On 23.01.2013 09:36, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
Hi!
Some quick answers to the part of notes/issues. I will provide rest of
answers soon.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:08 AM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
The biggest problem is that I really don't care for the idea of
contrib/pg_trgm being
2013/1/23 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
what should be result of concat(variadic NULL::int[])
I enabled this use case, but what should be result?
I think there are two somewhat defensible theories:
(1) punt, and return NULL overall. So in this
On 01/23/2013 12:05 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
Hi all
Would a committer be willing to pop some entries in .gitignore for
Windows native build outputs?
*.sln
We already exclude pgsql.sln - what others are built? None that I can see.
*.vcproj
*.vcxproj
These all go in the top dir, no? So I
Hi, Tom
Thank you for comments.
Tomonari Katsumata t.katsumata1...@gmail.com writes:
Why is it better to do this with a privilege, rather than just using
pg_hba.conf?
You are right.
Handling with pg_hba.conf is an easy way.
But I think many users think about switch over, so
the
On 01/23/2013 03:15 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 01/23/2013 12:05 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
Hi all
Would a committer be willing to pop some entries in .gitignore for
Windows native build outputs?
*.sln
We already exclude pgsql.sln - what others are built? None that I can
see.
*.vcproj
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Tomonari Katsumata
t.katsumata1...@gmail.com wrote:
ex:
primary_conninfo = 'port=5432 standby_mode=master-cascade'
primary_conninfo = 'port=5432 standby_mode=master-only'
primary_conninfo = 'port=5432 standby_mode=cascade-only'
I think it will be
On 01/23/2013 04:47 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
*.vcproj
*.vcxproj
Actually, I see we already have the first pattern. So I've added the
second.
Great, thanks.
Anchoring them is probably slightly safer, but I can't really imagine
that ever being an issue for a pattern like *.vcxproj.
--
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I think that might be acceptable from a performance point of view -
after all, if the index is unlogged,
On 23 January 2013 04:49, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
- recovery.conf is removed (no backward compatibility in this version of the
patch)
If you want to pursue that, you know where it leads. No, rebasing a
rejected patch doesn't help, its just relighting a fire that
Test scenario to reproduce:
1. Start the server
2. create the user as follows
./psql postgres -c create user user1 superuser login
password 'use''1'
3. Take the backup with -R option as follows.
./pg_basebackup -D ../../data1 -R -U
On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:14 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Amit Kapila
amit.kap...@huawei.com wrote:
On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 7:10 PM Zoltán Böszörményi wrote:
2013-01-22 13:32
Hi, Michael
2013/1/23 Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Tomonari Katsumata
t.katsumata1...@gmail.com wrote:
ex:
primary_conninfo = 'port=5432 standby_mode=master-cascade'
primary_conninfo = 'port=5432 standby_mode=master-only'
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I think these new regression tests are no good, because I doubt that
the number of recursive calls that can fit into any given amount of
stack space is guaranteed to be the same on all platforms. I have
committed the bug fixes themselves, however.
On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 2:30 AM Jameison Martin wrote:
Sorry for the late response, I just happened to see this yesterday.
Running a general benchmark against the patch as Keven suggests is a good
idea.
Amit, can you supply the actual values you saw when running pgbench (the 3
values
For the record, on MSVC we can use __assume(0) to mark unreachable code.
It does the same as gcc's __builtin_unreachable(). I tested it with the
same Pavel's palloc-heavy test case that you used earlier, with the
one-shot plan commit temporarily reverted, and saw a similar speedup you
reported
On 2013/01/23, at 18:12, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 23 January 2013 04:49, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
- recovery.conf is removed (no backward compatibility in this version of the
patch)
If you want to pursue that, you know where it leads. No,
command is in progress then program/command is
killed/crashed due to any problem
psql is exiting.
This is a headache. I have no idea how to solve this.
Sorry for the long delay in responding.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
copy-popen-20130123.patch
Description: Binary data
2013/1/23 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com:
2013/1/23 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
what should be result of concat(variadic NULL::int[])
I enabled this use case, but what should be result?
