Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 02:38, Tom Lane wrote: >> I did have another thought. It could compare the time from uptime to >> the timestamp on the lock file. If the server's been restarted since >> the time in the lock file then it must be stale. uhm. unless clock's >> been changed... > > Yeah, you can

Re: [HACKERS] BUG #4996: postgres.exe memory consumption keeps going up

Now why did this message get delayed by 4 hours before maia-1 delivered it to me? That was long enough in this to completely lose the thread of conversation. Received: from postgresql.org (mail.postgresql.org [200.46.204.86]) by maia-1.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2909CAFD073; T

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 2:30 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > I agree entirely with Andrew here- what we need are a set of users who > would be willing to run their actual applications against a beta release > in a testing environment.  The Beta-Mom position would be working with > some list of users who

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Greg Stark wrote: On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:00 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Greg Stark wrote: At least if it's all on one line you can just not scroll to the right and see the rest of the query on your screen. This is where the confusion arises. This is not possible on any termi

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Tom Lane wrote: > Josh Berkus writes: >>> That is a slightly alarmist. Who are we going to lose these users to? > >> Drizzle. MySQL forks. CouchDB. Any database which has replication >> which you don't need a professional DBA to understand. Whether or not >> it works. > > You haven't explai

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Greg Stark writes: > Incidentally I just tried > \d information_schema.views > and it *does* seem to put newlines after some of the target list > items. After each of the CASE expressions it puts a newline. So you > *already* get a mixture of some multiple items on a line and some > one-per-line.

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:00 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Greg Stark wrote: >> >> At least if it's all on one line >> you can just not scroll to the right and see the rest of the query on >> your screen. > > This is where the confusion arises. > > This is not possible on any terminal program I use -

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: Tom Lane wrote: Well, let's see it? What do you do with expressions that don't fit? See attached. This isn't going to work as-is, because (a) buf->data can be moved around by repalloc, and (b) you're not allowing for newline

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Andrew Dunstan writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Well, let's see it? What do you do with expressions that don't fit? > See attached. This isn't going to work as-is, because (a) buf->data can be moved around by repalloc, and (b) you're not allowing for newlines being introduced within the column expr

Re: [HACKERS] Logging configuration changes

Peter Eisentraut writes: > On sön, 2009-07-12 at 22:55 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On occasion, I would have found it useful if a SIGHUP didn't only log *that* >> it reloaded the configuration files, but also logged *what* had changed >> (postgresql.conf changes in particular, not so much

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update release notes for 7.4.26, 8.0.22, 8.1.18, 8.2.14, 8.3.8,

Tom Lane wrote: > Itagaki Takahiro writes: > > Could you fix this bug before release 8.4.1? > > I sent a patch, but no response in a week... > > I think that one's on Alvaro's queue. And, yes, the release notes will be updated before we package the release, so anything new that is added will be

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Greg Stark writes: >> Actually it always bothered me that we don't have implicit casts from >> integer->boolean. I can't see any ambiguity or unintentional effects >> this would cause problems with. Am I missing something? > > Personally, as an ol

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update release notes for 7.4.26, 8.0.22, 8.1.18, 8.2.14, 8.3.8,

Itagaki Takahiro writes: > Could you fix this bug before release 8.4.1? > I sent a patch, but no response in a week... I think that one's on Alvaro's queue. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your s

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update release notes for 7.4.26, 8.0.22, 8.1.18, 8.2.14, 8.3.8,

Could you fix this bug before release 8.4.1? I sent a patch, but no response in a week... [BUGS] fillfactor hides autovacuum parameters in 8.4.0 http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20090818185219.9da6.52131...@oss.ntt.co.jp momj...@postgresql.org (Bruce Momjian) wrote: > Log Message: > ---

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

* Andrew Dunstan (and...@dunslane.net) wrote: > Actually, what I had in mind was getting people to run their > applications etc. in some non-production environment on the beta. I > talked to a client today and he said "sure, we have several development > environments and we can put one or two

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

Andrew Dunstan writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Has anyone heard of other contexts in which file locks don't >> work? Has Windows got them? > Yes. But they are mandatory rather than advisory, I believe. Probably wouldn't matter for our purposes? I guess what we'd need is a writer's lock that still

