On 03/06/2012 01:09 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On ons, 2012-02-22 at 12:26 -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
I started collecting up all the variants that do work as an
initial shell script regression test, so that changes don't break
something that already works. Here are all the variations that
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 11:13:45AM +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
But it's broken in V3 protocol - getAnotherTuple() will be called
only if the packet is fully read. If the packet contents do not
agree with packet header, it's protocol error. Only valid EOF
return in V3
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
3. Pages with checksums set need to have a version marking to show
that they are a later version of the page layout. That version number
needs to be extensible to many later versions. Pages of multiple
versions need to
Hello
When I try to look on some multicheck form:
a) CHECK FUNCTION ALL ON table_name
b) CHECK TRIGGER ALL ON table_name
then more natural form is @b (for me). Personally, I can live with
one, both or second form, although I prefer CHECK TRIGGER.
I though some time more.
if somebody
On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 01:02:57PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
More detailed thoughts show that the test in heap_beginscan_internal()
is not right enough, i.e. wrong.
We need a specific XidInMVCCSnapshot test on the relvalidxid, so it
needs to be a specific xid, not an xmin because otherwise
Shigeru Hanada wrote:
[pgsql_fdw_v12.patch]
I know this is not the latest version, but I played around with it and
tickled a bug.
It seems to have a problem with rolled back subtransactions.
test= \d+ remote
Foreign table laurenz.remote
Column | Type | Modifiers |
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 03:46:16PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
I can see this strategy applying to many relation-pertinent system catalogs.
Do you foresee applications to non-relation catalogs?
Well, in theory, we have
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 07:07:41AM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
2012-03-05 19:56 keltez?ssel, Noah Misch ?rta:
Or how about a new feature in the backend, so ECPG can do
UPDATE/DELETE ... WHERE OFFSET N OF cursor
and the offset of computed from the actual cursor position and the
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@iki.fi wrote:
Remove extra copies of LogwrtResult.
I found one typo. Attached patch fixes that.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
***
(2012/03/06 6:19), Tom Lane wrote:
I've committed the PlanForeignScan API change, with that change and
some other minor editorialization. The pgsql_fdw patch now needs an
update, so I set it back to Waiting On Author state.
Thanks.
I've revised pgsql_fdw to catch up to this change, but I'll
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
On 21.02.2012 13:19, Fujii Masao wrote:
In some places, the spinlock insertpos_lck is taken while another
spinlock info_lck is being held. Is this OK? What if
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of mar mar 06 03:43:06 -0300 2012:
Hello
* I refreshed regress tests and appended tests for multi lines query
* There are enhanced checking of SELECT INTO statement
* I fixed showing details and hints
Oh, I forgot to remove the do_tup_output_slot()
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@iki.fi wrote:
Remove extra copies of LogwrtResult.
I found one typo. Attached patch fixes that.
Committed.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB:
Hi,
I have made some pg extension for Pg 9.1 and want to deploy it on Pg
9.2dev...
When i try create extension it shows error version mismatch server is 9.2
library has made for 9.1...
How to make library for 9.2?
Thanks,
Misa
Sent from my Windows Phone
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:43 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
Now, maybe we're never going to fix those kinds of anomalies anyway,
but if we go with this architecture, then I think the chances of it
ever being palatable to try are pretty low.
Why?
Because it'll require at least one XID
2012/3/6 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of mar mar 06 10:44:09 -0300 2012:
2012/3/6 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of mar mar 06 03:43:06 -0300 2012:
Hello
* I refreshed regress tests
Hi, Yeb.
Thanks for your reviewing and patch updates.
(and sorry my delayed response...)
I'd like to point out a case when plabel-label is NULL.