I think there are two somewhat defensible theories:
On 2013-01-19 23:42:02 -0500, Steve Singer wrote:
5) Currently its only allowed to access catalog tables, its fairly
trivial to extend this to additional tables if you can accept some
(noticeable but not too big) overhead for modifications on those tables.
I was thinking of making that an
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
I'm thinking that the main argument for trying to do this is so that we
could say plan caching is transparent, full stop, with no caveats or
corner cases. But removing those caveats is going to cost a fair
amount, and it looks like that cost will be wasted
2013-01-20 00:15 keltezéssel, Andrew Dunstan írta:
On 01/19/2013 02:51 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
Yes it rings a bell. See
http://people.planetpostgresql.org/andrew/index.php?/archives/264-Cross-compiling-PostgreSQL-for-WIndows.html
I wanted to add a comment to this blog entry but it
2013-01-19 21:15 keltezéssel, Andrew Dunstan írta:
On 01/19/2013 02:36 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
Cross-compiling is not really a supported platform. Why don't you
just build natively? This is know to work as shown by the buildfarm
animals doing it successfully.
Because I don't have
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:32 AM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 01:05:12PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
Hi all
Would a committer be willing to pop some entries in .gitignore for
Windows native build outputs?
*.sln
*.vcproj
*.vcxproj
It'd make life easier when
On 01/23/2013 08:47 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:32 AM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 01:05:12PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
Hi all
Would a committer be willing to pop some entries in .gitignore for
Windows native build outputs?
*.sln
On Jan 23, 2013 8:59 AM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
On 01/23/2013 08:47 AM, Phil Sorber wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:32 AM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 01:05:12PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
Hi all
Would a committer be willing to pop
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Thanks for commiting the fixes. About the regression tests, I think
you're right, but then I can't see how to include such a test. Maybe you
could add the other one, though?
Can you point me specifically at what
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
After reflecting on this a bit, I think that the problem may come from
drawing an unjustified analogy between views and prepared statements.
The code is certainly trying to treat them as the same thing, but
perhaps we
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Really, live DDL is not that frequent, and when you do that, you want
transparent replanning. I can't see any use case where it's important to
be able to run DDL in a live application yet continue to operate with
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:28 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
what should be result of concat(variadic NULL::int[])
I enabled this use case, but what should be result?
I think there are two somewhat defensible theories:
(1) punt, and
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
With the (attached for convenience) patch applied you can do
# ALTER TABLE replication_metadata SET (treat_as_catalog_table = true);
to enable this.
What I wonder about is:
* does anybody have a better name for the
On 2013-01-23 10:18:50 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
With the (attached for convenience) patch applied you can do
# ALTER TABLE replication_metadata SET (treat_as_catalog_table = true);
to enable this.
What I
Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
On 23.01.2013 09:36, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:08 AM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
The biggest problem is that I really don't care for the idea of
contrib/pg_trgm being this cozy with the innards of regex_t.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:04 AM, Jeevan Chalke
jeevan.cha...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Yes.
I guess my earlier patch, which was directly incrementing
ControlFile-unloggedLSN counter was the concern as it will take
ControlFileLock several times.
In this version of patch I did what Robert has
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
Attached is a patch that adds a note about the FATAL messages that
appear in the logs if you don't pass a valid user or dbname to PQping
or PQpingParams.
This was requested in the pg_isready thread.
Can I counter-propose the
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kap...@huawei.com wrote:
On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 8:25 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kap...@huawei.com
wrote:
On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 7:10 PM Zoltán Böszörményi wrote:
2013-01-22 13:32
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
Attached is a patch that adds a note about the FATAL messages that
appear in the logs if you don't pass a valid user or dbname to PQping
or
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
Attached is a patch that adds a note about the FATAL messages that
appear in the
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
Changing up the subject line because this is no longer a work in
progress nor is it pg_ping anymore.
