Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> objdump -W $object_file | \
> awk '/DW_TAG_/ { grab=0 } /DW_TAG_typedef/ { grab=1 } /DW_AT_name/ { if
> (grab) { print $0 } }' | \
> sed -e 's/^.*: \([^ ]*\)/\1/' | \
> sort | \
> uniq
I oversimplified the awk line, causing some garbage to appear at the end
:-( The full
Hi,
I just came across objdump -W which dumps the DWARF info from a object
file. This is useful to build a typedef file for pgindent. It can be
used like this:
objdump -W $object_file | \
awk '/DW_TAG_/ { grab=0 } /DW_TAG_typedef/ { grab=1 } /DW_AT_name/ { if (grab)
{ print $0 } }' | \
sed -e
Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Gregory Stark wrote:
>> We've been through this once already. You can't do it (cleanly) with just
>> Makefile hackery. The architectures have different endianness and possibly
>> other ABI differences. To handle that cleanly you have
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
I read that Perl 5.10 is about to hit Fedora rawhide. Anyone know if
it will work with plperl and/or DBD::Pg? If there are fixes needed
in plperl, it'd sure be nice if they were in 8.3 ...
I've tested 5.10 aga
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Why does shdepDropOwned() take AccessExclusiveLock on pg_shdepend?
> Hmm, I can't recall nor deduce any reason for that. Perhaps the
> intention was to protect against itself; but I think this should only
> matter if we're dropping t
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Gregory Stark wrote:
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
would the community accept a patch that would allow the making of 4-way fat
binaries on Mac OS X 10.5+? (Obviously for 8.4+).
Depends on how big and ugly it is, I thi
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> would the community accept a patch that would allow the making of 4-way fat
>> binaries on Mac OS X 10.5+? (Obviously for 8.4+).
>
> Depends on how big and ugly it is, I think. If you can do it just by
> hacki
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, Tom Lane wrote:
Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
would the community accept a patch that would allow the making of 4-way fat
binaries on Mac OS X 10.5+? (Obviously for 8.4+).
Depends on how big and ugly it is, I think. If you can do it just by
hacking CFLAGS an
Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> would the community accept a patch that would allow the making of 4-way fat
> binaries on Mac OS X 10.5+? (Obviously for 8.4+).
Depends on how big and ugly it is, I think. If you can do it just by
hacking CFLAGS and friends, sure; if it's as invasive a
andy wrote:
Hello,
Someplace I recall hearing about a benchmark/performance farm... is
anyone working on that? It sounds kinda fun and I have a little time
to help.
I'm a perl/C/Java/Lua guy, hopefully there is something there I can
help with.
It's on my (very long) TODO list to add
would the community accept a patch that would allow the making of 4-way fat
binaries on Mac OS X 10.5+? (Obviously for 8.4+).
I'm thinking about attempting it for an inside project here at work, but
was wondering if there was community interest?
Thanks!
--
Larry Rosenman htt
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Strange. Most of the time I'd have no problem writing this off as a
>> build-synchronization error, but the tree has been so quiet lately due
>> to the release cycle that this seems an odd time to be seeing such a
>> problem.
> This
Steven Flatt's report in this thread:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2008-01/msg00138.php
exposes two more-or-less-independent flaws.
One problem is that we allow operations like TRUNCATE on tables that are
open in the current backend. This poses a risk of strange behavior,
such as
re
Tom Lane wrote:
> I came across some rather strange choices of lock levels in pg_shdepend.c.
>
> Why does shdepDropOwned() take AccessExclusiveLock on pg_shdepend?
> Seems like RowExclusiveLock should be sufficient. If it isn't
> sufficient, I wonder whether the other functions in here are taking
Tom Lane wrote:
> Strange. Most of the time I'd have no problem writing this off as a
> build-synchronization error, but the tree has been so quiet lately due
> to the release cycle that this seems an odd time to be seeing such a
> problem.
This was on a laptop I hadn't used in some time, and I
I came across some rather strange choices of lock levels in pg_shdepend.c.
Why does shdepDropOwned() take AccessExclusiveLock on pg_shdepend?
