Re: [HACKERS] (A) native Windows port

2002-07-03 Thread Lamar Owen
On Tuesday 02 July 2002 03:14 pm, Jan Wieck wrote: Lamar Owen wrote: [...] Martin O has come up with a 'pg_fsck' utility that, IMHO, holds a great deal of promise for seamless binary 'in place' upgrading. He has been able to write code to read multiple versions' database structures --

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't see a huge value to using shared memory. Once we get auto-vacuum, pg_listener will be fine, No it won't. The performance of notify is *always* going to suck as long as it depends on going through a table. This is

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Jeff Davis
On Tuesday 02 July 2002 06:03 pm, Bruce Momjian wrote: Let me tell you what would be really interesting. If we didn't report the pid of the notifying process and we didn't allow arbitrary strings for notify (just pg_class relation names), we could just add a counter to pg_class that is

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't see a huge value to using shared memory. Once we get auto-vacuum, pg_listener will be fine, No it won't. The performance of notify is *always* going to suck as long as it depends on going through a table. This is particularly true given the

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Of course, a shared memory system probably is going to either do it sequentailly or have its own index issues, so I don't see a huge advantage to going to shared memory, and I do see extra code and a queue limit. Disk I/O vs. no

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is disk i/o a real performance penalty for notify, and is performance a huge issue for notify anyway, Yes, and yes. I have used NOTIFY in production applications, and I know that performance is an issue. The queue limit problem is a valid argument,

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Let me tell you what would be really interesting. If we didn't report the pid of the notifying process and we didn't allow arbitrary strings for notify (just pg_class relation names), we could just add a counter to pg_class that is updated for every notify. If a backend is listening, it

[HACKERS] Scope of constraint names

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
SQL92 requires named constraints to have names that are unique within their schema. Our past implementation did not require constraint names to be unique at all; as a compromise I suggested requiring constraint names to be unique for any given relation. Rod Taylor's pending pg_constraint patch

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Jeff Davis wrote: On Tuesday 02 July 2002 06:03 pm, Bruce Momjian wrote: Let me tell you what would be really interesting. If we didn't report the pid of the notifying process and we didn't allow arbitrary strings for notify (just pg_class relation names), we could just add a counter to

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Of course, a shared memory system probably is going to either do it sequentailly or have its own index issues, so I don't see a huge advantage to going to shared memory, and I do see extra code and a queue limit. Disk I/O vs. no disk I/O isn't a huge

Re: [HACKERS] Integrating libpqxx

2002-07-03 Thread Jeroen T. Vermeulen
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 02:05:57PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: Jeroen, do you have PostgreSQL CVS access yet? If not, we need to get you that. Don't have it yet, so please do! Jeroen ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why can't we do efficient indexing, or clear out the table? I don't remember. I don't recall either, but I do recall that we tried to index it and backed out the changes. In any case, a table on disk is just plain not the right medium for

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Of course, a shared memory system probably is going to either do it sequentailly or have its own index issues, so I don't see a huge advantage to going to shared memory, and I do see extra code and a queue limit. Is a shared memory implementation going to play silly buggers with the Win32

Re: [HACKERS] Integrating libpqxx

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Is it included now in the main build process? If so, I'll test it on FreeBSD/Alpha. Libpqxx still needs to be integrated: The 'configure' tests need to be merged into our main configure The documentation needs to be merged into our SGML docs. The makefile structure needs

[HACKERS] libpq++ build problems

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
OK, this is what I'm seeing on FreeBSD/Alpha for libpq++. I haven't figured out how to build libpqxx yet.: gmake[3]: Entering directory `/home/chriskl/pgsql-head/src/interfaces/libpq++' g++ -O2 -g -Wall -fpic -DPIC -I../../../src/interfaces/libpq -I../../../src/ include -c -o pgconnection.o