OK, I committed this. However, I have one suggestion. Maybe it would
be a good idea to add a -c or -t option that sets the
2013/1/23 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Really, live DDL is not that frequent, and when you do that, you want
transparent replanning. I can't see any use case where it's important to
be able to run DDL in a
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kap...@huawei.com wrote:
On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:14 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
When I removed postgresql.auto.conf and restarted the server,
I got the following warning message. This is not correct because
I didn't remove auto.conf.d from
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I agree with that, but I think Tom's concern is more with the cost of
too-frequent re-planning. The most obvious case in which DDL might be
frequent enough to cause an issue here is if there is heavy use of
temporary objects - sessions might be
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Yeah, and a lot more fairly-new developers who don't understand all the
connections in the existing system. Let me just push back a bit here:
based on the amount of time I've had to spend fixing bugs over the past
five
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Yeah, that is probably the major hazard IMO too. The designs sketched
in this thread would be sufficient to ensure that DDL in one session's
temp schema wouldn't have to invalidate plans in other sessions --- but
is that
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
next related example
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION public.myleast(VARIADIC integer[])
RETURNS integer
LANGUAGE sql
AS $function$
select min(v) from unnest($1) g(v)
$function$
The reason you get a null from that is that (1) unnest() produces
On 01/23/2013 10:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Improve concurrency of foreign key locking
This error message change looks rather odd, and has my head spinning a bit:
-errmsg(SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE cannot be applied
to the nullable side of an outer join)));
+
Hello,
Please let me know if I can do something to get the bug fix
(https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=902) committed.
I would like to fix other bugs related to postgres localization, but I
am not sure yet how to do it.
Thanks in advance,
Alexander
18.10.2012 19:46,
On 2013-01-23 11:44:29 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Yeah, and a lot more fairly-new developers who don't understand all the
connections in the existing system. Let me just push back a bit here:
based on the amount of time
On 2013-01-23 11:58:28 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 01/23/2013 10:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Improve concurrency of foreign key locking
This error message change looks rather odd, and has my head spinning a bit:
-errmsg(SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE cannot be applied
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
Changing up the subject line because this is no longer a work in
progress nor is it pg_ping anymore.
OK, I committed this. However, I have one
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 02:04:14PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
IMHO that's the single most important task of a review.
Really? I'd say the most important task for a review is does the patch
do what it says it does?. That is, if the patch is supposed to
Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
[rhaas pgsql]$ pg_isready -h www.google.com
grows old, dies
Do you think we should have a default timeout, or only have one if
specified at the command line?
+1 for default timeout
Alexander Law exclus...@gmail.com writes:
Please let me know if I can do something to get the bug fix
(https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=902) committed.
It's waiting on some Windows-savvy committer to pick it up, IMO.
(FWIW, I have no objection to the patch as given, but I
I get the following error when I try to compile just a specific binary
in src/bin/scripts:
gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels
-Wmissing-format-attribute -Wformat-security -fno-strict-aliasing
-fwrapv -fexcess-precision=standard
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2013-01-23 11:58:28 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
This error message change looks rather odd, and has my head spinning a bit:
-errmsg(SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE cannot be applied to
the nullable side of an outer join)));
+
On 23 January 2013 17:15, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2013-01-23 11:58:28 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 01/23/2013 10:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Improve concurrency of foreign key locking
This error message change looks rather odd, and has my head spinning a bit:
-
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Jon Erdman
postgre...@thewickedtribe.net wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Done. Attached.
- --
Jon T Erdman (aka StuckMojo)
PostgreSQL Zealot
On 01/22/2013 11:17 PM, Phil Sorber wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Jon Erdman
On 01/23/2013 09:08 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-23 11:44:29 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Yeah, and a lot more fairly-new developers who don't understand all the
connections in the existing system. Let me just push back a
2013/1/23 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
next related example
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION public.myleast(VARIADIC integer[])
RETURNS integer
LANGUAGE sql
AS $function$
select min(v) from unnest($1) g(v)
$function$
The reason you get a null
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 01/23/2013 10:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Improve concurrency of foreign key locking
This error message change looks rather odd, and has my head spinning a bit:
-errmsg(SELECT FOR UPDATE/SHARE cannot be
applied to the nullable side of an
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:02:18PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
I've been working with Andrew Gierth (well, mostly he's been doing
the work, as usual) to add WITH ORDINALITY as an option for
set-returning functions. In the process, he found a minor
David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:29:43PM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
Folks,
Please find attached a patch which implements the SQL standard
UNNEST() WITH ORDINALITY.
