stamps server logging process (?) pg_autovacuum integration (i

[HACKERS] Away this week

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
I will be doing training in Washington DC this week, returning Friday. I should be online in the evening and reading email then. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 R

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Yes, shoot over that the section should contain. --- Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > Perhaps. I was also thinking that maybe it's time to combine pg_dumpall > and pg_dump into a single utility. At the moment, I can't see

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I find this behavior highly undesirable, and consider it a bug.The globals dump should just add users, and not delete any. Unless the --clean option is passed, yes I agree with you. The other issue is that it is silly to have to use pg_dumpall to get the globals. A person should be able to

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option

2004-08-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Perhaps. I was also thinking that maybe it's time to combine pg_dumpall and pg_dump into a single utility. At the moment, I can't see how pg_dumpall can ever have a -Fc option, since it will be messy to interact with the pg_dump processes. I was thinking a pg_export utility that can output to

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option

2004-08-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I just got an autoreply from David stating he will be away until August 9 if we want this functionality we have to code it ourselves. If not it can wait until the next major release. It can wait --- it was submitted after feature freeze anyway, and we certainly have more than enough other things t

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
TODO item? --- Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > >>I just got an autoreply from David stating he will be away until August > >>9 if we want this functionality we have to code it ourselves. If not it > >>can wait until the ne

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
AFAICS that happens only if you've specified the -c (--clean) option. Hence, I don't think it's a bug. Nope, happens even if you don't pass --clean. Not in CVS tip ... but you're right, older versions did act that way. Looks like someone addressed this already. Yeah, was one of my fixes. Should w

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I've just found a bit of undesirable functionality which I would call a bug in pg_dump. I'm not sure everyone would, but we'll see. Problem: the script which dumps globals such as users (pg_dumpall -g) involves deleting *all* users from the pg_shadow table via a direct update to that table.

[HACKERS] How to crash postgres using savepoints

2004-08-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
test=# begin; BEGIN test=# savepoint "A"; SAVEPOINT test=# rollback to a; server closed the connection unexpectedly This probably means the server terminated abnormally before or while processing the request. LOG: server process (PID 45905) was terminated by signal 11 LOG: termina

Re: [HACKERS] Anybody have an Oracle PL/SQL reference at hand?

2004-08-02 Thread Tom Lane
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Oracle defines very few named exceptions. Instead, the intention is that > you define a name for a numeric exception and use it yourself. Yeah, I noticed that. It seems a spectacularly bad idea :-(. What redeeming social value has it got? AFAICS ther

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Jeff Davis wrote: > On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 12:35, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Does anyone have any more? > > >From reading the lists it seems like most of PITR is in. However, I > can't find any docs for it so I don't know how I'd test it. I downloaded > the latest snapshot and don't immediately see a

[HACKERS] pg_proc.proacl documentation request

2004-08-02 Thread Jonathan Scott
All, I am looking for documentation on the pg_proc.proacl column. I am working on a schemadiff and when I expect the acl to be the same, they come out slightly different. I searched the PG 7.4 doc site, and didn't find anything except the one liner on the pg_proc description page. Any kind of

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Here are the open items. I think once they are resolved we can head > > into beta: > > ... > > Does anyone have any more? > > contrib/dbsize doesn't even compile, and I'm still of the opinion that > oid2name is going to be pretty use

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > "Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Does anyone have any more? > > > win32 signal safe socket handler > > I thought that was solved long ago? > > > win32 query cancel in psql (?) > > What's the issue here? I thought these were both solved a long ago but I kept t

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, added. These items are not required for beta. --- Merlin Moncure wrote: > > Here are the open items. I think once they are resolved we can head > > into beta: > > > > pg_dump multiple -t (?) > > PITR backup sta

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Tom Lane
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> AFAICS that happens only if you've specified the -c (--clean) option. >> Hence, I don't think it's a bug. > Nope, happens even if you don't pass --clean. Not in CVS tip ... but you're right, older versions did act that way. Looks like someone addressed t

Re: [HACKERS] Anybody have an Oracle PL/SQL reference at hand?

