On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Your two paragraphs have roughly opposite arguments...
Doing it every 32 pages would give you 30 seconds to complete the
fsync, if you kicked it
On 2 May 2012 13:41, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
So on further reflection I'm thinking it may be best just to stick
with a hard conflict for now and see what feedback we get from beta
testers.
Which is what I was expecting y'all to conclude once you'd looked at
the task in more
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 12:06 -0700, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:29 AM, Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
I don't object to row_to_json() and array_to_json() functions
being
there as a convenience and as the
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 00:58 -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 4/29/12 6:03 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
The DML-WITH-LIMIT-1 is required to do single logical updates on tables
with non-unique rows.
And as for any logical updates we will have huge performance problem
when doing UPDATE or DELETE
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Your two paragraphs have roughly opposite arguments...
Doing it every 32
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Hannu Krosing ha...@krosing.net wrote:
For logical we don't really need to uniquely identify such rows - it
should sufficient if we just update exactly one of the matching rows.
The way to do this is to put all fields of the OLD.* tuple in the WHERE
clause and
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 05/01/2012 09:09 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
I think we ought to be sharing and debugging designs in
public, not internally within 2ndQuadrant - or any other company, or
any other mailing list other than this one.
OK. You
On 4 May 2012 13:59, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Your two
On 4 May 2012 14:01, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Hannu Krosing ha...@krosing.net wrote:
For logical we don't really need to uniquely identify such rows - it
should sufficient if we just update exactly one of the matching rows.
The way to do this is
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
... btw, it appears to me that the fast path patch has broken things
rather badly in LockReleaseAll. AFAICS it's not honoring either the
lockmethodid restriction nor the allLocks restriction with respect to
fastpath locks.
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
In 9.1, we just did this:
if (locallock-proclock == NULL || locallock-lock == NULL)
{
/*
* We must've run out of shared memory while
trying to set up this
Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 12:06 -0700, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
So given that do we do anything about this now, or wait till 9.3?
I'd like the json support in 9.2 updated as follows
I think it's too late to be entertaining proposals for such changes in
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 4 May 2012 13:59, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
In 9.1, we just did this:
if (locallock-proclock == NULL || locallock-lock == NULL)
{
/*
* We must've
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Originally, I thought that the patch should include some kind of
accounting mechanism to prevent that from happening, where we'd keep
track of the number of fast-path locks that were outstanding and make
sure to keep that many slots free in the main
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Originally, I thought that the patch should include some kind of
accounting mechanism to prevent that from happening, where we'd keep
track of the number of fast-path locks that were
On 05/04/2012 09:03 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
I try pretty hard not to go off and do large amounts of work in a
vacuum. If something is more than a couple days work, I post the
design on hackers and wait for feedback before writing a line of code.
That is an excellent luxury to have. You've
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The straw man argument here would require 100% transparency on everything
you do in regards to PostgreSQL and related software. Before doing any
development on any code, first post here to ask for design review. And if
On 05/04/2012 09:52 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Hannu Krosingha...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 12:06 -0700, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
So given that do we do anything about this now, or wait till 9.3?
I'd like the json support in 9.2 updated as follows
I think it's too late to be
Next week, I thought.
How are we handling the Monday release with everyone at PGCon? Was that
resolved?
I have yet to see a confirmed date, guys. If we expect any support from
the packagers and/or the advocacy volunteers, then people need at least
a week's notice, probably more.
--
Josh
Hi everybody.
First of all I have to thank you for your wonderful job! PostgreSQL rocks!
I am writing you because I am interested in understanding some specifics related
to PostgreSQL internals. More precisely, I am investigating the running time
of the different function implementation
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
Yeah, what I've been thinking about in conjunction with similar problems
is some sort of type registry, so that we could code for non-builtin
types in certain cases. Maybe we should add that the the developers'
meeting agenda.
Maybe. I don't want
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
How are we handling the Monday release with everyone at PGCon? Was that
resolved?
I have yet to see a confirmed date, guys. If we expect any support from
the packagers and/or the advocacy volunteers, then people need at least
a week's notice, probably
Hi Robert, Hi all,
On Friday, May 04, 2012 06:29:33 PM Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The straw man argument here would require 100% transparency on everything
you do in regards to PostgreSQL and related software. Before doing any
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
In my understanding - as the person doing quite a bit of the coding atm - the
point is to provide a very minimal *early* prototype to have a sensible basis
for design decisions/discussions. On one side thats useful to
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
Yeah, what I've been thinking about in conjunction with similar problems
is some sort of type registry, so that we could code for non-builtin
types in certain cases. Maybe we should
On tor, 2012-05-03 at 17:39 +0100, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On 3 May 2012 17:21, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I think I was the only user left; I have never heard from a BSD/OS user
in the past 5-7 years.
I'm inclined to agree with Bruce. While it's not reasonable to assume
that
On tor, 2012-05-03 at 15:47 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Peter, where are we on this?
I hadn't received any clear feedback, but if no one objects, I can
commit it.
---
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 08:16:59PM +0300, Peter
On 03/05/12 11:04, Jan Urbański wrote:
On 02/05/12 20:18, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
This doesn't work anymore with Python 3:
rv = plpy.execute(...)
do_something(rv[0:1])
Apparently, they changed the C API for doing slicing, or rather made one
of the two APIs for it silently do nothing. Details
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 13:43 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
Yeah, what I've been thinking about in conjunction with similar problems
is some sort of type registry, so that we could code
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 09:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 12:06 -0700, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
So given that do we do anything about this now, or wait till 9.3?
I'd like the json support in 9.2 updated as follows
I think it's too
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Hannu Krosing ha...@krosing.net wrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 09:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 12:06 -0700, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
So given that do we do anything about this now, or wait till 9.3?
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Hannu Krosing ha...@krosing.net wrote:
Can we at least have the xxx_to_json() functions try cast to json first
and fall back to text if the cast fails.
I think the idea that you can involve the casting machinery in this
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 15:59 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Hannu Krosing ha...@krosing.net wrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 09:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 12:06 -0700, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
So given
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On tor, 2012-05-03 at 17:39 +0100, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On 3 May 2012 17:21, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I think I was the only user left; I have never heard from a BSD/OS user
in the past 5-7 years.
I'm
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-
ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Hannu Krosing
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 4:40 PM
To: Robert Haas
Cc: Tom Lane; Andrew Dunstan; PostgreSQL-development; Merlin Moncure
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] JSON in
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 08:45:10PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On tor, 2012-05-03 at 17:39 +0100, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On 3 May 2012 17:21, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I think I was the only user left; I have never heard from a BSD/OS user
in the past 5-7 years.
I'm
On 5/3/12 2:54 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
(2) If logical transactions had been implemented as additions to
the WAL stream, and Slony was using that, do you think they would
still have been usable for this recovery?
Quite possibly not.
The key advantage that I see in londiste/slony
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 08:45:10PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I'm not so much opposed to removing the port. I am more concerned about
the manner in which it was done. The other ports I removed were known
to not work anyway, for years, and there were
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 06:25:24PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 08:45:10PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I'm not so much opposed to removing the port. I am more concerned about
the manner in which it was done. The other ports I
The new 9.2 GUC parameter temp_file_limit says it restricts temporary
file usage per session, but it doesn't say what happens if a session
needs to exceed that value --- it throws an error. Shouldn't we mention
that?
--
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.ushttp://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB
41 matches
Mail list logo