Added to CF4.
Surely you meant CF 2013-Next (i.e. first commit of 9.4 cycle).
--
Álvaro Herrera
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 03:12:37PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:29:43PM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
Folks,
Please find attached a patch which implements the SQL standard
UNNEST() WITH ORDINALITY.
Added to CF4.
Surely you meant
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Hari Babu haribabu.ko...@huawei.com wrote:
Test scenario to reproduce:
1. Start the server
2. create the user as follows
./psql postgres -c create user user1 superuser login
password 'use''1'
3. Take the backup with
On 01/23/2013 01:08 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Tom Lane escribió:
Alexander Law exclus...@gmail.com writes:
Please let me know if I can do something to get the bug fix
(https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=902) committed.
It's waiting on some Windows-savvy committer to pick
Fujii Masao escribió:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kap...@huawei.com wrote:
Is it safe to write something in the directory other than data
directory
via SQL?
postgres user usually has the write permission for the configuration
directory like /etc/postgresql?
On 01/23/2013 09:51 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
The only way to fix increasing bug counts is through more-comprehensive
regular testing. Currently we have regression/unit tests which cover
maybe 30% of our code. Performance testing is largely ad-hoc. We don't
require comprehensive acceptance
I just pushed this patch to the master branch. There was a
corresponding catversion bump and pg_control version bump. I have
verified that make check-world passes on my machine, as well as
isolation tests and pg_upgrade.
Tom Lane said at one point this is too complex to maintain. Several
times
On 2013-01-15 18:16:59 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
OK. I am back to this patch after a too long time.
Dito ;)
* would be nice (but thats probably a step #2 thing) to do the
individual steps of concurrent reindex over multiple relations to
avoid too much overall waiting for
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
For all of that, I'm not sure that people failing to seek consensus
before coding is really so much of a problem as you seem to think.
For my part, I don't think the lack of consensus-finding before
submitting patches is, in itself, a problem.
The
Andres Freund escribió:
I somewhat dislike the fact that CONCURRENTLY isn't really concurrent
here (for the listeners: swapping the indexes acquires exlusive locks) ,
but I don't see any other naming being better.
REINDEX ALMOST CONCURRENTLY?
--
Álvaro Herrera
On 24/01/13 07:45, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund escribió:
I somewhat dislike the fact that CONCURRENTLY isn't really concurrent
here (for the listeners: swapping the indexes acquires exlusive locks) ,
but I don't see any other naming being better.
REINDEX ALMOST CONCURRENTLY?
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 06:03:28PM +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On 1/14/13 10:22 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Also it appears to me that the hunk at lines 812ff is changing the
default
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:27:45PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
[rhaas pgsql]$ pg_isready -h www.google.com
grows old, dies
Do you think we should have a default timeout, or only
On 23.01.2013 20:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 06:03:28PM +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
anyway, +1 for making this as default option. Going that path, would
we be breaking backward compatibility? There might be scripts, (being
already used), which depend upon the current
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
the freezing does not happen:
Requests copying the data with rows already frozen, just as they
would be after running the commandVACUUM FREEZE/ command.
This is intended as a performance option for initial
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 09:00:25PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 23.01.2013 20:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 06:03:28PM +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
anyway, +1 for making this as default option. Going that path, would
we be breaking backward compatibility? There might
2013/1/14 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
So far as I can tell, get_create_function_cmd (and lookup_function_oid
too) were intentionally designed to not show their queries, and for that
On 01/23/2013 02:14 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
How have you been testing VS2012 builds? In what environment?