Seems like RowExclusiveLock should be sufficient. If it isn't
sufficient, I wonder whether the other functions in here are taking
strong enough locks.
It'
Sam Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's really up to you to find answers to these questions, especially
> the first one. Once you've designed an efficient algorithm then the
> second point (which I'm interpreting as how you'd go about changing
> tuplestore(?) so that things can be read in rev
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> False alarm, I think. I cleaned and rebuilt and now I can't reproduce it.
Strange. Most of the time I'd have no problem writing this off as a
build-synchronization error, but the tree has been so quiet lately due
to the release cycle that this seems a
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 07:42:24PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> During run creations I use two heaps instead of just one (yeah,
> it's still me... the one of the two heaps still trying to get some
> answer/help from -hackers)
Hi again!
> ISSUES
> a) how to distribute logical runs (that is bo
Hello,
Someplace I recall hearing about a benchmark/performance farm... is
anyone working on that? It sounds kinda fun and I have a little time to
help.
I'm a perl/C/Java/Lua guy, hopefully there is something there I can help
with.
-Andy
---(end of broadcast)
Hi,
On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 11:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Devrim: you should be testing specfiles by building as non-root;
> you would have caught this yourself.
Even though it means a lot of work in my current setup, this is what
will happen eventually, especially after the Makefile.regress probl
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > alvherre=# set lc_messWARNING: problem in alloc set PL/PgSQL function
> > context: detected write past chunk end in block 0xb541d0, chunk 0xb562c0
> > ages to 'C';
> > WARNING: problem in alloc set PL/PgSQL function context: detect
I'm trying to refine the sorting module of tuplesort.c
During run creations I use two heaps instead of just one (yeah, it's still
me... the one of the two heaps still trying to get some answer/help from
-hackers)
Those two runs are built in a way such that if we would concatenate one of them
t
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You don't need to set up all the machines this way, only the one where
> you actually write and test the SPEC file.
Well, actually, I'm fairly unhappy that Devrim's skipping the "make
check" step while building those RPMs (which he must do because it
wo
Devrim GÜNDÜZ escribió:
> On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 12:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > It's really not hard, it just takes a couple of minutes of one-time
> > setup.
>
>
> I *know* how to build the RPMs as non root :-) -- we are talking about
> ~60 servers to be setup like this . That's why it will t
Hi,
On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 13:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I *know* how to build the RPMs as non root :-) -- we are talking
> > about ~60 servers to be setup like this . That's why it will take a
> > bit time.
>
> You mean the RPM buildfarm?
Yes.
> I would've thought that was already set up a
Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=DCND=DCZ?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I *know* how to build the RPMs as non root :-) -- we are talking about
> ~60 servers to be setup like this . That's why it will take a bit time.
You mean the RPM buildfarm? I would've thought that was already set up
as non-root ---
Hi,
On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 12:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's really not hard, it just takes a couple of minutes of one-time
> setup.
I *know* how to build the RPMs as non root :-) -- we are talking about
~60 servers to be setup like this . That's why it will take a bit time.
I'll try to this
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
I read that Perl 5.10 is about to hit Fedora rawhide. Anyone know if
it will work with plperl and/or DBD::Pg? If there are fixes needed
in plperl, it'd sure be nice if they were in 8.3 ...
I've tested 5.10 against both and they seem t
Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=DCND=DCZ?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 11:26 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Shouldn't one always build RPMs as non-root?
> Probably, if the packager is not lazy ;)
It's really not hard, it just takes a couple of minutes of one-time
setup. Make a f
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> %install
>> rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
>>
>> make DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT install
I hope nobody tries building in a directory with a space in it...
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!
-
Hi,
On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 11:26 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Shouldn't one always build RPMs as non-root?
Probably, if the packager is not lazy ;)
Regards,
--
Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Host
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Devrim: you should be testing specfiles by building as non-root;
>> you would have caught this yourself.
> Shouldn't one always build RPMs as non-root?
