Bruce Momjian wrote:
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
On Friday 14 November 2003 22:10, Jan Wieck wrote:
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
On Friday 14 November 2003 03:05, Jan Wieck wrote:
For sure the sync() needs to be replaced by the discussed fsync() of
recently written files. And I think the
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hannu Krosing wrote:
It would be even better to have now() that returns the time current
transaction is COMMITted as this is the time other backend become aware
of it ;)
True, but implementing that would be very hard.
Son, that was a *joke* ...
-Original Message-
From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 17 November 2003 23:31
To: Josh Berkus
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
Josh Berkus writes:
Given all that, don't people think it's
Dann Corbit writes:
Cygwin requires a license for commercial use.
No, it does not.
Really?
What's this then?
http://www.cygwin.com/licensing.html
The Cygwin license, the GPL, specifically says:
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
covered by this
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hello,
If Win32 actually makes it into 7.5 then yes I believe 8.0 would be
appropriate.
It might be interesting to track Oracle's version number viz. its
feature list. IOW, a PostgreSQL 8.0 database would be feature
equivalent to an Oracle 8.0 database.
Dave Page writes:
Least interesting to many user perhaps, but lost of them seen to think
that it's important for expanding our userbase:
http://www.postgresql.org/survey.php?View=1SurveyID=9
That survey is a bit like asking television viewers, What do you think
would attract the most new
If the background writer uses fsync, it can write and allow the buffer
to be reused and fsync later, while if we use O_SYNC, we have to wait
for the O_SYNC write to happen before reusing the buffer;
that will be slower.
You can forget O_SYNC for datafiles for now. There would simply be too
-Original Message-
From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 November 2003 09:23
To: Dave Page
Cc: Josh Berkus; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
Dave Page writes:
Least interesting to many
On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 04:36, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
0. As you say, make it known to the public. Have people test their
in-development applications using a beta.
and how do you propose we do that? I think this is the hard part ...
other
0. As you say, make it known to the public. Have people test
their in-development applications using a beta.
and how do you propose we do that? I think this is the hard part
... other then the first beta, I post a note out to -announce and
-general that the beta's have been tag'd and
Dave Page wrote:
Right, but not having the luxury of time travel (wasn't that removed in
Postgres95? ;-) ) we can only go by what the majority think. We won't
know if it's actually right unless we try it.
We could run a survey saying 'would you use PostgreSQL on win32', but
the chances are that
Shachar Shemesh wrote:
I'm sorry if I'm being alow here
alow-slow
Just wanted to avoid confusion.
--
Shachar Shemesh
Open Source integration consultant
Home page resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will
Uytkownik Shachar Shemesh napisa:
Dave Page wrote:
Right, but not having the luxury of time travel (wasn't that removed in
Postgres95? ;-) ) we can only go by what the majority think. We won't
know if it's actually right unless we try it.
We could run a survey saying 'would you use PostgreSQL on
I'm sorry if I'm being alow here - is there any problem with running a
production server on cygwin's postgresql? Is the cygwin port of lesser
quality, or otherwise inferior?
Performance, performance, perfomance... and perfomance... it is (almost)
always worse perfomance when we
Claudio Natoli wrote:
I'm sorry if I'm being alow here - is there any problem with running a
production server on cygwin's postgresql? Is the cygwin port of lesser
quality, or otherwise inferior?
Performance, performance, perfomance... and perfomance... it is (almost)
always worse
Uz.ytkownik Andrew Dunstan napisa?:
Claudio Natoli wrote:
As for release numbering, ISTM that is not fundamentally very important.
At my former company we had code names for branches and decided release
names/numbers near release time in accordance with marketing
requirements. Let's not get
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 20:08:41 -0500,
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The time from release 7.3 to release 7.4 was 355 days, an all-time
high. We really need to shorten that.
Why is that?
End users will find it useful.
I started using
Le Mardi 18 Novembre 2003 06:21, Greg Stark a écrit :
Oh, and yeah, a win32 port. Yay, another OS port. Postgres runs on dozens
of OSes already. What's so exciting about one more? Even if it is a
pathologically hard OS to port to. Just because it was hard doesn't mean
it's useful.
Dear Greg,
...
Does anyone have a comparison of how many lines of code were added in
this release compared to previous?