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

Tom Lane wrote: I was actually having second thoughts about the idea of using file locking. The only environment in which I've heard of file locks not being trustworthy is NFS, and if you're running a DB on NFS you've probably got worse problems than this one. Notably, if you mistakenly try

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

Greg Stark writes: > On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:01 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Huh?  The startup script shouldn't *ever* remove the lock file. >> That's been true all along, and this doesn't change it. > I thought that was the whole difference between using pg_ctl to start > up and the initscripts. Sin

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:01 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> So with this change you would have the startup script not remove the >> lock file? > > Huh?  The startup script shouldn't *ever* remove the lock file. > That's been true all along, and this doesn't change it. I thought that was the whole differen

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

Greg Stark writes: > Actually it always bothered me that we don't have implicit casts from > integer->boolean. I can't see any ambiguity or unintentional effects > this would cause problems with. Am I missing something? Personally, as an old Pascal-lover, I always thought that C's failure to dist

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

Greg Stark writes: > On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:32 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Attached is a simple patch that uses the environment-variable approach. > So with this change you would have the startup script not remove the > lock file? Huh? The startup script shouldn't *ever* remove the lock file. Th

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Greg Stark wrote: At least if it's all on one line you can just not scroll to the right and see the rest of the query on your screen. This is where the confusion arises. This is not possible on any terminal program I use - they don't scroll left and right, they wrap, and the result in

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On Aug 26, 2009, at 8:17 AM, Jean-Michel Pouré wrote: Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 01:36 -0600, Rick Gigger a écrit : One possible reason that replication is more critical now than it was a year ago is the rise in cloud computing. The ability to fire up instances on demand is much more useful w

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:32 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Attached is a simple patch that uses the environment-variable approach. > This is a whole lot more self-contained than what would be needed to > pass the PID as an explicit switch, so I'm inclined to do it this way. > You could argue that a bad gu

[HACKERS] Linux LSB init script

Here's a first rough cut of Linux script which attempts to launch PostgreSQL as a somewhat LSB conforming application. It's very lightly tested and I haven't gone through to confirm that every corner case is handled exactly right; in fact on my kubuntu workstation (the only place I've tested so fa

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Much of the delay and uncertainty during beta in my mind comes from the > situation that we wait for negative results and don't trust the release > until we have seen and fixed enough of them. Instead of waiting for > concrete, positive results and producing the release w

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

I wrote: > "Kevin Grittner" writes: >> Thanks Andrew, Alvaro, and Chander. You've given me some thoughts to >> toss around. Of course, any of these is going to be somewhat more >> complex than using [ pg_ctl -w ] > Yeah. I wonder if we shouldn't expend a bit more effort to make that > way bull

Re: [HACKERS] Logging configuration changes

On sön, 2009-07-12 at 22:55 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On occasion, I would have found it useful if a SIGHUP didn't only log *that* > it reloaded the configuration files, but also logged *what* had changed > (postgresql.conf changes in particular, not so much interested in > pg_hba.conf).

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Maybe we need a couple of extra pg_get_viewdef() variants. One to wrap on > some provided line length, one to wrap on every column. psql could use the > first, pg_dump could use the second. > > I really can't believe anyone wants a single li

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On ons, 2009-08-26 at 18:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > I think there is a lot of merit (as Andrew suggests) in running a > > production application on a beta version of the database just to see > > if anything funny happens. > > ... but here we seem to be coming out at the same place anyway. Gett

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: I do have a solution that wraps when running line length over 80 instead of on every col: SELECT sh.shoename, sh.sh_avail, sh.slcolor, sh.slminlen, sh.slminlen * un.un_fact AS slminlen_cm, sh.slmaxlen, sh.slmaxlen * un.un_fact AS s

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Andrew Dunstan writes: > I do have a solution that wraps when running line length over 80 instead > of on every col: > SELECT sh.shoename, sh.sh_avail, sh.slcolor, sh.slminlen, > sh.slminlen * un.un_fact AS slminlen_cm, sh.slmaxlen, > sh.slmaxlen * un.un_fact AS slmaxlen_cm, sh.slunit >

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

Jean-Michel, > The truth is that Drupal core developers do not believe fixing the > prev/next link script is important. They don't care for SQL and don't > understand the relationship between SQL queries and CPU cycles. I doubt this would be an accurate description of all Drupal developers. The

