Hi Heikki,
I checked your patch, then I have a comment and two questions here.
The heap_prepare_insert() seems a duplication of code with earlier
half of existing heap_insert(). I think it is a good question to
consolidate these portion of the code.
I'm not clear the reason why the argument of
On 25 September 2011 09:43, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
Hi Heikki,
I checked your patch, then I have a comment and two questions here.
2011/9/14 Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com:
Attached is a new version of the patch. It is now complete, including WAL
OK, i started once again:
I hope the following is the correct way of querying the table corresponding
to a relid:
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/fix-for-pg-upgrade-tp3411128p4838427.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive
On 24 September 2011 11:59, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
TABLE tab completion in psql only completes to tables, not views. but
the TABLE command works fine for both tables and views (and also
sequences).
Seems we should just complete it to relations and not tables - or can
Hi Greg,
On Sunday, September 25, 2011 03:25:50 AM Greg Stark wrote:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
I was assuming the kernel was smart enough to read this as *this*
process is not going to be using this file anymore, not nobody in
the whole
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 06:25:01PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
The Part-1 implements corresponding SQL syntax stuffs which are
security_barrier
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Joshua Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Since we haven't yet come up with a reasonable way of machine-editing
postgresql.conf, this seems like a fairly serious objection to
getting
rid of recovery.conf. I wonder if there's a way we can work around
that...
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Why do you need new WAL replay routines? Can't you just use the existing
XLOG_HEAP_NEWPAGE support?
By any large, I think we should be avoiding special-purpose WAL entries
as much as possible.
I
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn_H=E4user?= bjoernhaeu...@gmail.com writes:
Am 25.09.2011 um 17:17 schrieb Edson Carlos Ericksson Richter:
alter table usuario alter column ativo type smallint using (case when ativo
then 1 else 0 end);
ERROR: argument of IS FALSE must be type boolean, not type smallint
That's it: a check constraint I was not aware of...
Thanks!
Edson
-Mensagem original-
De: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] Em nome de Tom Lane
Enviada em: domingo, 25 de setembro de 2011 13:04
Para: pgsql-gene...@postgresql.org;
Robert Haas 09/25/11 10:58 AM
I'm not sure we've been 100% consistent about that, since we
previously made CREATE OR REPLACE LANGUAGE not replace the owner
with the current user.
I think we've been consistent in *not* changing security on an
object when it is replaced.
test=# create user
Kohei KaiGai wrote:
I'm not clear the reason why the argument of
CheckForSerializableConflictIn() was changed from the one in
heap_insert().
The code was probably just based on heap_insert() before this recent
commit:
Kerem Kat kerem...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 19:51, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Why? CORRESPONDING at a given set-operation level doesn't affect either
sub-query, so I don't see why you'd need a different representation for
the sub-queries.
In the planner to construct
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Okay, so you do agree that eventually we want to be rid of
recovery.conf? I think everyone else agrees on that. But if we are
going to remove recovery.conf eventually, what is the
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sep 24, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I don't exactly buy this argument. If postgresql.conf is hard to
machine-edit, why is recovery.conf any easier?
Because you generally just write a brand-new file, without worrying
about
Folks,
What happens currently if we have an \include in postgresql.conf for a file
which doesn't exist? Is it ignored, or do we error out?
If it could just be ignored, maybe with a note in the logs, then we could be a
lot more flexible.
--Josh Berkus
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
Joshua Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
What happens currently if we have an \include in postgresql.conf for a file
which doesn't exist? Is it ignored, or do we error out?
It's an error, and I think changing that would be a really bad idea.
If it could just be ignored, maybe with a note in
There might be a use case for a separate directive include_if_exists,
or some such name. But I think the user should have to tell us very
clearly that it's okay for the file to not be found.
Better to go back to include_directory, then.
--Josh Berkus
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 00:31, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
That is somewhat compensated by the fact that tuples that are accessed more
often are also more likely to be in cache. Fetching the heap tuple to check
visibility is very cheap when the tuple is in
On Sat, 2011-09-24 at 10:49 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I'll add that it would also cause a little confusion with inclusivity.
What if you do: '[5,2)'::int4range? Is that really '[2,5)' or '(2,5]'?
Reminder: BETWEEEN supports the SYMMETRIC keyword, so there is
a precedent for this.
And I
Reminder: BETWEEEN supports the SYMMETRIC keyword, so there is
a precedent for this.
And I don't see it as valuable enough to justify changing the
grammar.
I agree that we should leave symmetry until 9.3.