Re: [HACKERS] (A) native Windows port

2002-07-03 Thread Jean-Michel POURE
Le Jeudi 27 Juin 2002 05:48, Christopher Kings-Lynne a écrit : I am willing to supply a complete, friendly, powerful and pretty installer program, based on NSIS. Maybe you should contact Dave Page, who wrote pgAdmin2 and the ODBC installers. Maybe you can both work on the installer. By the

Re: [HACKERS] Scope of constraint names

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
One problem I see is that pg_constraint entries can *only* be associated with relations; so the table has no way to represent constraints associated with domains --- not to mention assertions, which aren't associated with any table at all. I'm in no hurry to try to implement assertions, but

[HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Hi All, I have given up working on the BETWEEN node. It got to the stage where I realised I was really out of my depth! Rod Taylor has indicated an interest in the problem and I have sent him my latest patch, so hopefully he'll be able to crack it. So instead, I've taken up with the DROP

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 08:20, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Of course, a shared memory system probably is going to either do it sequentailly or have its own index issues, so I don't see a huge advantage to going to shared memory, and I do see extra code and a queue limit. Is a shared

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Tue, 2002-07-02 at 23:35, Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is disk i/o a real performance penalty for notify, and is performance a huge issue for notify anyway, Yes, and yes. I have used NOTIFY in production applications, and I know that performance is an

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reduce heap tuple header size

2002-07-03 Thread Manfred Koizar
On Tue, 2 Jul 2002 02:16:29 -0400 (EDT), Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I committed the version with no #ifdef's. If we need them, we can add them later, but it is likely we will never need them. My point was, if there is a need to fallback to v7.2 format, it can be done by changing a

Re: [HACKERS] (A) native Windows port

2002-07-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Tue, 2002-07-02 at 21:50, Lamar Owen wrote: On Tuesday 02 July 2002 03:14 pm, Jan Wieck wrote: Lamar Owen wrote: [...] Martin O has come up with a 'pg_fsck' utility that, IMHO, holds a great deal of promise for seamless binary 'in place' upgrading. He has been able to write

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Rod Taylor
On Tue, 2002-07-02 at 17:12, Bruce Momjian wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Of course, a shared memory system probably is going to either do it sequentailly or have its own index issues, so I don't see a huge advantage to going to shared memory, and I do

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I've not looked in a while, but the column rename code did not account for issues in foreign keys, etc. Those should be easier to ferret out soon, but may not be so nice to change yet. Which is probably a good reason for us to offer it as an all-in-one command, rather than expecting them to

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Rod Taylor
It should also be noted that an ALTER TABLE / SET TYPE implemented with the above idea with run into the 2x diskspace issue as well as take quite a while to process. I think that if the 'SET TYPE' operation is ever to be rollback-able, it will need to use 2x diskspace. If it's

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is a shared memory implementation going to play silly buggers with the Win32 port? No. Certainly no more so than shared disk buffers or the SI message facility, both of which are *not* optional. regards, tom lane

Re: [HACKERS] Scope of constraint names

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A considerable advantage of per-relation constraint names is that a new unique name can be assigned for a nameless constraint while holding only a lock on the target relation. We'd need a global lock to create unique constraint names in the

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps this is a good place to introduce anonymous mmap ? I don't think so; it just adds a portability variable without buying us anything. Is there a way to grow anonymous mmap on demand ? Nope. Not portably, anyway. For instance, the HPUX man page

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Are you planning to have one circular buffer per listening backend ? No; one circular buffer, period. Each backend would also internally buffer notifies that it hadn't yet delivered to its client --- but since the time until delivery could vary

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 14:32, Rod Taylor wrote: It should also be noted that an ALTER TABLE / SET TYPE implemented with the above idea with run into the 2x diskspace issue as well as take quite a while to process. I think that if the 'SET TYPE' operation is ever to be rollback-able,

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 15:51, Tom Lane wrote: Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Are you planning to have one circular buffer per listening backend ? No; one circular buffer, period. Each backend would also internally buffer notifies that it hadn't yet delivered to its client ---

