On 09/10/2012 05:19 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:06:18PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
It is this kind of run-around that caused me to generate my own doc
build in the past; maybe I need to return to doing my own doc build.
You keep threatening with that. You are free,
On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 19:21 +0400, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
New version of patch is attached. Parameter randomization was
introduced. It controls whether to randomize choose. Choose algorithm
was rewritten.
Do you expect it to be bad in any reasonable situations? I'm inclined to
just make
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com wrote:
On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 19:21 +0400, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
New version of patch is attached. Parameter randomization was
introduced. It controls whether to randomize choose. Choose algorithm
was rewritten.
Do you
On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 11:15 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
That's a fair point. Do you have any suggested wording, or
suggestions for exactly where in the documentation you think it
would be most helpful? The subsection on serializable transactions
seems like the most obvious location:
I'd like to propose moving postgresql_fdw_validator into contrib/dblink
as dblink's own validator.
Main purpose of this proposal is to reserve the name postgresql_fdw
for concrete FDW for PostgreSQL. I used to use pgsql_fdw as the name,
but in previous CF I got comments that full product name is
Hello Folks,
I hope this is the right place to ask for this feature.
I have just started working with Postgres seriously, and I come from a SQL
Server background. In SQL Server when one develops complex stored
procedures, it is possible to see the query plans of the stored procedure,
even when
On Monday, September 10, 2012 8:20 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
On Sunday, September 09, 2012 1:37 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
On Friday, September 07, 2012 11:19 PM Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi writes:
Would socketpair(2) be simpler?
I've not done anything yet about the potential
Excerpts from Boszormenyi Zoltan's message of vie jun 29 09:11:23 -0400 2012:
We have some use cases for this patch, when can you post
a new version? I would test and review it.
What use cases do you have in mind?
--
Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL
2012/9/11 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com:
Excerpts from Boszormenyi Zoltan's message of vie jun 29 09:11:23 -0400 2012:
We have some use cases for this patch, when can you post
a new version? I would test and review it.
What use cases do you have in mind?
I'm motivated with this
Excerpts from Kohei KaiGai's message of mar sep 11 12:46:34 -0300 2012:
2012/9/11 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com:
Excerpts from Boszormenyi Zoltan's message of vie jun 29 09:11:23 -0400
2012:
We have some use cases for this patch, when can you post
a new version? I would test
2012/9/11 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com:
Excerpts from Kohei KaiGai's message of mar sep 11 12:46:34 -0300 2012:
2012/9/11 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com:
Excerpts from Boszormenyi Zoltan's message of vie jun 29 09:11:23 -0400
2012:
We have some use cases for this
Excerpts from Kohei KaiGai's message of mar sep 11 13:25:18 -0300 2012:
2012/9/11 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com:
- an SQL-driven scheduler, similar to pgAgent, it's generic enough,
we might port it to this scheme and publish it
Hm, this would benefit from a direct backend
While reflecting on
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2012-09/msg00030.php
I discovered that tsquery selectivity is capable of concluding that
word:* matches less stuff than word:
pub=# explain analyze select * from publications_test where
to_tsvector('simple', title) @@
2012-09-11 17:58 keltezéssel, Alvaro Herrera írta:
Excerpts from Kohei KaiGai's message of mar sep 11 12:46:34 -0300 2012:
2012/9/11 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com:
Excerpts from Boszormenyi Zoltan's message of vie jun 29 09:11:23 -0400 2012:
We have some use cases for this patch,
I ran across a minor typo while reviewing the full-text search
documentation. Attached is a patch to address the one usage of lexems
in a sea of lexemes.
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/textsearch.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/textsearch.sgml
new file mode 100644
index 978aa54..5305198
***
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
We discussed it to the point of consensus, and Tom wrote a patch
to implement that. Testing in my shop hit problems for which the
cause was not obvious. I don't know whether there is a flaw in
the designed approach that we all missed, a
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 08:27:49AM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
On 09/10/2012 05:19 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:06:18PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
It is this kind of run-around that caused me to generate my own doc
build in the past; maybe I need to return
Hackers,
I found this surprising:
david=# CREATE DOMAIN STATUS AS INTEGER CHECK ( VALUE IN (1, 2, 3) );
CREATE DOMAIN
david=# select -4::status;
ERROR: value for domain status violates check constraint status_check
david=# select -1::status;
?column?
--
-1
(1 row)
David E. Wheeler da...@justatheory.com writes:
So I guess the precedence of :: is higher than -?
Sure. Otherwise, you might get the wrong semantics of -.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/sql-syntax-lexical.html#SQL-PRECEDENCE
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via
This comment in UpdateFullPageWrites() seems to be inaccurate:
* It's safe to check the shared full_page_writes without the lock,
* because we assume that there is no concurrently running process which
* can update it.
That assumption does not hold on any sane SMP system.
I think
Dan Scott wrote:
I ran across a minor typo while reviewing the full-text search
documentation. Attached is a patch to address the one usage of
lexems in a sea of lexemes.
Applied to HEAD.
-Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to
On Wednesday, September 12, 2012 5:33 AM Gurjeet Singh wrote:
This comment in UpdateFullPageWrites() seems to be inaccurate:
* It's safe to check the shared full_page_writes without the lock,
* because we assume that there is no concurrently running process
which
* can
On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 9:09 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Boszormenyi Zoltan's message of vie jun 29 09:11:23 -0400 2012:
We have some use cases for this patch, when can you post
a new version? I would test and review it.
What use cases do you have in mind?
Wouldn't it be
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:44:57PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
For the archives, and for those not following the paper in detail, there
is one situation in which SSI will abort a read-only transaction.
When there are three transactions forming a dangerous pattern where T1
(read-only) has a
Excerpts from Amit Kapila's message of mié sep 12 00:30:40 -0300 2012:
On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 9:09 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Boszormenyi Zoltan's message of vie jun 29 09:11:23 -0400 2012:
We have some use cases for this patch, when can you post
a new version? I would
On Sep 10, 2012, at 6:01 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
Well given that OSSP seems to be abandon ware (no activity since July
2008), it might be time to dump it in favor of something else.
Are there any outstanding issues that would require an update?
Many. Look at all the
On Sep 10, 2012, at 6:05 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
Yeah, maybe. It doesn't even seem to be the standard implementation
on Linux or Mac. A bit of research says that Theodore Ts'o's libuuid
is what comes native with the OS on those platforms. No idea whether
the
On Sep 11, 2012, at 4:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Sure. Otherwise, you might get the wrong semantics of -.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/sql-syntax-lexical.html#SQL-PRECEDENCE
Well, I guess that's what I get for writing test in literal SQL pushed through
psql.
28 matches
Mail list logo
