Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

On Wednesday 11 April 2007 12:24, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > If we could use configure for MSVC this would have Just Happened (tm). I > wonder how many other little bits we miss out on? CMake anyone? wt -- Warren Turkal (w00t) ---(end of broadcast)--

Re: [HACKERS] Makefile patch to make gcov work on Postgres contrib modules

Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > %.so: %.o > ! $(CC) -shared -o $@ $< > sqlmansect = 7 > --- 11,16 > endif > %.so: %.o > ! $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -shared -o $@ $< Surely CFLAGS should be irrelevant at link time. Maybe LDFLAGS? regards, tom

Re: [HACKERS] Makefile patch to make gcov work on Postgres contrib modules

Gregory Stark wrote: > Actually better than adding -lcov, I think this rule really ought to > have CFLAGS in it in case there are other CFLAGS that are necessary > at link time. But why would -lcov appear in CFLAGS? If it's a library it should be in LIBS and perhaps in SHLIB_LINK. -- Peter Eis

Re: [HACKERS] [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: Anyone interested in improving postgresql scaling?]

"Kris Kennaway" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If there really are users who find 10 proctitle updates/second an > unacceptably low update rate, then tune for the default case and > provide an option to allow them to override the rate limit to whatever > update rate they find appropriate. If you

[HACKERS] Makefile patch to make gcov work on Postgres contrib modules

I was trying to use gcov on Postgres and ran into a problem where some contrib modules were missing the key libcov symbols and failed to load. Korry very helpfully tracked down the missing bit: the broken modules were ones built using "gcc -shared" according to the rule in Makefile.linux which doe

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Full page writes improvement, code update

I don't fully understand what "transaction log" means. If it means "archived WAL", the current (8.2) code handle WAL as follows: 1) If full_page_writes=off, then no full page writes will be written to WAL, except for those during onlie backup (between pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup). T

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Full page writes improvement, code update

The score below was taken based on 8.2 code, not 8.3 code. So I don't think the below measure is introduced only in 8.3 code. Tom Lane wrote: > Koichi Suzuki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> For more information, when checkpoint interval is one hour, the amount >> of the archived log size was as fo

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Fix for large file support

Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If we expose LET_OS_MANAGE_FILESIZE, should we add a flag to the > control file so that you can't start a backend that has that defined > against a cluster that was initialized without it? I imagine we'd flag that as relsegsize = 0 or some such.

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Tom Lane wrote: Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: The proper fix is to put it in the msvc build sys, where it writes pg_config.h :-) It also needs a new lib for initdb. I have a patch for it, and it works here, I'm just asking if it's safe to enable it or if it may cause runtmie pro

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Full page writes improvement, code update

Koichi Suzuki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > For more information, when checkpoint interval is one hour, the amount > of the archived log size was as follows: > cp: 3.1GB > gzip: 1.5GB > pg_compresslog: 0.3GB The notion that 90% of the WAL could be backup blocks even at very l

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Magnus Hagander wrote: > (FWIW, I had ipv6 on my list of things to make happen, but I didn't > realise it would cause this issue on a machine with ipv6 on it, since > I don't have one) The IPv6 support is finely tuned to deal with all kinds of combinations of API support, library support, and ker

Re: [HACKERS] elog(FATAL) vs shared memory

FWIW, you might want to put some safeguards in there so that you don't try to inadvertently kill the backend that's running that function... unfortunately I don't think there's a built-in function to tell you the PID of the backend you're connected to; if you're connecting via TCP you could

Re: [HACKERS] Eliminating unnecessary left joins

I agree with others that the way that query is constructed is a bit odd, but it does bring another optimization to mind: when doing an inner-join between a parent and child table when RI is defined between them, if the query only refers to the child table you can drop the parent table from

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Fix for large file support

If we expose LET_OS_MANAGE_FILESIZE, should we add a flag to the control file so that you can't start a backend that has that defined against a cluster that was initialized without it? On Apr 6, 2007, at 2:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: [ redirecting to -hackers for wider comment ] Zdenek Kotala <

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The proper fix is to put it in the msvc build sys, where it writes > pg_config.h :-) It also needs a new lib for initdb. I have a patch > for it, and it works here, I'm just asking if it's safe to enable it or if > it may cause runtmie problems on platf

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] [Fwd: Index Advisor]

Gurjeet Singh wrote: > The interface etc. may not be beautiful, but it isn't ugly either! It is > a lot better than manually creating pg_index records and inserting them into > cache; we use index_create() API to create the index (build is deferred), > and then 'rollback to savepoint' to undo t

[HACKERS] Fwd: patch to suppress psql timing output in quiet mode

[forwarded from -patches] I noticed that when psql accepts input from stdin or -f (but not -c), and timing is set to on in .psqlrc, timing results are printed out to stdout even when -q (quiet) is passed in. This may not be the perfect solution, but it fixes the problem (I'm having problems with

Re: [HACKERS] New email list about migration?

Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Should we create an email list just for migration questions? Seems it >> would be appropriate. -1 on that. > I think we have enough lists :). +1 on that. //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: H

Re: [HACKERS] New email list about migration?

Bruce Momjian wrote: Should we create an email list just for migration questions? Seems it would be appropriate. I think we have enough lists :). Joshua D. Drake -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240

[HACKERS] New email list about migration?

Should we create an email list just for migration questions? Seems it would be appropriate. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

Re: [HACKERS] So are we calling it: Feature Freeze?

Bruce Momjian wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Should we announce? There is some web work etc.. to be done. > > Sure. I don't remember us doing anything special to annouce feature > freeze, but if there is something, please go ahead. Given that nobody else did anything, I've updat

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >>> Anyway, the obvious fix seems to be to add a line to >>> src/tools/msvc/Solution.pm to #define HAVE_IPV6 1 in pg_config.h >>> >> >> Won't work, that hits both msvc and mingw. (assuming you maen >> pg_config.h.win32, since pg_config.h is a

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Magnus Hagander wrote: Anyway, the obvious fix seems to be to add a line to src/tools/msvc/Solution.pm to #define HAVE_IPV6 1 in pg_config.h Won't work, that hits both msvc and mingw. (assuming you maen pg_config.h.win32, since pg_config.h is a generated file) The proper fix is to put

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 02:24:08PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: > >On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > >>Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> > >>>Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 17:06 schrieb Andrew Dunstan: > >>> > >>> > There is a c

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Magnus Hagander wrote: On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 17:06 schrieb Andrew Dunstan: There is a configure time and a runtime check. The code is below - note the first #ifdef. Yeah,

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 17:06 schrieb Andrew Dunstan: > > > >>There is a configure time and a runtime check. The code is below - note > >>the first #ifdef. > >> > > > >Yeah, the problem is that th

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 17:06 schrieb Andrew Dunstan: There is a configure time and a runtime check. The code is below - note the first #ifdef. Yeah, the problem is that the msvc build has no intelligence to detect the IPv6 APIs to define HAVE_IPV6. So tha

Re: [HACKERS] UUID generation functions

# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2007-04-11 14:27:47 +0200: > I have built some UUID generation functions using the library at > . This should cover all the usual ways to > do it, and it also provides some special constants that could be useful. There's already a mapping

Re: [HACKERS] conflicting gettimeofday with MinGW

> > That page is ages out of date. The intended sync is > apparently broken. > > The current download area is on sourceforge > > http://sf.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=2435 > > > > > > *sigh* > > And what is in 3.12, which is apparently the current version? Sorry that was implied. sys

Re: [HACKERS] conflicting gettimeofday with MinGW

Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote: That page is ages out of date. The intended sync is apparently broken. The current download area is on sourceforge http://sf.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=2435 *sigh* And what is in 3.12, which is apparently the current version? cheers andrew -

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 17:06 schrieb Andrew Dunstan: > There is a configure time and a runtime check. The code is below - note > the first #ifdef. Yeah, the problem is that the msvc build has no intelligence to detect the IPv6 APIs to define HAVE_IPV6. So that needs to be developed. -- Pe

Re: [HACKERS] conflicting gettimeofday with MinGW

That page is ages out of date. The intended sync is apparently broken. The current download area is on sourceforge http://sf.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=2435 Andreas > > mingw-runtime-3.10 introduced a gettimeofday declaration in > sys/time.h > > that is not compatible with port.h. > >

Re: [HACKERS] UUID generation functions

Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I have built some UUID generation functions using the library at > . This should cover all the usual ways to > do it, and it also provides some special constants that could be useful. > What should I do with this?

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 16:46 schrieb Magnus Hagander: Point being - if you build on a ipv6 enabled machine, will that binary then work at all on a non-ipv6 machine? Consider binaries distributed by the installer... Might as well think up the proper fix before we j

Re: [HACKERS] Why need XLogReadBuffer have the paramter "init"?