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There could a little more smartness here to avoid unneccessary copying (not just storing) of not-listened-to data. Yeah, I was wondering about that too. I guess that depending on the circumstances this can be either faster or slower than copying them

Re: [HACKERS] (A) native Windows port

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Lamar Owen wrote: On Tuesday 02 July 2002 03:14 pm, Jan Wieck wrote: Lamar Owen wrote: [...] Martin O has come up with a 'pg_fsck' utility that, IMHO, holds a great deal of promise for seamless binary 'in place' upgrading. He has been able to write code to read multiple versions'

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 16:30, Tom Lane wrote: Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There could a little more smartness here to avoid unneccessary copying (not just storing) of not-listened-to data. Yeah, I was wondering about that too. I guess that depending on the circumstances

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Neil Conway
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 05:35:42PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: 1. To send NOTIFY: grab write lock on shared-memory circular buffer. If enough space, insert message, release lock, send signal, done. If not enough space, release lock, send signal, sleep some small amount of time, and then try again.

Re: [HACKERS] libpq++ build problems

2002-07-03 Thread jtv
On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 02:25:46PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: OK, this is what I'm seeing on FreeBSD/Alpha for libpq++. [cut] [paste] cc1plus: warning: *** *** The -O2 flag TRIGGERS KNOWN OPTIMIZER BUGS ON THIS PLATFORM *** Doesn't say it doesn't work though... Have you

Re: [HACKERS] (A) native Windows port

2002-07-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 17:28, Bruce Momjian wrote: Hannu Krosing wrote: Our very extensibility is our weakness for upgrades. Can it be worked around? Anyone have any ideas? Perhaps we can keep an old postgres binary + old backend around and then use it in single-user mode to do a

Re: [HACKERS] Integrating libpqxx

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Is it included now in the main build process? If so, I'll test it on FreeBSD/Alpha. Libpqxx still needs to be integrated: The 'configure' tests need to be merged into our main configure The documentation needs to be merged into our SGML docs.

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: but we are already attracting a thundering herd by sending a signal to all _possibly_ interested backends at the same time That's why it's so important that the readers use a sharable lock. The only thing they'd be locking out is some new writer trying

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Hi All, I have given up working on the BETWEEN node. It got to the stage where I realised I was really out of my depth! Rod Taylor has indicated an interest in the problem and I have sent him my latest patch, so hopefully he'll be able to crack it. So

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Conway) writes: How would this interact with the current transactional behavior of NOTIFY? No change. Senders would only insert notify messages into the shared buffer when they commit (uncommited notifies would live in a list in the sender, same as now). Readers would

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 17:48, Tom Lane wrote: Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: but we are already attracting a thundering herd by sending a signal to all _possibly_ interested backends at the same time That's why it's so important that the readers use a sharable lock. The only

Re: [HACKERS] (A) native Windows port

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Hannu Krosing wrote: However, the limiting factor is that we don't have a mechanism to have both databases running at the same time currently. How so ? AFAIK I can run as many backends as I like (up to some practical limit) on the same comuter at the same time, as long as they use

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reduce heap tuple header size

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Manfred Koizar wrote: On Tue, 2 Jul 2002 02:16:29 -0400 (EDT), Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I committed the version with no #ifdef's. If we need them, we can add them later, but it is likely we will never need them. My point was, if there is a need to fallback to v7.2 format, it

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 17:48, Tom Lane wrote: That's why it's so important that the readers use a sharable lock. The only thing they'd be locking out is some new writer trying to send (yet another) notify. But there must be some way to communicate the

Re: [HACKERS] regress/results directory problem

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Marc has removed the regress/results directory from CVS. --- Thomas Lockhart wrote: ... I am backing out my GNUmakefile change. I am still unclear why this has started happening all of a sudden. ? The results/

Re: [HACKERS] libpq++ build problems

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Actually, I am confused. In src/template/freebsd I see: CFLAGS='-pipe' case $host_cpu in alpha*) CFLAGS=$CFLAGS -O;; i386*)CFLAGS=$CFLAGS -O2;; esac so why is he seeing the -O2 flag on FreeBSD/alpha?