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Tom Lane wrote: Greg Stark writes: I agree with Tom's concerns -- think of that guy who was bumping up against the 1600 column limit. At least if they're on one line you can still see the structure of the query albeit with a very very wide scrollbar... But for typical queries I

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > Is the offering good enough? We might need to run some kind of tutorials > for users to be able to run large tests easily, and maybe think about > some newer tools allowing to compare logs of two application runs in two > database versions

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > ... but here we seem to be coming out at the same place anyway.  Getting > people to put their existing apps onto a beta is very productive. > We have to encourage people to do more of that while it's still beta, > instead of waiting till .0 or .1

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

Greg Stark wrote: > Actually it always bothered me that we don't have implicit casts > from integer->boolean. I can't see any ambiguity or unintentional > effects this would cause problems with. Am I missing something? I'd be at least a little bit concerned about how such automatic casting to

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

Greg Stark wrote: > > PostgreSQL and MySQL do not use the same concatenation funtions (D6 only, > > fixed in D7) > > Personally I don't see a problem with us adding this to Postgres now > that we have variadic functions. I'm not sure why others are so > dead-set against it; it seems a lot less bu

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

2009/8/26 Greg Stark : >> PostgreSQL does not automatically cast data between BOOLEAN and INT >> PostgreSQL does not automatically cast data between INT and VARCHAR/CHAR > > These are things we've gone out of our way to NOT do. At some cost > too. Being loose here makes it easy to miss errors in yo

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

2009/8/26 Jean-Michel Pouré : > Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 22:06 +0100, Greg Stark a écrit : >> That >> would be unfortunate because I think there are 2 or 3 real >> improvements hidden in your list. > > Then explain I don't have your skills. What I'm suggesting is that you should take a different

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> ... Surely it's been tested before, else it would not be in >> the release, right? > I would sure hope so. Testing features individually makes a whole lot > more sense to me than testing the release as a whole. Ju

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Greg Stark writes: > I agree with Tom's concerns -- think of that guy who was bumping up > against the 1600 column limit. At least if they're on one line you can > still see the structure of the query albeit with a very very wide > scrollbar... > But for typical queries I do agree one per line is

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Hi, Peter Eisentraut writes: > On ons, 2009-08-26 at 14:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> Sure, but an aimless mandate to do testing for 4 (or 8, or 12) months >> doesn't necessarily buy you much, either. I'm good at focused >> activity - but there was nothing focused about 8.4 beta that I could >

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On ons, 2009-08-26 at 14:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> Sure, but an aimless mandate to do testing for 4 (or 8, or 12) months >> doesn't necessarily buy you much, either.  I'm good at focused >> activity - but there was nothing focused abo

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Josh Berkus wrote: Tom, all, As far as the alpha releases go, I wouldn't --- I see no evidence that we have the manpower to formalize them any more than they are now. I do like the idea of trying to reach out to more beta testers and manage that phase more aggressively. Maybe if we can ma

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Tom, all, > As far as the alpha releases go, I wouldn't --- I see no evidence that > we have the manpower to formalize them any more than they are now. > I do like the idea of trying to reach out to more beta testers and > manage that phase more aggressively. Maybe if we can make something > happ

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 16:56 -0400, Alvaro Herrera a écrit : > Have you tried Drupal 7? It's said to have many of these corrected. > Maybe you should stop wasting your time with 6.x. I am running a large community on the Net and people would like to migrate our framework to Drupal. We agreed

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 22:06 +0100, Greg Stark a écrit : > With your current approach you're likely to get dismissed out of hand, > not unlike what I can well believe happened in the Drupal world. This is the case. > That > would be unfortunate because I think there are 2 or 3 real > improvem

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On ons, 2009-08-26 at 14:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > Sure, but an aimless mandate to do testing for 4 (or 8, or 12) months > doesn't necessarily buy you much, either. I'm good at focused > activity - but there was nothing focused about 8.4 beta that I could > see. Maybe we need some kind of Te

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

2009/8/26 Jean-Michel Pouré : > After reading my story, I hope we can agree that noone is going to port > any MySQL code to PostgreSQL ever. This demands too much intellectual > efforts. Many people will migrate from DB2 and Oracle to PostgreSQL. But > no MySQL developer is going to use PostgreSQL

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

Jean-Michel Pouré wrote: > We are not leaving in a perfect world and there no reason to achieve > perfectness. So let's support this list, please: > http://drupal.org/node/14 Have you tried Drupal 7? It's said to have many of these corrected. Maybe you should stop wasting your time with 6.x.