--Josh Berkus
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
All,
I'd love to see someone evaluate the impact of Marti's patch on JDBC
applications which use named prepared statements. Anyone have a benchmark
handy?
--Josh
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
2011/9/24 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
I updated the patches of fix-leaky-view problem, according to the
previous discussion.
The NOLEAKY option was replaced by LEAKPROOF option, and several
regression
test cases
2011/9/23 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:45 AM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
The attached patch is a portion that we splitted off when we added
pg_shseclabel system catalog.
It enables the control/sepgsql to assign security label on pg_database
I rather like Tom's suggestion of include_if_exists.
include_if_exists certainly solves the recovery.conf/recovery.done problem. We
can even phase it out, like this:
9.2: include_if_exists = 'recovery.conf' in the default postgresql.conf file.
9.3: include_if_exists = 'recovery.conf'
Joshua Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
include_if_exists certainly solves the recovery.conf/recovery.done problem.
We can even phase it out, like this:
9.2: include_if_exists = 'recovery.conf' in the default postgresql.conf file.
9.3: include_if_exists = 'recovery.conf' commented out by
Hi,
Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp writes:
2011/8/15 Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp:
The attached three patches try to consolidate code path of DROP
statement on various kind of object classes.
These are rebased to the latest tree, and the part-3 portion also consolidates
DROP OPERATOR
panam wrote:
OK, i started once again:
I hope the following is the correct way of querying the table corresponding
to a relid:
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/fix-for-pg-upgrade-tp3411128p4838427.html
Yes, that is very close to
This is a review of the patch at this CF location:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=598
as posted here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4e04c099.3020...@enterprisedb.com
This patch applied cleanly and compiled without warning. It
performed correctly. Since
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Marti Raudsepp ma...@juffo.org wrote:
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 00:31, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
That is somewhat compensated by the fact that tuples that are accessed more
often are also more likely to be in cache. Fetching
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
I'm a bit nervous about storing security_barrier in the RTE. What
happens to stored rules if the security_barrier option gets change
later?
The rte-security_barrier is evaluated when a query referencing security
views
So I thought it would be a good idea to enable contrib/sepgsql in the
Fedora build of 9.1. This soon crashed and burned, though, because
(1) if you build sepgsql, there is no way to omit the sepgsql regression
tests, other than by not regression-testing contrib at all. I didn't
see that as a
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
This is a review of the patch at this CF location:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=598
as posted here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4e04c099.3020...@enterprisedb.com
Hmm, why is that patch the one posted
Tom Lane wrote:
Kevin Grittner writes:
This is a review of the patch at this CF location:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=598
as posted here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4e04c099.3020...@enterprisedb.com
Hmm, why is that patch the one posted for
On 11-09-22 09:24 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Fujii Masaomasao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/9/13 Jun Ishidukaishizuka@po.ntts.co.jp:
Update patch.
Changes:
* set 'on' full_page_writes by user (in document)
* read FROM: XX in backup_label (in xlog.c)
*
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 11:22:03AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Robert Haas 09/25/11 10:58 AM
I'm not sure we've been 100% consistent about that, since we
previously made CREATE OR REPLACE LANGUAGE not replace the owner
with the current user.
I think we've been consistent in *not*
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 11:22:03AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Robert Haas 09/25/11 10:58 AM
I'm not sure we've been 100% consistent about that, since we
previously made CREATE OR REPLACE LANGUAGE not replace the owner
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 10:12 PM, Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
[ new results ]
Nice results. I think these are far more convincing than the last
set, because (1) the gains are bigger and (2) they survive -O2 and (3)
you tested an actual query, not just qsort() itself.
I don't
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
As a stopgap, what about removing sepgsql from the list of contrib
modules tested by make -C contrib check?
+1.
In fact, I've been wondering if we ought to go a step further and not
recurse into the sepgsql directory for *any*
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
As a stopgap, what about removing sepgsql from the list of contrib
modules tested by make -C contrib check?
+1.
In fact, I've been wondering if we ought to go a step further and not
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 12:06 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Then we
could get rid of the associated configure option, which no longer
serves any other purpose, and just say that if you want to build (or
regression-test) sepgsql, well, you gotta go to that directory and do
it by hand.
Hi,
I'd like to support UTF-8 text or csv files that has BOM (byte order mark)
in COPY FROM command. BOM will be automatically detected and ignored
if the file encoding is UTF-8. WIP patch attached.
I'm thinking about only COPY FROM for reads, but if someone wants to add
BOM in COPY TO, we might
42 matches
Mail list logo