In case of sepgsql_setcon() being invoked with null argument
to reset security label of the client, but not committed yet,
the last item of the
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:50 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
+ * An xlog-switch record consumes all the remaining space on the
+ * WAL segment. We have already reserved it for us, but we still
need
+ * to make sure it's been allocated and
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
1. We don't need them because there will be something better in a
later release. I don't think anybody disagrees that a better solution
is possible in the future; doubts have been expressed as to what will
be required
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Tomas Vondra t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
The idea is that buildfarm systems that are known to have a) reasonable
hardware and b) no other concurrent work going on could also do
performance tests. The main benefit of this approach is it avoids
duplicating all of the
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Larry Rosenman l...@lerctr.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Is there any way to get more info out of CLUSTER VERBOSE so it says
what index it's working on AFTER the table re-write?
INFO: clustering public.values using sequential scan
Shigeru Hanada wrote:
Connection should be closed only when the trigger is a
top level transaction and it's aborting, but isTopLevel flag was not
checked. I fixed the bug and added regression tests for such cases.
I wondered about that - is it really necessary to close the
OK, I have removed all *.o and all *.so files - and extension is
succesfully deployed on 9.2
Thanks,
Misa
2012/3/6 Misa Simic misa.si...@gmail.com
Hi,
I have made some pg extension for Pg 9.1 and want to deploy it on Pg
9.2dev...
When i try create extension it shows error version
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com wrote:
Regarding a functional area I can help... but I can not understand why
this idea is so unappreciated?
I think it's a bit unfair to say that this idea is unappreciated.
There are LOTS of good features that we don't have yet
On 06.03.2012 14:52, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
On 21.02.2012 13:19, Fujii Masao wrote:
In some places, the spinlock insertpos_lck is taken while another
spinlock info_lck
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
I admit that block is longer than any of our existing spinlock blocks.
However, it's important for performance. I tried using a lwlock earlier, and
that negated the gains. So if that's a serious
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
On 06.03.2012 14:52, Fujii Masao wrote:
This also strikes me that the usage of the spinlock insertpos_lck might
not be OK in ReserveXLogInsertLocation() because a few dozen instructions
can be performed while holding the
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 11:38:33PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
By doing a DROP CASCADE on plpython2, you drop the user functions, but
not the support functions.
Well, yeah. The language depends on the support functions, not the
other way around.
This
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com wrote:
Regarding a functional area I can help... but I can not understand why
this idea is so unappreciated?
I think it's a bit unfair to say that this idea is unappreciated.
Well,
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
4. Checksums are being removed, but some blocks may still have them.
Thus, it's not an error for a block to have no checksum, but any
still-remaining checksums should be correct (though possibly we ought
not to complain
Commit b5282aa893:
Revise sinval code to remove no-longer-used tuple TID from inval messages.
dropped ItemPointer from callbacks and replaced it with hashValue.
There seems to be 2 ways that new backend code calculates it:
- hashoid(oid), which seems to assume too much?
-
2012/3/6 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com wrote:
Regarding a functional area I can help... but I can not understand why
this idea is so unappreciated?
I think it's a bit unfair to say that
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com wrote:
Regarding a functional area I can help... but I can not understand why
this idea is so unappreciated?
I think
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 11:38:33PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Well, yeah. The language depends on the support functions, not the
other way around.
Well, if CREATE LANGUAGE created those functions, it seems logical that
DROP FUNCTION removes them. Why is
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
For the reasons stated above, I believe pd_tli is less useful than
pd_pagesize_version. I fear that if we repurpose pd_pagesize_version,
we're going to make things very difficult for people who want to write
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
But having said that, it's not apparent to me why such a thing would
need to live inside the database at all. It's very easy to visualize
a task scheduler that runs as a client and
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I'll keep an open mind for now about database/table level. I'm not
sure how possible/desirable each is.
Table level sounds great, but how will it work with recovery? We don't
have a relcache in Startup process.