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: themselves. (I'd also be inclined to include the hash code in the transmitted message, so that readers could more quickly ignore uninteresting messages.) Doesn't seem worth it, and how would the user know their

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: themselves. (I'd also be inclined to include the hash code in the transmitted message, so that readers could more quickly ignore uninteresting messages.) Doesn't seem worth it, and how would the user know their hash; they already have a C string for comparison. Do we have

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 22:43, Tom Lane wrote: Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 17:48, Tom Lane wrote: That's why it's so important that the readers use a sharable lock. The only thing they'd be locking out is some new writer trying to send (yet another)

Re: [HACKERS] libpq++ build problems

2002-07-03 Thread jtv
On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 01:45:56PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: Actually, I am confused. In src/template/freebsd I see: CFLAGS='-pipe' case $host_cpu in alpha*) CFLAGS=$CFLAGS -O;; i386*)CFLAGS=$CFLAGS -O2;; esac so why is he

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: themselves. (I'd also be inclined to include the hash code in the transmitted message, so that readers could more quickly ignore uninteresting messages.) Doesn't seem worth it, and how would the user know their hash; This is not the

Re: [HACKERS] libpq++ build problems

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
jtv wrote: On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 01:45:56PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: Actually, I am confused. In src/template/freebsd I see: CFLAGS='-pipe' case $host_cpu in alpha*) CFLAGS=$CFLAGS -O;; i386*)CFLAGS=$CFLAGS -O2;; esac so why is

Re: [HACKERS] Scope of constraint names

2002-07-03 Thread Rod Taylor
I don't buy that argument even for foreign keys --- and remember that pg_constraint will also hold entries for CHECK, UNIQUE, and PRIMARY KEY constraints. I don't want to have to take a global lock whenever we create an index. I don't understand why a global lock is necessary -- and not

[HACKERS] Compiling PostgreSQL with Intel C Compiler 6.0

2002-07-03 Thread Hans-Jürgen Schönig
I have tried to compile PostgreSQL with the Intel C Compiler 6.0 for Linux. During this process some errors occurred which I have attached to this email. I have compiled the sources using: [hs@duron postgresql-7.2.1]$ cat compile.sh #!/bin/sh

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
Bruce Momjian wrote: Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Hi All, I have given up working on the BETWEEN node. It got to the stage where I realised I was really out of my depth! Rod Taylor has indicated an interest in the problem and I have sent him my latest patch, so hopefully he'll

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Hiroshi Inoue wrote: As I remember, Hiroshi's drop column changed the attribute number to a special negative value, which required lots of changes to track. ??? What do you mean by *lots of* ? Yes, please remind me. Was your solution renumbering the attno values? I think there are fewer

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Hiroshi Inoue wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Hiroshi Inoue wrote: As I remember, Hiroshi's drop column changed the attribute number to a special negative value, which required lots of changes to track. ??? What do you mean by *lots of* ? Yes, please remind me. Was your

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
Bruce Momjian wrote: Hiroshi Inoue wrote: As I remember, Hiroshi's drop column changed the attribute number to a special negative value, which required lots of changes to track. ??? What do you mean by *lots of* ? Yes, please remind me. Was your solution renumbering the attno

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
Bruce Momjian wrote: Hiroshi Inoue wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Hiroshi Inoue wrote: As I remember, Hiroshi's drop column changed the attribute number to a special negative value, which required lots of changes to track. ??? What do you mean by *lots of* ? Yes,

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Yes, please remind me. Was your solution renumbering the attno values? Yes though I don't intend to object to Christopher's proposal. Hiroshi, I am thinking of rolling back my CVS to see if there's code from your previous test implementation