7.2.4: 456204 lines of code in 1021 files
7.3.4: 480491 lines of code in 1012 files
7.4: 554567 lines of code in 1128 files (boah!)
I used a fresh extracted source-directory and
Claudio Natoli wrote:
Claudio Natoli wrote nothing of the sort :-P
---
Certain disclaimers and policies apply to all email sent from Memetrics.
For the full text of these disclaimers and policies see
a
href=http://www.memetrics.com/emailpolicy.html;http://www.memetrics.com/em
Will adding the logical attribute number break all of the external
tools? pg_dump, etc are all dependent on attnum now?
Would it be possible to keep the meaning of attnum the same externally
and add another column internally to represent the physical number?
Dave
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 02:33:41PM +0100, Tommi Maekitalo wrote:
...
Does anyone have a comparison of how many lines of code were added in
this release compared to previous?
7.2.4: 456204 lines of code in 1021 files
7.3.4: 480491 lines of code in 1012 files
7.4: 554567 lines of code in
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Here's the situation as I see it:
. there have been lots of requests for a native Win32 port
. this is important to some people and not important to others
. the decision has long ago been made to do it, and some work
has been done, and more is being done
Isn't it
Dave Cramer wrote:
Will adding the logical attribute number break all of the external
tools? pg_dump, etc are all dependent on attnum now?
Would it be possible to keep the meaning of attnum the same externally
and add another column internally to represent the physical number?
Interesting
Uz.ytkownik Jean-Michel POURE napisa?:
For me, this makes 60% of the market at least.
A 1% to 60% is not a small difference, it is a real gap.
Don't forget that success isn't always connected with technical things
(very good example is MySQL :-)) - PostgreSQL needs a good marketing,
clear
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
0. As you say, make it known to the public. Have people test their
in-development applications using a beta.
and how do you propose we do that? I think this is the hard part ...
other then the first beta, I post a
Claudio Natoli wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Here's the situation as I see it:
. there have been lots of requests for a native Win32 port
. this is important to some people and not important to others
. the decision has long ago been made to do it, and some work
has been done, and
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Speaking of which, any ETA on this? Bruce? If anyone from
core can indicate
how they'd like this architected (from the perspective of code
rearrangement), I'm willing to have a crack at this.
http://momjian.postgresql.org/main/writings/pgsql/win32.html
No,
Claudio Natoli wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Speaking of which, any ETA on this? Bruce? If anyone from
core can indicate
how they'd like this architected (from the perspective of code
rearrangement), I'm willing to have a crack at this.
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I am ready to work with anyone to make fork/exec happen. It requires we
find out what globals are being set by the postmaster, and have the
child run those same routines. I can show you examples of what I have
done and walk you through areas that need work. If you look at
All:
Does anyone know if there is going to be a port to Solaris 9 x86 in the
near future. What is the decission to develop on this platform since Sun
is pushing Solaris x86 harder than ever.
--
Christopher Smiga
System Engineer (Sun SCSA)
N2 Broadband Network Operations
Phone: 888-671-1268
--- Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which feature is requested more than that?
Not sure how often features are requested and by whom. However, if you take a
look at the TODO list, you'll find plenty of stuff more important than win32
port.
Of the following (which includes every
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Christoper Smiga wrote:
All:
Does anyone know if there is going to be a port to Solaris 9 x86 in the
near future. What is the decission to develop on this platform since Sun
is pushing Solaris x86 harder than ever.
Doesn't it work? I've run on Solaris 8 x86 extensively
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, ow wrote:
Have *never* seen ppl running Oracle or Sybase on Windows.
I can't speak for Oracle, but Sybase on Windows is definitely a real
thing. If you have to deal with developing for their iAnywhere product (a
remote replication solution for PocketPC applications),
ow wrote:
Have *never* seen ppl running Oracle or Sybase on Windows. Not sure about DB/2
or Informix, never worked with them, but I'd suspect the picture is the same.
Then you need to get out more. I have seen Oracle, Sybase, DB2 (and
probably Informix, I forget) all running on Windows in a
--- Rocco Altier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, ow wrote:
Have *never* seen ppl running Oracle or Sybase on Windows.
I can't speak for Oracle, but Sybase on Windows is definitely a real
thing. If you have to deal with developing for their iAnywhere product
iAnywhere is a
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 08:39:29AM -0800, ow wrote:
Have *never* seen ppl running Oracle or Sybase on Windows.
