Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Svenne Krap
Tom Lane wrote: I'm a bit suspicious of proposals that we move either hba or conf into SQL tables --- one of the main reasons why they are flat files is so you can still edit them after you've hosed them to the point that the database won't start or won't let you in. If you don't have a

Re: [HACKERS] Initdb on Windows 2003

2006-03-30 Thread Magnus Hagander
Just to let you guys know, I spoke to Microsoft and they confirmed that they have restricted access to the 'nul' device in a security update (to admin users). Not quite sure of the extact update! This is hardcoded in the Windows source, so no way to change somthing via code :( :-O Do

Re: [HACKERS] Initdb on Windows 2003

2006-03-30 Thread James_Hughes
Not yet, have asked for that very information. -James -Original Message- From: Magnus Hagander [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 30 March 2006 09:27 To: Hughes, James; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Initdb on Windows 2003 Just to let you guys

[HACKERS] COPY and read-only transactions

2006-03-30 Thread Peter Eisentraut
I probably made the original mistake in the code, so I refrain from claiming to know anything about Boolean logic, but this note in the release notes doesn't seem right: Fix the sense of the test for read-only transaction in COPY The code formerly prohibited COPY TO, where it should

[HACKERS] Slony-I for circular replication

2006-03-30 Thread Bojidar Mihajlov
Hi All; Can Slony-I be used for circular replication (A replicates B replicates A) or there is some kind of problem with locking or anything else? If I avoid insert conflicts will the following scenario succeed for the updates : A: X.balance-= 5 B: X.balance-= 3 A receives the update

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tino Wildenhain wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: ISTM that the first requirement is for a sane API that will handle the fact that HBA lines are ordered. Persistence in itself shouldn't be a big problem - we already do that with some shared tables, iirc. so we might have some functions like:

Re: [HACKERS] Slony-I for circular replication

2006-03-30 Thread Robert Treat
On Thursday 30 March 2006 08:34, Bojidar Mihajlov wrote: Hi All; Can Slony-I be used for circular replication (A replicates B replicates A) or there is some kind of problem with locking or anything else? Sounds like you want some kind of synchronous federated multi-master repication...

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Tino Wildenhain
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Tino Wildenhain wrote: ... I dont think it has to be ordered preliminary. Since we are dealing with subnets and stuff - the ordering already lays in the data - just like routing tables work: most specific matches first. I could think of a solution where pg_hba.conf just

Re: [HACKERS] COPY and read-only transactions

2006-03-30 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I probably made the original mistake in the code, so I refrain from claiming to know anything about Boolean logic, but this note in the release notes doesn't seem right: Fix the sense of the test for read-only transaction in COPY The code

Re: [HACKERS] COPY and read-only transactions

2006-03-30 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 02:20:04PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I probably made the original mistake in the code, so I refrain from claiming to know anything about Boolean logic, but this note in the release notes doesn't seem right: Fix the sense of the test for read-only transaction

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We don't have the luxury of being able just to throw out old stuff because we think it might be neater to do it another way. Well, we could if there were a groundswell of demand showing that the pg_hba.conf approach were inadequate (don't think so) or

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: If your pg_hba.conf looks like hostall all 0.0.0.0/32 md5 there's not much call to update it dynamically ... There'll be a call to update it once - to 0.0.0.0/0 ;-) I guess you proved the point about how easy it is the get wrong ;-)

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: If your pg_hba.conf looks like host all all 0.0.0.0/32 md5 there's not much call to update it dynamically ... There'll be a call to update it once - to 0.0.0.0/0 ;-) Doh ;-). Should make more effort to check my throwaway

Re: [HACKERS] Slony-I for circular replication

2006-03-30 Thread D'Arcy J.M. Cain
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 09:22:38 -0500 Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 30 March 2006 08:34, Bojidar Mihajlov wrote: Can Slony-I be used for circular replication (A replicates B replicates A) or there is some kind of problem with locking or anything else? Sounds like you

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread A.M.
Could postgres offer at least a read-only view of the data in the interim? Ordering could be controlled by line number. On Thu, March 30, 2006 10:14 am, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: If your pg_hba.conf looks like hostall all

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Andrew Dunstan
A.M. wrote: Could postgres offer at least a read-only view of the data in the interim? Ordering could be controlled by line number. You can get the contents as a single text field like this: | select pg_read_file|('pg_hba.conf', 0, 50*1024); Writing a plperl function that would strip

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Tony Caduto
Not sure about the luxury - iirc there was some change in the format of pg_hba.conf anyway over the time and beside pgadmin3 I dont see many tools to edit this file (apart from the usual text editor ;) Just a FYI, PG Lightning Admin edits the pg_hba.conf as well as the postgresql.conf

[HACKERS] pg_class catalog question...