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: I am thinking of rolling back my CVS to see if there's code from your previous test implementation that we can use. Apart from the DropColumn function itself, what other changes did you make? Did you have modifications for '*' expansion in the parser,

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Yes, please remind me. Was your solution renumbering the attno values? Yes though I don't intend to object to Christopher's proposal. Hiroshi, I am thinking of rolling back my CVS to see if there's code from your previous test implementation that we can use. Apart from the

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Yes, please remind me. Was your solution renumbering the attno values? Yes though I don't intend to object to Christopher's proposal. Hiroshi, I am thinking of rolling back my CVS to see if there's code from your previous test implementation

[HACKERS] Adding attisdropped

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Hi, I've attached the changes I've made to pg_attribute.h - I can't see what's wrong but whenever I do an initdb it fails: initdb -D /home/chriskl/local/data The files belonging to this database system will be owned by user chriskl. This user must also own the server process. The database

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I am thinking of rolling back my CVS to see if there's code from your previous test implementation that we can use. Apart from the DropColumn function itself, what other changes did you make? Did you have modifications for '*' expansion in the parser, etc.? Yes, please review

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Well, obviously I prefer the attisdropped approach. I think it's clearer and there's less confusion. As a head developer for phpPgAdmin that's what I'd prefer... Hiroshi obviously prefers his solution, but doesn't object to OK, can you explain the issues from a server and client

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Well, obviously I prefer the attisdropped approach. I think it's clearer and there's less confusion. As a head developer for phpPgAdmin that's what I'd prefer... Hiroshi obviously prefers his solution, but doesn't object to OK, can you explain

Re: [HACKERS] listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Right. But we play similar games already with the existing SI buffer, to wit: It means a full seq scan over pointers ;) I have not seen any indication that the corresponding scan in the SI code is a bottleneck --- and that has to scan over *all*

Re: [HACKERS] Scope of constraint names

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't want to have to take a global lock whenever we create an index. I don't understand why a global lock is necessary -- To be sure we are creating a unique constraint name. and not simply a lock on the pg_constraint table In this context, a lock

Re: [HACKERS] regress/results directory problem

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marc has removed the regress/results directory from CVS. Uh ... say it ain't so, Joe! regress/results/Makefile was part of several releases. If you really did that, then it is no longer possible to extract the state of some past releases from CVS. This

Re: [HACKERS] Compiling PostgreSQL with Intel C Compiler 6.0

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have tried to compile PostgreSQL with the Intel C Compiler 6.0 for Linux. During this process some errors occurred which I have attached to this email. I have compiled the sources using: These are not errors, only

Re: [HACKERS] libpq++ build problems

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ... The following patch fixes the libpqxx compile problem on FreeBSD/alpha. The old code set -O2 for FreeBSD/i386, but that is already set earlier. The new patch just updates the FreeBSD/alpha compile. As a general rule, anything that affects one

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Unfortunately many apps rely on the fact that the attnos are consecutive starting from 1. It was the main reason why Tom rejected my trial. Nothing has changed about it. OK, I've been looking at Hiroshi's implementation. It's basically semantically equivalent to mine from what I can see so

Re: [HACKERS] Adding attisdropped

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've attached the changes I've made to pg_attribute.h - I can't see what's wrong but whenever I do an initdb it fails: Did you change the relnatts entry in pg_class.h for pg_attribute? More generally, run initdb with -d or -v or whatever its

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Tom Lane
Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I used the following macro in my trial implementation. #define COLUMN_IS_DROPPED(attribute) ((attribute)-attnum = DROP_COLUMN_OFFSET) The places where the macro was put are exactly the places where attisdropped must be checked. Actually, your trial

Re: [HACKERS] BETWEEN Node DROP COLUMN

2002-07-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Unfortunately many apps rely on the fact that the attnos are consecutive starting from 1. It was the main reason why Tom rejected my trial. Nothing has changed about it. OK, I've been looking at Hiroshi's implementation. It's basically semantically