That'd be my advice --- the other way is archaic, not to mention a
bit of a secur
Tom Lane wrote:
"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On 21/01/2008, Devrim GÃœNDÃœZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Orafce is about to be approved for Fedora, and I need help for one of
the review items. Per:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=251805#c1
AFAICT, the
"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 21/01/2008, Devrim GÃNDÃZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Orafce is about to be approved for Fedora, and I need help for one of
>> the review items. Per:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=251805#c1
AFAICT, there's nothing wrong with the
On 1/21/08, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > MD5 is broken in the sense that you can create two or more meaningful
> > documents with the same hash.
>
> Note that this isn't actually very interesting for the purpose for
> which the md5() function was put into core: namely, hashing passwords
On 1/21/08, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW, I'd like to see MD5/SHA-1 for BYTEA, not just TEXT, and with a
> BYTEA return value. Does pgcrypto provide that?
Yes.
--
marko
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list
>>> I read that Perl 5.10 is about to hit Fedora rawhide. Anyone know if
>>> it will work with plperl and/or DBD::Pg? If there are fixes needed
>>> in plperl, it'd sure be nice if they were in 8.3 ...
I tried and couldn't get the Debian perl 5.10 package installed without having
apt tell me it
* Tom Lane:
>> MD5 is broken in the sense that you can create two or more meaningful
>> documents with the same hash.
>
> Note that this isn't actually very interesting for the purpose for
> which the md5() function was put into core: namely, hashing passwords
> before they are stored in pg_authid
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * David Fetter:
>> Is there any country with laws so benighted that they restrict secure
>> hashing algorithms? Right now, there's a contest between SHA1 and
>> MD5 as to which one gets broken first, and SHA1 appears to be in the
>> lead. SHAn for n>1
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
I read that Perl 5.10 is about to hit Fedora rawhide. Anyone know if
it will work with plperl and/or DBD::Pg? If there are fixes needed
in plperl, it'd sure be nice if they were in 8.3 ...
I've tested 5.10 against both and they seem to work fine. My plperl te
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
> I read that Perl 5.10 is about to hit Fedora rawhide. Anyone know if
> it will work with plperl and/or DBD::Pg? If there are fixes needed
> in plperl, it'd sure be nice if they were in 8.3 ...
I've tested 5.10 against both and they seem to
Hi.
From: "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Yeah, vote +1:-)
Probably, the equipment which is not Symbolic Link is needed in order
to correspond to XP and 2K. It is hard to use rather than 'SymbolicLink'.
It will be enough if notice are written to a document.
The notice is *alraedy* in
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 10:11:52PM +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
> Hi.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> >Junctions only work for directories, not for files.
> >
> >In theory, you should be able to use mklink to create a hardlink on
> >previous v
Hi.
- Original Message -
From: "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Junctions only work for directories, not for files.
In theory, you should be able to use mklink to create a hardlink on
previous versions of Windows, but I'm not sure if it'll work. But we want
symlinks here, not h
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 07:33:57AM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 15:36 +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
> > Hi Simon, and Dave,Magnus.
> >
> > About pg_standby, a link option cause a problem in windows(XP and 2k,2k3).
> > It is because the call of mklink is needed. Then, they are th
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 03:36:29PM +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
> Hi Simon, and Dave,Magnus.
>
> About pg_standby, a link option cause a problem in windows(XP and 2k,2k3).
> It is because the call of mklink is needed. Then, they are the new programs
> of VISTA and 2008. It is CreateSymbolicLink of
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 10:22:13 -0500
> From: Jonah H. Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: pgsql-hackers list
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] sun to buy mysql
>
> On Jan 19, 2008 10:01 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm surprised no
Hello
is any chance to share standard Makefile and RH Makefile? I am sorry.
I don't understand to Makefile absolutely. It's look so global
Makefile need some changes.
Any help is welcome.
Regards
Pavel Stehule
On 21/01/2008, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
>
> Orafce is ab
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 10:55:11PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 8.3's psql is ponderously unhelpful when getting the type
> > description of an enum, so I'd like to propose a new column in the
> > \dT output which can contain those values in an array format.
On 1/20/08, Greg Sabino Mullane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In summary: what would objections be to my writing a sha1() patch?
Well.
If you do start adding hashes to core then _please_ pick a path
that allows having all the standard hashes in advance. That means
both md5 and sha-1, sha2 (4 hash
51 matches
Mail list logo