I _have_ certainly seen plenty of people running Oracle on Windows.
They weren't necessarily happy, of course, but people do it all the
time.
As for Sybase, you don't see that
In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christoper
Smiga) transmitted:
Does anyone know if there is going to be a port to Solaris 9 x86 in
the near future. What is the decission to develop on this platform
since Sun is pushing Solaris x86 harder than ever.
If
Peter,
Well, based on the feedback we're getting from the 7.4 release, the #1 issue
for non-postgresql users who are interested enough to post to message boards
is Where is the Windows Port? This gets mentioned roughly 10 times as
often as any other potential feature.
So the Windows port
Marek,
Maybe it's a good time to think about PostgreSQL's marketing strategy
identity. Maybe this great DBMS should be changed in all areas - not
only in technical related fields ?
If your interest is marketing PostgreSQL, please join the Advocacy list.
That goes for anyone on this list who
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:24:25AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
Well, based on the feedback we're getting from the 7.4 release, the #1 issue
for non-postgresql users who are interested enough to post to message boards
is Where is the Windows Port? This gets mentioned roughly 10 times as
This
I think they are actually trying to pull it out of the dumpster,
whether from desperation of marketing acumen no one knows. I think
they've gone back to the 'if we can get them hooked on a dual opteron
box, we can sell them some massive E1' or whatever.
On Nov 18, 2003, at 11:32 AM,
Guys,
I agree with Neil ... it's not the length of the development part of the
cycle, it's the length of the beta testing.
I do think an online bug tracker (bugzilla or whatever) would help. I also
think that having a person in charge of testing would help as well ... no
biggie, just
PostgreSQL most definitely works great on Solaris x86 !
At UC Berkeley, we have our undergraduate students hack on the
internals of PostgreSQL in the upper-division Introduction to
Database Systems class ..
http://www-inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs186/
The official platform is Solaris x86 - that's
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:42:31AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
(Oddly enough, my problem in doing more testing myself is external to
PostgreSQL; most of our apps are PHP apps and you can't compile PHP against
two different versions of PostgreSQL on the same server. Maybe with User
Mode
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ow) wrote:
Have *never* seen ppl running Oracle or Sybase on Windows.
I haven't seen Sybase on Windows (only barely have seen it anywhere,
fitting with the comment made that it hides in the lucrative financial
industry); I _have_
Josh Berkus wrote:
Guys,
I agree with Neil ... it's not the length of the development part of the
cycle, it's the length of the beta testing.
I do think an online bug tracker (bugzilla or whatever) would help. I also
think that having a person in charge of testing would help as well ... no
-Original Message-
From: ow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 8:39 AM
To: Dann Corbit; Christopher Kings-Lynne; Greg Stark
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
--- Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote:
Guys,
I agree with Neil ... it's not the length of the development part of the
cycle, it's the length of the beta testing.
I do think an online bug tracker (bugzilla or whatever) would help. I also
think that having a
--- Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have all of the above database systems installed on the Windows 2000
machine I am typing this message from.
DB/2 7.1
Oracle 8.1.7 and 9.2.0.5
MySQL 4.0.12
Sybase Adaptive Server 12.0
Informix Dynamic Server 9.2
(Also SapDB, Firebird server,
-Original Message-
From: ow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 11:23 AM
To: Dann Corbit; Christopher Kings-Lynne; Greg Stark
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
--- Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Maybe some sort of automated distributed build farm would be a good
idea. Check out http://build.samba.org/about.html to see how samba does
it (much lighter than the Mozilla tinderbox approach).
We wouldn't need to be as
Hi folks,
Is there any pre-existing protocol for a company to pay for specific
features to be added to PostgreSQL?
I've gotten full executive buy-in to the idea that it would be far
cheaper to sponsor and pay for people to develop the enterprise features
we need in Postgres than to do an Oracle
Mr. Rogers,
Is there any pre-existing protocol for a company to pay for specific
features to be added to PostgreSQL?
Are other people/companies already doing this, either officially or
unofficially, and what is the general protocol for going about doing
this?
