Re: [HACKERS] Removing SORTFUNC_LT/REVLT

2006-01-01 Thread Andrew - Supernews
On 2005-12-29, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, no, that's not the problem: the problem is that you should be able to specify ORDER BY any sort ordering that the system can deal with, and the USING syntax is in fact too impoverished to do that. What if the mentioned operator is in more

Re: [HACKERS] Removing SORTFUNC_LT/REVLT

2006-01-01 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Jan 01, 2006 at 07:48:56AM -, Andrew - Supernews wrote: Doesn't this result in incorrect output in multi-column sorts? i.e. if 'Foo' = 'foo', but for sorting purposes you always sort them with 'Foo' first, then a multicolumn sort of the following data: ('Foo',1) ('foo',2)

Re: [HACKERS] Removing SORTFUNC_LT/REVLT

2006-01-01 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 04:33:32PM -, Andrew - Supernews wrote: On 2005-12-29, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, no, that's not the problem: the problem is that you should be able to specify ORDER BY any sort ordering that the system can deal with, and the USING syntax is in fact

[HACKERS] psql readline win32

2006-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
Getting started early this year, I've finally found a way around the issues with readline on win32. And it just took a little bit of google research and some testing. Recap of the problem: When running psql in a readline enabled mode on win32, any character requiring the AltGr key to generate

Re: [HACKERS] EINTR error in SunOS

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Qingqing Zhou [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I understand put a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() in the retry-loop may make more graceful stop, but it won't work in some cases -- notice that the io routines we will patch can be used before the signal mechanism is setup. I don't think it will help much at

Re: [HACKERS] Removing SORTFUNC_LT/REVLT

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes: On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 04:33:32PM -, Andrew - Supernews wrote: Does it matter? How would the same operator specify different orderings in different operator classes, Well, we currently don't forbid it and indeed encourage it (by

[HACKERS] Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf?

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
I was reminded of $subject by http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2006-01/msg2.php While I haven't tried it, I suspect that allowing a DNS host name would take little work (basically removing the AI_NUMERICHOST flag passed to getaddrinfo in hba.c). There was once a good reason not to

Re: [HACKERS] Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf?

2006-01-01 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: I was reminded of $subject by http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2006-01/msg2.php While I haven't tried it, I suspect that allowing a DNS host name would take little work (basically removing the AI_NUMERICHOST flag passed to getaddrinfo in

Re: [HACKERS] EINTR error in SunOS

2006-01-01 Thread Qingqing Zhou
On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: Qingqing Zhou [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I understand put a CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() in the retry-loop may make more graceful stop, but it won't work in some cases -- notice that the io routines we will patch can be used before the signal mechanism is

Re: [HACKERS] Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf?

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: ... I don't see a good reason why we shouldn't let people use DNS names. Security? Possibly, but if you're worried about that sort of attack you just don't use DNS names in pg_hba.conf. Certainly it'd be worth

Re: [HACKERS] Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf?

2006-01-01 Thread John DeSoi
On Jan 1, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: For the user in referred to thread: SSH tunnelling. I wonder if there's a way we can make that easier to setup... Making this easier and transparent would be nice, but I would still vote to allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf. SSH

Re: [HACKERS] Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf?

2006-01-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Sonntag, 1. Januar 2006 19:30 schrieb Tom Lane: I don't see a good reason why we shouldn't let people use DNS names. I generally support this, but I wonder if this could have strange effects if a name resolves to more than one IP address or even an IPv4 and an IPv6 address.

[HACKERS] Add a Known Issues section

2006-01-01 Thread Qingqing Zhou
Do we have a known issues section somewhere? If not, I would suggest we split the TODO list into two big sections, one is the PostgreSQL improvement part, the other is the known issues part. AFAICS there are some long lasting problems there simply because hackers are not aware of or too trouble

Re: [HACKERS] Add a Known Issues section

2006-01-01 Thread Qingqing Zhou
On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: Qingqing Zhou [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do we have a known issues section somewhere? If not, I would suggest we split the TODO list into two big sections, one is the PostgreSQL improvement part, the other is the known issues part. Aren't they all

Re: [HACKERS] Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf?

2006-01-01 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: I was reminded of $subject by http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2006-01/msg2.php While I haven't tried it, I suspect that allowing a DNS host name would take little work (basically removing the AI_NUMERICHOST flag passed to getaddrinfo in hba.c). There was once

Re: [HACKERS] Add a Known Issues section

2006-01-01 Thread Robert Treat
On Sunday 01 January 2006 17:30, Qingqing Zhou wrote: On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: Qingqing Zhou [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do we have a known issues section somewhere? If not, I would suggest we split the TODO list into two big sections, one is the PostgreSQL improvement part,

Re: [HACKERS] psql readline win32

2006-01-01 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Magnus Hagander wrote: Considering we have a fix, I think we need to re-enable readline on win32, and document this. However, there are a couple of things to decide on first: 1) Should it be made default? As it requires you to include this file to work, perhaps it should be set to

Re: [HACKERS] Add a Known Issues section

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Qingqing Zhou [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do we have a known issues section somewhere? If not, I would suggest we split the TODO list into two big sections, one is the PostgreSQL improvement part, the other is the known issues part. Aren't they all known issues? You need to be a lot clearer

Re: [HACKERS] EINTR error in SunOS

2006-01-01 Thread Doug Royer
From the Linux 'nfs' man page: intr If an NFS file operation has a major timeout and it is hard mounted, then allow signals to interupt the file operation and cause it to return EINTR to the calling program. The default is to

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] default resource limits

2006-01-01 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In experimenting I needed to set this at 20 for it to bite much. If we wanted to fine tune it I'd be inclined to say that we wanted 20*connections buffers for the first, say, 50 or 100 connections and 10 or 16 times for each

Re: [HACKERS] Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf?