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

Jean-Michel Pour? wrote: > To tell you how lazy MySQL people are is my last experience in the > Drupal world. In short, on my devel server, Drupal previous/next link > display SQL script returns 21.000 rows. Yes, we have seen this too. We have always targeted serious database developers, and tho

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

2009/8/26 Jean-Michel Pouré : > After reading my story, I hope we can agree that noone is going to port > any MySQL code to PostgreSQL ever. This demands too much intellectual Surely this is a complete overgeneralization... ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgre

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

> Second, we're not going to support MySQL's *bugs* and *bad design > decisions* which is what lazy developers actually want; they want > something exactly the same as MySQL, including bugs. If they want > that, > they can use MySQL. We are not MySQL, and trying to out-MySQL MySQL > is > stupid,

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Did we kill the idea of trying to retain the original view definition? >> Granted, that doesn't really help for SELECT *... > > That has nothing at all to do with the issue. The question is not about > whether to keep the original, it's abou

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

On Wednesday 26 August 2009 12:17:25 pm Josh Berkus wrote: > > Yes. PostgreSQL should be able to run MySQL code quoted here: > > > > This is a prerequisite for people to be willing to test and adopt > > PostgreSQL. People are not willing to debug frameworks like Drupal and > > port them to Postgre

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

David Fetter writes: > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 02:46:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> The alpha releases as currently constituted are practically the >> exact opposite of what's being suggested here :-(. We are pushing >> them out without very much advertisement, and certainly without any >> formal

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 02:46:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Matthew T. O'Connor" writes: > > Alvaro Herrera wrote: > >> This seems a good idea. Possibly pushing the betas more > >> aggresively to current users would make them tested not only by > >> PG hackers ... > > > Isn't this the purpose o

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL Compatibility WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

>> So when you talk about focusing on usablility improvements you mean >> that priority should be given to supporting MySQL-specific syntax >> extensions and ensuring that there are no queries where the MySQL >> optimizer comes up with a more efficient plan than PostgreSQL? Well, I'd be intereste

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

2009/8/26 Jean-Michel Pouré : > Dear Kevin > >> So when you talk about focusing on usablility improvements you mean >> that priority should be given to supporting MySQL-specific syntax >> extensions and ensuring that there are no queries where the MySQL >> optimizer comes up with a more efficient p

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

"Matthew T. O'Connor" writes: > Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> This seems a good idea. Possibly pushing the betas more aggresively to >> current users would make them tested not only by PG hackers ... > Isn't this the purpose of the new alpha releases, at lease to some extent. The alpha releases as c

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

decibel wrote: On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:02 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: The tiny patch attached fixes a long-standing peeve of mine (and at least one of my clients'), namely that the target list printed in viewdefs are unreadable. example output now looks like this: regression=# select pg_get

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Alvaro Herrera wrote: This seems a good idea. Possibly pushing the betas more aggresively to current users would make them tested not only by PG hackers ... Isn't this the purpose of the new alpha releases, at lease to some extent. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgr

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Dear Kevin > So when you talk about focusing on usablility improvements you mean > that priority should be given to supporting MySQL-specific syntax > extensions and ensuring that there are no queries where the MySQL > optimizer comes up with a more efficient plan than PostgreSQL? Yes. PostgreSQL

[HACKERS] Upcoming minor releases

The packager team is planning minor releases of 7.4.X to 8.4.X. The packaging of the releases will be done on September 3-4, with release due on September 9 (late to avoid a US holiday on September 7). -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http:

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Yup.  This is a huge problem and we need to deal with it somehow.  At > the same time, I'm worried that our beta testing process is already > inadequate.  We've found several rather embarrassing bugs in 8.4, for > instance, things that should have

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:02 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: The tiny patch attached fixes a long-standing peeve of mine (and at least one of my clients'), namely that the target list printed in viewdefs are unreadable. example output now looks like this: regression=# select pg_get_viewdef('shoe',