2006-03-30 Thread Jonah H. Harris
I apologize for the lameness of this question upfront :) Does anyone know how to add a fixed-length char field to pg_class? I need to avoid the cost of variable-length so I tried to add the fixed-length char[64] right before relacl and updated CLASS_TUPLE_SIZE to reflect the fixed-size of the

Re: [HACKERS] Index vacuum improvements

2006-03-30 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Tom Lane wrote: Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1. Instead of stopping on the first matching tuple, scan the whole index page for all matching entries at once. That loses the ability to reflect tuple deadness back into LP_DELETE flags, no? Which is a

Re: [HACKERS] [ADMIN] can't get connection during pg_dump

2006-03-30 Thread Tom Lane
Steve Linabery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I just replicated the problem, see below for explanation, but here is ps output: postgres 25817 3201 55 10:20 ?00:02:54 postgres: postgres db_being_dumped [local] COPY postgres 27956 3201 46 10:24 ?00:00:36 postgres:

Re: [HACKERS] pg_class catalog question...

2006-03-30 Thread Tom Lane
Jonah H. Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does anyone know how to add a fixed-length char field to pg_class? Changing any of the bootstrap catalogs is fairly tricky --- there are a lot of places you have to update manually. I'd suggest looking for a previous commit that did something similar

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes: If your pg_hba.conf looks like hostall all 0.0.0.0/32 md5 there's not much call to update it dynamically ... There's one case, where .pgpass got hosed, and you didn't have a backup of it, and need to assign new passwords... I once

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Dunstan) writes: We don't have the luxury of being able just to throw out old stuff because we think it might be neater to do it another way. The current rules for HBA are order dependent. The issue raised as I understood it was not to invent a new scheme but to be

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Chris Browne wrote: Maybe we could do something like this: if there is a pg_hba.conf file present, then use it as now and ignore the access rights table - if someone does GRANT/REVOKE CONNECT while under pg_hba.conf then process it but issue a warning. Maybe there could also be an initdb switch

Re: [HACKERS] Index vacuum improvements

2006-03-30 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Simon Riggs wrote: First off, we need some good timings that show this effect. I believe it, but we need some publicly discussable performance test cases to show the effect and then show how much we've improved upon it, repeatably. Yeah, a good vacuum benchmark would be

[HACKERS] WAL dirty-buffer management bug

2006-03-30 Thread Tom Lane
I added some notes to src/backend/access/transam/README explaining the protocol for executing a WAL-logged action: --- 1. Pin and exclusive-lock the shared buffer(s) containing the data page(s) to be modified. 2. START_CRIT_SECTION() (Any error during the next two steps must cause a PANIC

Re: [HACKERS] pg_class catalog question...

2006-03-30 Thread Jonah H. Harris
On 3/30/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here are a couple of possibilities; the first one is smaller but it's touching pg_proc not pg_class. Yeah, I noticed that one. How would you suggest setting CLASS_TUPLE_SIZE in that case? -- Jonah H. Harris, Database Internals Architect

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread Robert Treat
On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 12:43, Chris Browne wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Dunstan) writes: We don't have the luxury of being able just to throw out old stuff because we think it might be neater to do it another way. The current rules for HBA are order dependent. The issue raised as I

Re: [HACKERS] control pg_hba.conf via SQL

2006-03-30 Thread David Fetter
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 10:43:31AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: A.M. wrote: Could postgres offer at least a read-only view of the data in the interim? Ordering could be controlled by line number. You can get the contents as a single text field like this: | select

Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces oddity?

2006-03-30 Thread Philip Yarra
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:46 am, Philip Yarra wrote: OK, how about on \d+, if the object is not on pg_default or pg_global, print the tablespace that this object is on? That way, people not using tablespaces won't ever see it. Tom, does this answer your objection? If so, I'll produce a patch for

Re: [HACKERS] Tru64/Alpha problems

2006-03-30 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: I'm not sure that I believe the getaddrinfo doesn't work diagnosis anyway, seeing that bear gets through make check okay. Wouldn't that fail too if there were a problem there? Now that I look further

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum: could not access status of transaction

2006-03-30 Thread Robert Treat
On Tuesday 28 March 2006 14:21, Nichlas Löfdahl wrote: Hello! PostgreSQL 8.1.1 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu I've been running a server with autovacuum enabled for quite a while now (months) without problems. But recently the server slowed down and after investigation I found the following

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum: could not access status of transaction

2006-03-30 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Robert Treat wrote: On Tuesday 28 March 2006 14:21, Nichlas Löfdahl wrote: I've been running a server with autovacuum enabled for quite a while now (months) without problems. But recently the server slowed down and after investigation I found the following repeated error messsage in the