2004-08-02 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 01:43:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Can anyone check how well the syntax of plpgsql EXCEPTION, as described > >> at > >> http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/plpgsql-control-structures.html#PLPGSQL-

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Jeff Davis
On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 12:35, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Does anyone have any more? >From reading the lists it seems like most of PITR is in. However, I can't find any docs for it so I don't know how I'd test it. I downloaded the latest snapshot and don't immediately see anything about PITR. Regards,

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote: Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Problem: the script which dumps globals such as users (pg_dumpall -g) involves deleting *all* users from the pg_shadow table via a direct update to that table. AFAICS that happens only if you've specified the -c (--clean)

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Josh Berkus
Tom, > AFAICS that happens only if you've specified the -c (--clean) option. > Hence, I don't think it's a bug. Nope, happens even if you don't pass --clean. -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Joshua D. Drake
This is a non-trivial accident to have happen on a shared machine; once users are dumped, all of their ownerships and permissions go with them. If you have a complex permissions system, better hope you backed up first! I find this behavior highly undesirable, and consider it a bug.The glo

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Here are the open items. I think once they are resolved we can head > into beta: > ... > Does anyone have any more? contrib/dbsize doesn't even compile, and I'm still of the opinion that oid2name is going to be pretty useless if it doesn't know about ta

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Tom Lane
"Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Does anyone have any more? > win32 signal safe socket handler I thought that was solved long ago? > win32 query cancel in psql (?) What's the issue here? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Tom Lane
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Problem: the script which dumps globals such as users (pg_dumpall -g) > involves deleting *all* users from the pg_shadow table via a direct update to > that table. AFAICS that happens only if you've specified the -c (--clean) option. Hence, I don't think

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump bug fixing

2004-08-02 Thread Josh Berkus
Chris, I've just found a bit of undesirable functionality which I would call a bug in pg_dump. I'm not sure everyone would, but we'll see. Problem: the script which dumps globals such as users (pg_dumpall -g) involves deleting *all* users from the pg_shadow table via a direct update to that

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Marc G. Fournier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 02 August 2004 21:25 > To: Dave Page > Cc: Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL-development > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Open items > > > Unless he's posted from an address that I dont' recognize, it > isn't in the queu

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option

2004-08-02 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I just got an autoreply from David stating he will be away until August > 9 if we want this functionality we have to code it ourselves. If not it > can wait until the next major release. It can wait --- it was submitted after feature freeze anyway, and

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Marc G. Fournier
Unless he's posted from an address that I dont' recognize, it isn't in the queue ... at least not for approval ... On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Dave Page wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian Sent: 02 August 2004 20:36 To: PostgreSQ

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Merlin Moncure
> Here are the open items. I think once they are resolved we can head > into beta: > > pg_dump multiple -t (?) > PITR backup status file > win32 binary version stamps > server logging process (?) > pg_autovacuum integration (in queue) > pg_dump fixes (in queue)

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian > Sent: 02 August 2004 20:36 > To: PostgreSQL-development > Subject: [HACKERS] Open items > > > win32 binary version stamps Magnus has just gone on holiday for a couple of weeks

[HACKERS] Open items

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Here are the open items. I think once they are resolved we can head into beta: pg_dump multiple -t (?) PITR backup status file win32 binary version stamps server logging process (?) pg_autovacuum integration (in queue) pg_dump fixes (in queu

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
I just got an autoreply from David stating he will be away until August 9 if we want this functionality we have to code it ourselves. If not it can wait until the next major release. If anyone wants the original patch I can supply it.

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Is anyone working on this patch? --- Tom Lane wrote: > "David F. Skoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Tom Lane wrote: > >> pg_dump -t s1.t1 -t s2.t2 -- Dump s1.t1 and s2.t2 > > > That's a

Re: [HACKERS] Support for persistant objects in PostgreSQL?

2004-08-02 Thread Josh Berkus
Merlin, > Just curious: why not? Because it's non-atomic data, which violates normalization and makes maintenance and data cleaning a royal pain. Also, you'd still need to write your own operators to be able to do comparisons. -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco --

Re: [HACKERS] Support for persistant objects in PostgreSQL?

2004-08-02 Thread Merlin Moncure
Josh Berkus wrote: > I don't reccomend using them at any time, though ... Just curious: why not? Merlin ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Re: [HACKERS] Support for persistant objects in PostgreSQL?

2004-08-02 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Josh Berkus wrote: Suresh, Is persistant objects and references to these objects supported in PostgreSQL? If so can anyone point me to the documentation for these? These structures are usually known as "Composite Types", although they have a different, less intuitive name in the

Re: [HACKERS] Support for persistant objects in PostgreSQL?