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Perhaps some more formalised beta program would be useful. I have > at least one client who could probably be persuaded to devote some > resources to Beta testing. Maybe we need a Beta Program co-ordinator > or some such animal. I suspect that plenty of possible beta tes

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Andrew Dunstan escribió: > Perhaps some more formalised beta program would be useful. I have at > least one client who could probably be persuaded to devote some > resources to Beta testing. Maybe we need a Beta Program co-ordinator > or some such animal. I suspect that plenty of possible beta tes

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Andreas Pflug escribió: > When initially implementing the pretty option, I ran into the same > consideration. Back then, I decided not to try any line breaking on the > column list. Instead, I treated the columns as "just a bunch of > columns", laying the emphasis on the from-clause (with potentia

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: My concern is not just with those features, but with the whole ratio of the window for new work to the total development cycle. That ratio keeps going down and the time the tree is effectively frozen to new features keeps going up. Yup. This

[HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

[originally sent from wrong account :-( ] The tiny patch attached fixes a long-standing peeve of mine (and at least one of my clients'), namely that the target list printed in viewdefs are unreadable. example output now looks like this: regression=# select pg_get_viewdef('shoe',true);

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

> Robert Haas wrote: >> I am assuming that at least Hot Standby and Streaming Replication will >> likely require two CommitFests to go from the point where they are >> seriously reviewable to actual commit. FWIW, I think that both HS and SR are special cases: if we ever see reviewable patches for

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > >> But Pg >> should have some pretty print function - it is easy implemented there. >> Personally, I prefere Celko's notation, it is little bit more compact >> >> SELECT sh.shoename, sh.sh_avail, sh.slcolor, sh.slminlen, >> sh.slminlen * un.un_fact AS slminl

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Andrew Dunstan wrote: > the window for new work to the total development cycle. That ratio > keeps going down and the time the tree is effectively frozen to new > features keeps going up. I'd like to see us keep the tree open as > long as possible but be much more ruthless about chopping off thi

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: [originally sent from wrong account :-( ] Andrew, you can login to the majordomo site and set your secondary address as an alias of this one. This means it'll recognize the other address and allow you to post from there without going throu

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> >> I am assuming that at least Hot Standby and Streaming Replication will >> likely require two CommitFests to go from the point where they are >> seriously reviewable to actual commit.  So if they hit the 9/15 date, >>

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > [originally sent from wrong account :-( ] Andrew, you can login to the majordomo site and set your secondary address as an alias of this one. This means it'll recognize the other address and allow you to post from there without going through the moderator queue. Of cou

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Robert Haas wrote: I am assuming that at least Hot Standby and Streaming Replication will likely require two CommitFests to go from the point where they are seriously reviewable to actual commit. So if they hit the 9/15 date, they should make 8.5 even with just three CommitFests. If they don'

[HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

The tiny patch attached fixes a long-standing peeve of mine (and at least one of my clients'), namely that the target list printed in viewdefs are unreadable. example output now looks like this: regression=# select pg_get_viewdef('shoe',true); pg_get_viewdef

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba.conf: samehost and samenet

2009/8/25 Alvaro Herrera : > Stef Walter wrote: >> Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> > and not just use SIOCGIFCONF for all Unixen? >> >> I do know that using SIOCGIFCONF on AIX comes with strange wrinkles and >> variable length data structures etc... getifaddrs() on AIX is a far more >> maintainable int

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

Tom Lane wrote: > start_daemon doesn't provide for switching to a non-root userid > according to that spec, so it seems like *it's* missing a crucial > detail. Hmmm... I didn't see anything requiring that it only by run by root. Do you see something that suggests that it must be? I've bee

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Jean-Michel Pouré wrote: > Kevin Grittner a écrit : >> It's not clear to me what you feel is needed. > http://drupal.org/node/559302 These look like performance issues. > http://drupal.org/node/14 These are MySQL compatibility issues. So when you talk about focusing on usablility impr

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

On Aug 26, 2009, at 11:18 , Jean-Michel Pouré wrote: Web apps are 95% of PostgreSQL possible users. Where does this figure come from? Michael Glaesemann grzm seespotcode net -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http:

