2011/7/10 Jaime Casanova ja...@2ndquadrant.com:
On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 5:29 AM, hubert depesz lubaczewski
dep...@depesz.com wrote:
hi,
would it be possible to incorporate
http://www.postgres.cz/index.php/Enhanced-psql in core PostgreSQL/psql?
This patch adds lots of nice functionalities,
Hello
2011/7/9 Cédric Villemain cedric.villemain.deb...@gmail.com:
2011/7/9 hubert depesz lubaczewski dep...@depesz.com:
hi,
would it be possible to incorporate
http://www.postgres.cz/index.php/Enhanced-psql in core PostgreSQL/psql?
This patch adds lots of nice functionalities, which we
2011/7/10 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com:
2011/7/10 Jaime Casanova ja...@2ndquadrant.com:
On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 5:29 AM, hubert depesz lubaczewski
dep...@depesz.com wrote:
hi,
would it be possible to incorporate
http://www.postgres.cz/index.php/Enhanced-psql in core PostgreSQL/psql?
I like Darren's proposal. It is elegant.
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 18:38:59 +1200
From: gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz
To: dar...@darrenduncan.net
CC: pg...@j-davis.com; guilla...@lelarge.info; mbee...@hotmail.com;
pgsql-gene...@postgresql.org; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re:
Thanks Tom. Here is a example. Just a background of things . I have made
changes in postgress execution and storage engine to make it a MPP style
engine - keeping all optimizer intact. Basically take pgress serial plan and
construct a parallel plan. The query I am running is below.
*Query*
#
On 08/07/11 18:21, Darren Duncan wrote:
Jeff Davis wrote:
On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 20:56 -0700, Darren Duncan wrote:
When you create a temporary table, PostgreSQL needs to add rows in
pg_class, pg_attribute, and probably other system catalogs. So
there are
writes, which aren't possible in a
On Jul 7, 2011, at 12:30 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
thank you very much for review.
I thank you, too, Hanada-san. I was assigned to review this patch, but you beat
me to it. So now I'll do the follow-up review.
I cleaned patch and merged your documentation patch
I hope, this is all - a
On Jul10, 2011, at 06:01 , Bruce Momjian wrote:
Can someone help me understand pg_locks? There are three fields related
to virtual and real xids:
virtualtransaction | text |
transactionid | xid |
virtualxid | text |
Our docs say 'virtualtransaction' is:
On 11-07-07 09:22 PM, Jun Ishiduka wrote:
As you proposed, adding new field which stores the backup end location
taken from minRecoveryPoint, into pg_control sounds good idea.
Update patch.
Here is a review of the updated patch
This version of the patch adds a field into pg_controldata that
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
2011/7/10 Jaime Casanova ja...@2ndquadrant.com:
big part of this seems to be (based on the examples on the page,
haven't read the patch) scripting functionality but now that we have
DO, is really a need for that?
note - a output from DO statement
HarmeekSingh Bedi harmeeksi...@gmail.com writes:
Thanks Tom. Here is a example. Just a background of things . I have made
changes in postgress execution and storage engine to make it a MPP style
engine - keeping all optimizer intact. Basically take pgress serial plan and
construct a parallel
On 7/4/11 7:22 PM, Joseph Adams wrote:
I'll try to submit a revised patch within the next couple days.
So? New patch?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
Simon, Greg,
This patch[1] is for some reason marked waiting on Author. But I
can't find that there's been any review of it searching the list.
What's going on with it? Has it been reviewed?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
All,
Kaigai still has some patches pending review or revision in this
Commitfest. We need to wrap these up.
Joe: will you be able to be able to do more review on security labels?
Noah: do either of the leaky views patches look like they're almost
ready to commit?
Everyone: can someone
2011/7/10 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
2011/7/10 Jaime Casanova ja...@2ndquadrant.com:
big part of this seems to be (based on the examples on the page,
haven't read the patch) scripting functionality but now that we have
DO, is really a need for
Fujii,
In the current scheme we restart archiving from the last restartpoint,
which exists only on the archive. This new patch improves upon this by
keeping the most recent files locally, so we are less expose in the
case of archive unavailability. So this patch already improves things
and
All,
Merlin volunteered to review this patch and has not turned in a review.
Can someone who is Windows-saavy pitch in and review it ASAP?
I wrote and attached a patch for the TODO item below (which I proposed).
Allow multiple Postgres clusters running on the same machine to
distinguish
Hackers,
B. 6. Current behaviour _is intended_ (there is if to check node type)
and _natural_. In this particular case user ask for text content of some
node, and this content is actually .