"Jacky Leng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Cann't we remove this param? No. > We can rewrite like this: > 1.XLogReadBuffer: > * remove init; > * everytime we cann't read a block, just "log_invalid_page" it, and return > InvalidBuffer; Your proposal degrades the robustness of the system by tu

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Magnus Hagander wrote: On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 03:33:21PM +0100, Dave Page wrote: Magnus Hagander wrote: On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:08:36AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 15:36 schrieb Dave Page: This mean

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 16:46 schrieb Magnus Hagander: > Point being - if you build on a ipv6 enabled machine, will that binary then > work at all on a non-ipv6 machine? Consider binaries distributed by the > installer... Might as well think up the proper fix before we just band-aid > it for th

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 03:33:21PM +0100, Dave Page wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:08:36AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >> Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >>> Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 15:36 schrieb Dave Page: > >>> > This means that the regression tests fail to

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:08:36AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 15:36 schrieb Dave Page: >>> This means that the regression tests fail to run, leaving a postmaster.log full of 'no pg_hba.conf entry for h

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 15:36 schrieb Dave Page: >> >>> This means that the regression tests fail to run, leaving a >>> postmaster.log full of 'no pg_hba.conf entry for host ::1' errors. >>> Should we have initdb enable the ::1 pg_hba.conf tr

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:08:36AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 15:36 schrieb Dave Page: > > > >>This means that the regression tests fail to run, leaving a > >>postmaster.log full of 'no pg_hba.conf entry for host ::1' errors. > >>Should w

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 15:36 schrieb Dave Page: This means that the regression tests fail to run, leaving a postmaster.log full of 'no pg_hba.conf entry for host ::1' errors. Should we have initdb enable the ::1 pg_hba.conf trust entry by default on Vista? Any bet

Re: [HACKERS] Question about SHM_QUEUE

Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: >> Hmmm, my next question is whether we should use SHM_QUEUE or not in >> new modules. The point deluded me when I wrote DSM and I wondered >> the autovacuum-multiworkers patch uses SHM_QUEUE. > Good question. I used SHM_QUEUE b

Re: [HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

Am Mittwoch, 11. April 2007 15:36 schrieb Dave Page: > This means that the regression tests fail to run, leaving a > postmaster.log full of 'no pg_hba.conf entry for host ::1' errors. > Should we have initdb enable the ::1 pg_hba.conf trust entry by default > on Vista? Any better options? The defa

[HACKERS] Vista/IPv6

On Windows Vista, IPv6 is enabled by default, and cannot be uninstalled, or disabled easily on the loopback adaptor. localhost is ::1 by default, and the enhanced 'security' makes it insanely difficult to edit the hosts file. This means that the regression tests fail to run, leaving a postmaster.

Re: [HACKERS] conflicting gettimeofday with MinGW

Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote: mingw-runtime-3.10 introduced a gettimeofday declaration in sys/time.h that is not compatible with port.h. (current is mingw-runtime-3.12) int __cdecl gettimeofday(struct timeval *__restrict__, void *__restrict__ /* tzp (unused) */); T

[HACKERS] Why need XLogReadBuffer have the paramter "init"?

Cann't we remove this param? We can rewrite like this: 1.XLogReadBuffer: * remove init; * everytime we cann't read a block, just "log_invalid_page" it, and return InvalidBuffer; 2.Also rewrite all functions calling XLogReadBuffer with "init=true": skip current block if XLogReadBuffer return Inv

Re: [HACKERS] Question about SHM_QUEUE

ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: > Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I have a question about SHM_QUEUE. Why do we need this component? > > It's a hangover from Berkeley days that no one has felt a need to remove > > yet. > > > > > Then, can we replace SHM_QUEUE by a pointer-based double-linked

[HACKERS] UUID generation functions

I have built some UUID generation functions using the library at . This should cover all the usual ways to do it, and it also provides some special constants that could be useful. I have attached the code, but the code is actually against 8.2 with uuid define

Re: [HACKERS] conflicting gettimeofday with MinGW

On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 01:45:28PM +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote: > > mingw-runtime-3.10 introduced a gettimeofday declaration in sys/time.h > that is not compatible with port.h. > (current is mingw-runtime-3.12) > > int __cdecl gettimeofday(struct timeval *__restrict__, >

[HACKERS] conflicting gettimeofday with MinGW

mingw-runtime-3.10 introduced a gettimeofday declaration in sys/time.h that is not compatible with port.h. (current is mingw-runtime-3.12) int __cdecl gettimeofday(struct timeval *__restrict__, void *__restrict__ /* tzp (unused) */); The problem was already reported by

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE using sub selects

Hi, Hmm. That sounds like it would be a horrid mess. You need to decouple > the execution of the subplan from the use of its outputs, apparently. > There is some precedent for this in the way that InitPlans are handled: > the result of the subplan is stored into a ParamList array entry that's

Re: [HACKERS] CIC and deadlocks

On 4/11/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [ itch... ] The problem is with time-extended execution of GetSnapshotData; what happens if the other guy lost the CPU for a good long time while in the middle of GetSnapshotData? He might set his xmin based on info you saw as long gone. You mi

Re: [HACKERS] Question about SHM_QUEUE

Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have a question about SHM_QUEUE. Why do we need this component? > It's a hangover from Berkeley days that no one has felt a need to remove yet. > > > Then, can we replace SHM_QUEUE by a pointer-based double-linked list? > What exactly will you gain by it?