So either
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
4. Checksums are being removed, but some blocks may still have them.
Thus, it's not an error for a block to have no checksum, but any
Marko Kreen mark...@gmail.com writes:
So my question is that after doing generic SearchSysCache() like:
tup = SearchSysCache(USERMAPPINGUSERSERVER,
ObjectIdGetDatum(user_mapping-userid),
ObjectIdGetDatum(foreign_server-serverid),
0, 0);
what is the proper way to
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 10:38:31AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 11:38:33PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Well, yeah. The language depends on the support functions, not the
other way around.
Well, if CREATE LANGUAGE created those
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of mar mar 06 12:47:46 -0300 2012:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
But since you brought it up, I think there is a lot of value to having
a scheduler that's integrated with the database. There are many
things that the database does which could
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
For the reasons stated above, I believe pd_tli is less useful than
pd_pagesize_version. I fear that if we repurpose pd_pagesize_version,
we're
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I'll keep an open mind for now about database/table level. I'm not
sure how possible/desirable each is.
Table level sounds great, but how will it
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
As to whether we should increment pd_pagesize_version, I'm not sure
quite what you were saying about that (I think you may have an extra
or missing word there), but I don't think it's necessary here.
I said this...
On
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
As to whether we should increment pd_pagesize_version, I'm not sure
quite what you were saying about that (I think you may have an extra
or
On 06.03.2012 19:00, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
As to whether we should increment pd_pagesize_version, I'm not sure
quite what you were saying about that (I think you may have an extra
or missing word there), but I don't think
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I'll keep an open mind for now about database/table level. I'm not
sure
With all the respect to all into this Community...
I have no experience enough rich with C or C++ to say yes I can do that
alone. I do not know the internals of PostgreSQL at all. But I have
quite long experience with other languages.
I imagine if you have a piece of code which can run function
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Has EDB or anybody else you know of has used the pd_pagesize_version
field for something else, so you'd rather I didn't touch that?
The EDB page format is exactly the same as the community one.
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Options
(1) Recovery ignores checksums until db in consistent state
(2) Recovery ignores checksums until all databases are enabled, when
we set flag in pg_control
(3) Recovery checks blocks marked as having a
On tis, 2012-03-06 at 10:11 +0200, Alexander Shulgin wrote:
On 03/06/2012 01:09 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On ons, 2012-02-22 at 12:26 -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
I started collecting up all the variants that do work as an
initial shell script regression test, so that changes don't break
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com wrote:
Algorithm for first loop:
check jobs exists and is time to run it
run job as other sql statements (some validity check may be done)
get next job
no jobs - delay
There are crucial things missing here, namely the need
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Options
(1) Recovery ignores checksums until db in consistent state
(2) Recovery ignores checksums until all databases are enabled, when
we set
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Christopher Browne cbbro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com wrote:
Algorithm for first loop:
check jobs exists and is time to run it
run job as other sql statements (some validity check may be done)
get
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 09:25:17AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
2. Turning checksums on/off/on/off in rapid succession can cause false
positive reports of checksum failure if crashes occur and are ignored.
That may lead to the feature and PostgreSQL being held in disrepute.
This I do think
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 03:03:18PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
To avoid any confusion as to where this proposed feature is now, I'd
like to summarise my understanding, make proposals and also request
clear feedback on them.
Checksums have a number of objections to them outstanding.