2004-08-02 Thread Josh Berkus
Suresh, > Is persistant objects and references to these objects > supported in PostgreSQL? If so can anyone point me to > the documentation for these? These structures are usually known as "Composite Types", although they have a different, less intuitive name in the SQL99 standard which escapes

Re: [HACKERS] replication modules on postgres

2004-08-02 Thread Tom Lane
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, chinni wrote: >> Is the core Postgres team thinking of providing such an API? > the only worry I'd have is a new one > coming along that needs to plug in at a different point in the server ... That would be the major worry I'd

Re: [HACKERS] replication modules on postgres

2004-08-02 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 08:51, chinni wrote: > Hi all! > Some time back I discussed the inclusion of replication (e.g. > postgres-R) into postgres. > One of the technical reasons that I understand against such a move is > the application dependence of replication. PostgresR requires a large > amount

Re: [HACKERS] replication modules on postgres

2004-08-02 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, chinni wrote: Is the core Postgres team thinking of providing such an API? Would they be inclined to do so in the future? Finally, in case they are not, would the postgres team be willing to help independent contributors (like me) to standardize such an API and accept the change

Re: [HACKERS] psql i18n - sk

2004-08-02 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Zoltan Bartko wrote: > attached you may find a tarball with somme message catalogs > transalated to sk. The rest will follow. Installed. > A question: does anything like a string-freeze happen in a PostgreSQL > development cycle? If so, when is it going to be in the case of PgSQL > 7.5? Now that

Re: [HACKERS] replication modules on postgres

2004-08-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Some time back I discussed the inclusion of replication (e.g. postgres-R) into postgres. One of the technical reasons that I understand against such a move is the application dependence of replication. PostgresR requires a large amount of code change in postgres. All this leads to a bitter taste i

[HACKERS] replication modules on postgres

2004-08-02 Thread chinni
Hi all! Some time back I discussed the inclusion of replication (e.g. postgres-R) into postgres. One of the technical reasons that I understand against such a move is the application dependence of replication. PostgresR requires a large amount of code change in postgres. All this leads to a bitter

Re: [HACKERS] psql i18n - sk

2004-08-02 Thread Tom Lane
Zoltan Bartko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > A question: does anything like a string-freeze happen in a PostgreSQL=20 > development cycle? Yes. > If so, when is it going to be in the case of PgSQL 7.5? Not for a good long while yet. I'd not suggest getting excited about translation for another m

Re: [HACKERS] psql i18n - sk

2004-08-02 Thread Zoltan Bartko
Hackers/Peter, attached you may find a tarball with somme message catalogs transalated to sk. The rest will follow. A question: does anything like a string-freeze happen in a PostgreSQL development cycle? If so, when is it going to be in the case of PgSQL 7.5? Cheers, Zoltan Dňa So 31. Júl 2

Re: [HACKERS] SQL conformance docs

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, updated. Thanks. --- Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > I notice that we can now tick some more stuff off this list: > > http://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/unsupported-features-sql99.html > > eg. savepoints.

Re: [HACKERS] Support for persistant objects in PostgreSQL?

2004-08-02 Thread Jeff
On Aug 2, 2004, at 2:08 AM, Suresh Tri wrote: Hi, Can you have persistant objects in PostgreSQL? In Oracle you can have create Object types. e.g create type ADDRESS as object (street_name VARCHAR2(30), house_noNUMBER); In Oracle you can even have references to these objects from

Re: [HACKERS] why is postgres-R not in standard dev Path.

2004-08-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Chris Browne wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (chinni) writes: > > Postgres-R is a multi server (write anywhere) replication tool > > which is possibly important for any enterprise if they want to shift > > to postgres. > > > > Did you guys debate on merging it. > > I seem to recall there being a

Re: [HACKERS] shared buffer hash table corrupted

2004-08-02 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 00:09, Adrian Maier wrote: > Hello, > > On the production server I have PostgreSql 7.4.3 , on Mandrake Linux 9.2. > In the message log on 29 july I have received several "shared buffer > hash table > corrupted" errors . > What could cause this error ? (bad RAM maybe?) M

Re: [HACKERS] shared buffer hash table corrupted

2004-08-02 Thread Gavin Sherry
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Adrian Maier wrote: > Hello, > > On the production server I have PostgreSql 7.4.3 , on Mandrake Linux 9.2. > In the message log on 29 july I have received several "shared buffer > hash table > corrupted" errors . > What could cause this error ? (bad RAM maybe?) Consider ru