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Am Sonntag, 1. Januar 2006 19:30 schrieb Tom Lane: I don't see a good reason why we shouldn't let people use DNS names. I generally support this, but I wonder if this could have strange effects if a name resolves to more than one IP address or even

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] default resource limits

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That's easily fixed, I think. We just need to remember what we have proved works. I can apply the attached patch if you think that's worth doing. If you like; but if so, remove the comment saying that there's a connection between the required list

Re: [HACKERS] EINTR error in SunOS

2006-01-01 Thread Doug McNaught
Doug Royer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From the Linux 'nfs' man page: intr If an NFS file operation has a major timeout and it is hard mounted, then allow signals to interupt the file operation and cause it to return EINTR to the calling

Re: [HACKERS] EINTR error in SunOS

2006-01-01 Thread Bruce Momjian
Let me give you a sky-high view of this. Database reliability requires that the disk drive be 100% reliable. If any part of the disk storage fails (I/O write failure, NFS failure) we have to assume that the disk storage is corrupt and the database needs to be restored from backup. The NFS

Re: [HACKERS] Add a Known Issues section

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Qingqing Zhou [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: Aren't they all known issues? You need to be a lot clearer about what distinction you intend to draw, and why it's so important that it deserves to be the principal classification metric for TODO. ... However, there

Re: [HACKERS] EINTR error in SunOS

2006-01-01 Thread Doug Royer
Yes - if you assume that EINTR only happens on NFS mounts. My point is that independent of NFS, the error checking that I have found in the code is not complete even for non-NFS file systems. The read() and write() LINUX man pages do NOT specify that EINTR is an NFS-only error. EINTR

Re: [HACKERS] EINTR error in SunOS

2006-01-01 Thread Doug McNaught
Doug Royer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The MOUNT options are opposite. Linux NFS mount - defualts to no-intr Solaris NFS mount - default to intr Oh, right--I didn't realize that was what you were talking about. -Doug ---(end of broadcast)---

[HACKERS] Ignore, just a test ...

2006-01-01 Thread Marc G. Fournier
Upgraded the News Server, and need to make sure gateways are working ... Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664 ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] EINTR error in SunOS

2006-01-01 Thread Doug McNaught
Doug Royer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes - if you assume that EINTR only happens on NFS mounts. My point is that independent of NFS, the error checking that I have found in the code is not complete even for non-NFS file systems. The read() and write() LINUX man pages do NOT specify that

Re: [HACKERS] psql readline win32

2006-01-01 Thread Robert Treat
On Sunday 01 January 2006 18:51, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Magnus Hagander wrote: 4) Can we ship linked with readline in the installer? If not, can we ship a readline-linked binary at all, or just the source? Considering readline drags along the GPL, and not just the LGPL. (We can link either

Re: [HACKERS] psql readline win32

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sunday 01 January 2006 18:51, Andrew Dunstan wrote: This has been debated ad nauseam in the past. The consensus, bar a few people with more advanced paranoia than I suffer from, is that we can ;-) I don't think it is good practice to ship packaged

[HACKERS] SIGALRM in autovacuum.c

2006-01-01 Thread Bruce Momjian
Is this correct in autovacuum.c? pqsignal(SIGALRM, handle_sig_alarm); Should it be SIG_IGN? I don't see autovacuum using a timer or a reason it is calling the backend's timer routine. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us

Re: [HACKERS] SIGALRM in autovacuum.c

2006-01-01 Thread Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote: Is this correct in autovacuum.c? pqsignal(SIGALRM, handle_sig_alarm); Should it be SIG_IGN? I don't see autovacuum using a timer or a reason it is calling the backend's timer routine. FYI, the comment above this says: * Set up signal handlers. We

Re: [HACKERS] SIGALRM in autovacuum.c

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes: Is this correct in autovacuum.c? pqsignal(SIGALRM, handle_sig_alarm); Should it be SIG_IGN? Absolutely not. autovacuum takes locks just like a backend and has to be able to handle deadlock timeout checks. regards,

Re: [HACKERS] Why don't we allow DNS names in pg_hba.conf?

2006-01-01 Thread elein
I also support this change. My clients have tended to move machines and networks around a lot as well as move databases from machine to machine. It would be nice to let the network gurus concentrate on getting the dns servers up and correct and leverage that work instead of having to change

Re: [HACKERS] psql readline win32

2006-01-01 Thread Qingqing Zhou
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote Anyone for trying to port BSD libedit to work on Windows? Maybe just let it be on Windows is acceptable. I am currently happy with my psql without readline support on Windows, but on Unix that's hard. If Windows users want more advanced client, there are a