1. We
2012/3/6 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Christopher Browne cbbro...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com wrote:
Algorithm for first loop:
check jobs exists and is time to run it
run job as other sql
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
One crazy idea would be to have a checksum _version_ number somewhere on
the page and in pg_controldata. When you turn on checksums, you
increment that value, and all new checksum pages get that checksum
version; if you
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
That's not why I want to leave that field alone, though: I want to
leave that field alone for backward and forward compatibility, so that
any version of community PostgreSQL ever released - and any page
inspection tools, current or future - can look at
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of mar mar 06 14:57:30 -0300 2012:
2012/3/6 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Christopher Browne cbbro...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Artur Litwinowicz ad...@ybka.com wrote:
Algorithm for first
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
But having said that, it's not apparent to me why such a thing would
need to live inside the database at all. It's very easy to visualize
a task scheduler that runs as a client and requires nothing new from the
core
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
And also some interface. It'd be useful to have background jobs that
executed either immediately or at a certain time or after a certain
delay, as well as repeating jobs that execute at a certain interval or
on a
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
It seems to me that the only thing that needs core support is the
ability to start up the daemon when postmaster is ready to accept
queries, and shut the daemon down when postmaster kills backends (either
because
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On tor, 2012-03-01 at 20:56 +0900, Shigeru Hanada wrote:
How about moving postgresql_fdw_validator into dblink,
That's probably a good move. If this were C++, we might try to subclass
this whole thing a bit, to avoid code duplication, but I don't see
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 06:00:13PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
One crazy idea would be to have a checksum _version_ number somewhere on
the page and in pg_controldata. When you turn on checksums, you
increment that
Hi,
I've noticed a locale-specific bug in regression tests, I discovered
thanks to the new magpie buildfarm member (testing cs_CZ locale).
The problem is in foreign_data where the output is sorted by a column,
and cs_CZ behaves differently from C and en_US.
More precisely, in C it's true that
It seems to me that the only thing that needs core support is the
ability to start up the daemon when postmaster is ready to accept
queries, and shut the daemon down when postmaster kills backends (either
because one crashed, or because it's shutting down).
I think this could be addressed
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I would dismissed this out of hand at this if you said it a year ago,
but I'm older and wiser now. At some point this cycle, I did some
benchmarking of the subtransaction abort path, since the slowness of
things like EXCEPTION blocks in PL/pgsql is a
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 03:03:18PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
To avoid any confusion as to where this proposed feature is now, I'd
like to summarise my understanding, make proposals and also request
clear feedback on them.
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 01:52:31PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 06:00:13PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
One crazy idea would be to have a checksum _version_ number somewhere on
the page and in
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 07:09:23PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 03:03:18PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
To avoid any confusion as to where this proposed feature is now, I'd
like to summarise my
On 06.03.2012 17:12, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
On 06.03.2012 14:52, Fujii Masao wrote:
This also strikes me that the usage of the spinlock insertpos_lck might
not be OK in ReserveXLogInsertLocation() because a few dozen instructions
can be
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 11:10:38AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Marko Kreen mark...@gmail.com writes:
So my question is that after doing generic SearchSysCache() like:
tup = SearchSysCache(USERMAPPINGUSERSERVER,
ObjectIdGetDatum(user_mapping-userid),
Excerpts from Simon Riggs's message of lun mar 05 16:34:10 -0300 2012:
It does however, illustrate my next review comment which is that the
comments and README items are sorely lacking here. It's quite hard to
see how it works, let along comment on major design decisions. It
would help
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
* Why do we need multixact to be persistent? Do we need every page of
multixact to be persistent, or just particular pages in certain
circumstances?
Any page that contains at least one multi with an update as a member
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I think the turning checksums on/off/on/off is really a killer
problem, and obviously many of the actions needed to make it safe make
the checksum feature itself less useful.
One crazy idea would be to have a checksum
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
We provide four levels of tuple locking strength: SELECT FOR KEY UPDATE is
super-exclusive locking (used to delete tuples and more generally to update
tuples modifying the values of the columns that make up the
On mån, 2012-03-05 at 19:37 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
The exact case is that the user was using plpython2u in PG 9.0, but
the PG 9.1 one-click installer only supplies plpython3u.
That seems like a pretty stupid choice to me, if it's true.
That doesn't address your issue, but users shouldn't
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 07:09:23PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
The problem is actually on/off/crash/on in quick succession which is
much less likely.
I must be missing something, but how about:
if (!has_checksums page_loses_checksum_due_to_hint_bit_write)
wal_log_the_hint_bit_write();
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
On 06.03.2012 17:12, Tom Lane wrote:
How long is the current locked code exactly --- does it contain a loop?