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Jean-Michel Pouré wrote: Everytime I try a new Drupal module under PostgreSQL, I run into tiny SQL problems ranging from error to performance drop. The most problematic problem is http://drupal.org/node/559986 I strongly suspect this post badly mis-diagnoses the problem. IMHO for what

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 09:30 -0500, Kevin Grittner a écrit : > It's not clear to me what you feel is needed. That could mean many > things Dear Kevin, I rarely post on Hackers, so I will try to explain: * I use PostgreSQL since 1998. * I took part in the development of pgAdmin 1&2. * I l

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

"Kevin Grittner" writes: > This brings me back round to what I was looking at recently -- the > possibility of trying to make an LSB-conforming init script for > PostgreSQL. I'm having a lot of trouble, though, trying to get either > the postmaster or pg_ctl to behave well with the start_daemon f

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Pavel Stehule wrote: I am not sure - this should by task for client application. pg_get_viewdef() already has a pretty print mode, and this change would only affect output from that mode. Non-pretty printed output would be unchanged. My argument is that the pretty print mode for target l

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

Kevin Grittner wrote: Tom Lane wrote: In general I'd not recommend that an init script go messing with the contents of the postmaster.pid file, which it would have to do to have any of this logic in the script. But LSB specifically provides the pidofproc function to extract the pid

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

2009/8/26 Andrew Dunstan : > > [originally sent from wrong account :-( ] > > > The tiny patch attached fixes a long-standing peeve of mine (and at least > one of my clients'), namely that the target list printed in viewdefs are > unreadable. > > example output now looks like this: > >   regression=

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Andrew Dunstan writes: > When you're dealing with a view that has 40 or 50 fields, having them > all run together over a dozen or two lines is just horrible. True, but is having them span a couple of screens vertically going to be much better? There'll be a whole lot of wasted whitespace. I'm

Re: [HACKERS] We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts

Tom Lane wrote: > In general I'd not recommend that an init script go messing with the > contents of the postmaster.pid file, which it would have to do to > have any of this logic in the script. But LSB specifically provides the pidofproc function to extract the pid info. http://refspecs.fre

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL does CAST implicitely between int and a domain derive from int during SELECT query

Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 09:16 -0500, Kevin Grittner a écrit : > Please repost with that the pgsql-performance list Done: http://drupal.org/node/559986 Kind regards, JMP signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: The tiny patch attached fixes a long-standing peeve of mine (and at least one of my clients'), namely that the target list printed in viewdefs are unreadable. Personally I think this will take up enough vertical space to make things less reada

Re: [HACKERS] 8.5 release timetable, again

Jean-Michel Pouré wrote: > focus on usability. It's not clear to me what you feel is needed. That could mean many things -Kevin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL does CAST implicitely between int and a domain derived from int during SELECT query

Jean-Michel Pouré wrote: Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 10:07 -0400, Andrew Dunstan a écrit : Isn't that cast effectively a no-op? What is no-op in English (I am French, pardon my English). I will update table definition in 5 minutes. see cheers

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL does CAST implicitely between int and a domain derived from int during SELECT query

Jean-Michel Pouré wrote: > Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 10:07 -0400, Andrew Dunstan a écrit : > > > > Isn't that cast effectively a no-op? > > What is no-op in English (I am French, pardon my English). “no-op” means “an operation which does nothing”. -- Alvaro Herrera

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL does CAST implicitely between int and a domain derived from int during SELECT query

Jean-Michel Pouré wrote: >Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 10:07 -0400, Andrew Dunstan a écrit : >> >> Isn't that cast effectively a no-op? > > What is no-op It's short for "no operation" -- meaning it doesn't really result in anything being done. You are probably way off base in your assumptions a

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL does CAST implicitely between int and a domain derived from int during SELECT query

Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 10:07 -0400, Andrew Dunstan a écrit : > > Isn't that cast effectively a no-op? What is no-op in English (I am French, pardon my English). I will update table definition in 5 minutes. Stay tuned. Kind regards, Jean-Michel signature.asc Description: Ceci est une parti

Re: [HACKERS] pretty print viewdefs

Andrew Dunstan writes: > The tiny patch attached fixes a long-standing peeve of mine (and at > least one of my clients'), namely that the target list printed in > viewdefs are unreadable. Personally I think this will take up enough vertical space to make things less readable on-screen, not more

  1   2   >