I don't buy that. The check for the node type is there because
two different libxml functions are
Teodor, Oleg, Heikki,
My concern is that I am unable to prove to myself simply by reading
the code that the 24 line chunk deleted from gistFindPath (near ***
919,947 ) are no longer needed. My familiarity with the gist code
is low enough that it is not surprising that I cannot prove this
Hackers,
This patch needs a new reviewer, per Cedric. Please help!
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 7/3/11 2:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Yeah. If there were One True Way to create a UUID, I would probably
agree that we should push that functionality into core. But there are
a lot of ways (and the reason for that is that they all suck in one
fashion or another :-(). Between that and the lack
On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 00:36 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Is this really a good idea? I think the note should still be there in
9.1 and beyond (with the version applicability note of course)
I see your point, but it also seems strange to keep such a note
permanently. And it also seems minor
Original Message
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Review of VS 2010 support patches
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
To: Brar Piening b...@gmx.de
Date: 08.07.2011 11:38
Sorry for the late response - I've been on a wedding this weekend.
Something is strange here. Did you run
On tor, 2010-12-16 at 15:16 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Found another problem in it: when running with an older version of
dbghelp.dll (which I was), it simply didn't work. We need to grab the
version of dbghelp.dll at runtime and pick which things we're going to
dump based on that.
The
On Mon, 2011-06-27 at 10:13 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I didn't get a lot of comments on my the previous version of my patch
to accelerate table locks.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-06/msg00953.php
Here's a new version anyway. In this version, I have:
I am trying to
On Jul 10, 2011, at 1:40 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Hackers,
B. 6. Current behaviour _is intended_ (there is if to check node type)
and _natural_. In this particular case user ask for text content of some
node, and this content is actually .
I don't buy that. The check
On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:20:12AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
Noah: do either of the leaky views patches look like they're almost
ready to commit?
The parts 0/1 patch would be ready for committer, but instead it's going to
merge into a combined patch with part 2. I've updated the entry
On 11/07/2011 4:23 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I was going through the GetLastError() calls to unify the printf
formats, as discussed, and I stumbled across this:
+ write_stderr(could not write crash dump to %s: error code
%08x\n,
+dumpPath,
A few very minor things that I noticed:
1. You use pre-increment in for loops (e.g. FastPathGrantLock). The
rest of the code seems to use post-increment in for loops, so you
might as well stick to the convention in cases where the two have
identical meaning.
2. Typo in the README: acquire the
On Jul 10, 2011, at 4:15 PM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com wrote:
On Mon, 2011-06-27 at 10:13 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I didn't get a lot of comments on my the previous version of my patch
to accelerate table locks.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-06/msg00953.php
Here's
On Jul 9, 2011, at 10:49 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
In short: in my opinion, attoptions and attfdwoptions need to be one
thing and the same.
I feel the opposite. In particular, what happens when a future release of
PostgreSQL adds an attoption that happens to have the
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 3:30 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Fujii,
In the current scheme we restart archiving from the last restartpoint,
which exists only on the archive. This new patch improves upon this by
keeping the most recent files locally, so we are less expose in the
case
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
You can't *today*. But it's a very good question whether it wouldn't
make more sense to solve these problems by extending DO rather than
adding things into psql. Functionality in DO will be available to
non-psql clients.
I don't think we're ever going
On 07/10/2011 11:50 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Kaigai still has some patches pending review or revision in this
Commitfest. We need to wrap these up.
Joe: will you be able to be able to do more review on security labels?
Unfortunately his 4th patch version came a bit late for me -- I'll try
to
Okay, I finally had time to install a bunch of databases and see what
the industry thinks.
I tested the four seemingly most pertinent databases. The ability to
select for update with a left outer join is present on these
databases:
* Oracle
* SQL Server (not the same syntax, but does support the
Florian Pflug wrote:
On Jul10, 2011, at 06:01 , Bruce Momjian wrote:
Can someone help me understand pg_locks? There are three fields related
to virtual and real xids:
virtualtransaction | text |
transactionid | xid |
virtualxid | text |
Our docs say
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
But if that's what you want, just don't put your data in different
databases in the first place. That's what schemas are for.
Sadly, DBAs don't always have the ability to put all their data in one
database, even if
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of dom jul 10 21:21:19 -0400 2011:
On Jul 9, 2011, at 10:49 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com
wrote:
In short: in my opinion, attoptions and attfdwoptions need to be one
thing and the same.
I feel the opposite. In particular, what happens
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Michael Nolan htf...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
But if that's what you want, just don't put your data in different
databases in the first place. That's what schemas are for.
Sadly, DBAs don't
39 matches
Mail list logo