Perhaps best if you take a look for yourself, the function is called
ReserveXLogInsertLocation() in patch. It calls a
Martin Pihlak martin.pih...@gmail.com writes:
Updated patch attached.
Applied with minor editorialization (mainly just improving the
comments).
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
Preliminary comment:
This README is very helpful.
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
We provide four levels of tuple locking strength: SELECT FOR KEY UPDATE is
super-exclusive locking (used to delete tuples and more generally to update
tuples
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On mån, 2012-03-05 at 19:37 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
The exact case is that the user was using plpython2u in PG 9.0, but
the PG 9.1 one-click installer only supplies plpython3u.
That seems like a pretty stupid choice
On 6 March 2012 21:04, Dimitri Fontaine dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
[CASCADE will not run the command triggers for cascaded objects]
If these are all expected, does it in any way compromise the
effectiveness of DDL triggers in major use-cases?
I don't think so. When replicating the replica
Tatsuo Ishii is...@postgresql.org writes:
I'm working on implementing query cache in pgpool-II. I want to know
if a table has been modified because pgpool-II has to invalidate cache
if corresponding table is modified. For DDL/DML it would be doable
since pgpool-II knows all SQLs sent from
Marko Kreen mark...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 11:10:38AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Why would you need to know that? The reason the calculation function
is static is that there's no apparent need to expose that information
outside the syscache subsystem.
Because I need to
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mar mar 06 18:10:16 -0300 2012:
Preliminary comment:
This README is very helpful.
Thanks. I feel silly that I didn't write it earlier.
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
We provide four levels of
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I would dismissed this out of hand at this if you said it a year ago,
but I'm older and wiser now. At some point this cycle, I did some
benchmarking of the subtransaction abort path,
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
This might be something to consider in the adjacent thread about command
triggers, too --- who do they run as, and if it's not the calling user,
how do they find out who that is?
As of now, calling user (we just calling a function), or another user if
the
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Preliminary comment:
This README is very helpful.
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
We provide four levels of tuple locking strength: SELECT FOR KEY UPDATE is
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
This is an interesting hypothesis which I think we can test. I'm
thinking of writing a quick patch (just for testing, not for commit)
to set a
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mar mar 06 18:10:16 -0300 2012:
Preliminary comment:
This README is very helpful.
Thanks. I feel silly that I didn't write it earlier.
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:39 PM,
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
Activity and discretion beyond that could be defined in PL code,
including run/don't run conditions, activities, and dependancies. The
only thing Postgres doesn't currently have is a clock which fires
events. Anything we try to implement which is more
On tis, 2012-03-06 at 16:15 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On mån, 2012-03-05 at 19:37 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
The exact case is that the user was using plpython2u in PG 9.0, but
the PG 9.1 one-click installer only
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think reseting the stats has anything to do with it, it is
just that the shared_buffers warmed up over time.
Yes.
On my testing, this dirty-before-evict is because the bgwriter is
riding too far ahead of the clock
Hello
there is new version
* fixed small formatting issues related to drop SPI call
* long functions was divided
* CREATE TRIGGER ALL ON table support
Regards
Pavel
check_function-2012-03-06-3.patch.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Dimitri Fontaine dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
Activity and discretion beyond that could be defined in PL code,
including run/don't run conditions, activities, and dependancies. The
only thing Postgres doesn't currently
Excerpts from Dimitri Fontaine's message of mar mar 06 18:44:18 -0300 2012:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
Activity and discretion beyond that could be defined in PL code,
including run/don't run conditions, activities, and dependancies. The
only thing Postgres doesn't currently
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Why do we need a ticker? Just fetch the time of the task closest in the
future, and sleep till that time or a notify arrives (meaning schedule
change).
Because that can't be done in userland (at least, not
Excerpts from Merlin Moncure's message of mar mar 06 19:07:51 -0300 2012:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Why do we need a ticker? Just fetch the time of the task closest in the
future, and sleep till that time or a notify arrives (meaning
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