When I tested this patch the last time I've been using Windows 8 RTM
(Microsoft Windows 8 Enterprise Evaluation - 6.2.9200 Build 9200) and
Microsoft Visual Studio Express 2012 für
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 09:33:58AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Thanks for commiting the fixes. About the regression tests, I think
you're right, but then I can't see how to include such a test. Maybe you
could
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:15:27AM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 03:12:37PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:29:43PM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
Folks,
Please find attached a patch which implements the SQL standard
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 02:40:45PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:15:27AM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 03:12:37PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:29:43PM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
Folks,
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:27:45PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
[rhaas pgsql]$ pg_isready -h www.google.com
Kevin Grittner wrote:
Applied with trivial editing, mostly from a pgindent run against
modified files.
Applied back as far as 9.0. Before that code didn't match well
enough for it to seem safe to apply without many hours of
additional testing.
I have confirmed occurences of this problem at
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 02:50:01PM -0500, Phil Sorber wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:27:45PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Robert Haas
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 09:33:58AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Thanks for commiting the fixes. About the regression tests, I think
you're
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
As a reminder, COPY FREEZE still does not issue any warning/notice if
the freezing does not happen:
Requests copying the data with rows already frozen, just as they
would be after running the commandVACUUM
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 03:02:24PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 09:33:58AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Thanks for
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 02:50:01PM -0500, Phil Sorber wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:27:45PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
For all of that, I'm not sure that people failing to seek consensus
before coding is really so much of a problem as you seem to think.
For my part, I don't think the lack of
On 2013-01-22 12:32:07 +, Amit kapila wrote:
This closes all comments raised till now for this patch.
Kindly let me know if you feel something is missing?
I am coming late to this patch, so bear with me if I repeat somethign
said elsewhere.
Review comments of cursory pass through the
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
For all of that, I'm not sure that people failing to seek consensus
before coding is really so much of a
On 23.01.2013 20:44, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
For all of that, I'm not sure that people failing to seek consensus
before coding is really so much of a problem as you seem to think.
For my part, I don't think the lack of consensus-finding before
Folks,
As you know, there's a lot of people these days using SCHEMA for
multi-tenant application partitioning. One of them pointed out to me
that schema is missing from ALTER DEFAULT PRIVS; that is, there's no
way for you to set default permissions on a new schema. For folks using
schema for
On 01/23/2013 12:48 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 23 January 2013 17:15, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2013-01-23 11:58:28 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 01/23/2013 10:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Improve concurrency of foreign key locking
This error message change looks
On 17.01.2013 23:20, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
2013/1/16 Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com:
This looks OK on a quick once-over, but should it update the
documentation somehow?
Documentation does not take so much description for type_transition
rules, so I just modified relevant description a bit to
Heikki,
* Heikki Linnakangas (hlinnakan...@vmware.com) wrote:
FWIW, here's how I feel about some the patches. It's not an exhaustive list.
Thanks for going through them and commenting on them.
Event Triggers: Passing Information to User Functions (from 2012-11)
I don't care about this whole
Josh,
* Josh Berkus (j...@agliodbs.com) wrote:
As you know, there's a lot of people these days using SCHEMA for
multi-tenant application partitioning. One of them pointed out to me
that schema is missing from ALTER DEFAULT PRIVS; that is, there's no
way for you to set default permissions on
Hello
I do that pretty often. A better approach, imv, would be making psql a
bit more of a 'real' shell, with loops, conditionals, better variable
handling, etc.
after a few years prototyping on this area I am not sure so this is
good idea. Maybe better to start some new console from
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 09:56:48PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
(But, at least with the type of packaging I'm using in Fedora, he would
first have to go through a package downgrade/reinstallation process,
because the packaging provides no simple scripted way of manually
starting the old
Hi,
I decided to reply on the patches thread to be able to find this later.
On 2013-01-23 22:48:50 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
logical changeset generation v4
This is a boatload of infrastructure for supporting logical replication, yet
we have no code actually implementing logical
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