Other companies are doing
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I am ready to work with anyone to make fork/exec happen. It requires we
find out what globals are being set by the postmaster, and have the
child run those same routines. I can show you examples of what I have
done and walk you through areas
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 12:36:11AM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
0. As you say, make it known to the public. Have people test their
in-development applications using a beta.
and how do you propose we do that? I think this is the hard
Hannu Krosing wrote:
Tom Lane kirjutas E, 17.11.2003 kell 02:08:
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmmm... I agree this behavior isn't ideal, although I can see the case
for viewing this as a mistake by the application developer: they are
assuming that they know exactly when transactions
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
1. Open WAL files with O_SYNC|O_DIRECT or O_SYNC(Not sure if
Without grouping WAL writes that does not fly. Iff however such grouping
is implemented that should deliver optimal performance. I don't think flushing
WAL to the OS early (before a tx commits) is
Thank you very much, for help.
The problem was, that the server and client wasn't the same version.
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 14:04:56 +0200,
Petro Pelekh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So my database doesn't have
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 13:14:34, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Would you please check CVS HEAD. Tom has just applied the patch fix
this and we could use more testers.
CVS HEAD compiles fine and all regression tests pass on my Sol 2.8 and 2.9
boxes.
-derek
Derek Morr
GPG public key:
On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 14:33, James Rogers wrote:
Hi folks,
Is there any pre-existing protocol for a company to pay for specific
features to be added to PostgreSQL?
There are several people who do this type of work (Neil, Joe, David, the
folks are Command Prompt Inc., etc.).
Personally, I
Hallo,
I'm trying to call plpgsql functions from c functions directly through
the Oid, but i have a problem: it seems that the plpgsql interpreter
calls SPI_connect and fails even if the caller has already
spi-connected. I am working on recursive functions in c and so i can not
call
http://www-inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs186/hwk0/index.html
Are these screenshots of PgAccess on Mac OSX?
Robert Treat
On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 13:07, Sailesh Krishnamurthy wrote:
PostgreSQL most definitely works great on Solaris x86 !
At UC Berkeley, we have our undergraduate students hack on
Robert Treat wrote:
http://www-inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs186/hwk0/index.html
Are these screenshots of PgAccess on Mac OSX?
It's pretty sad that Mike Stonebraker only has a salary of $15,000. ;-)
I also thought this SIGMOD article was a nice read:
On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 14:36, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Maybe some sort of automated distributed build farm would be a good
idea. Check out http://build.samba.org/about.html to see how samba does
it (much lighter than the
I've been looking all over but I can't seem to see a company that is
providing *up-to-date* postgresql support and provides their own
supported binaries. Am I barking up the wrong tree entirely here?
TIA
--
Austin Gonyou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Coremetrics, Inc.
---(end of
Mike == Mike Mascari [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mike Robert Treat wrote:
http://www-inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs186/hwk0/index.html
Are these screenshots of PgAccess on Mac OSX?
Yup .. that's from Joe Hellerstein, who was the instructor in the
Spring when I was a TA.
Mike
Hi list,
First of all, many thanks to everyone who contributed to 7.4 - I'm just
starting to rebuild parts of our CMS to make use of some of the new
features - very welcome indeed.
Whilst looking through the new information_schema objects in the DB, and
browsing the documentation for these
Robert Treat wrote:
Check the archives on this, as its been hashed out already once at least
... I think the big issue/problem is that nobody seems able (or wants) to
come up with a script that could be setup in cron on machines to do this
... something simple that would dump the output to
Will adding the logical attribute number break all of the external
tools? pg_dump, etc are all dependent on attnum now?
Would it be possible to keep the meaning of attnum the same externally
and add another column internally to represent the physical number?
Interesting idea. It would require
HOWEVER, a release cycle of *less than 6 months* would kill the advocacy vols
if we wanted the same level of publicity.
I do support the idea of dev releases. For example, if there was a dev
release of PG+ARC as soon as Jan is done with it, I have one client would
would be willing to test it
PostgreSQL most definitely works great on Solaris x86 !
At UC Berkeley, we have our undergraduate students hack on the
internals of PostgreSQL in the upper-division Introduction to
Database Systems class ..
http://www-inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs186/
Hi Sailesh,
You know what would be kind of
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
HOWEVER, a release cycle of *less than 6 months* would kill the advocacy vols
if we wanted the same level of publicity.
I do support the idea of dev releases. For example, if there was a dev
release of PG+ARC as soon as Jan is done
Chris == Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
PostgreSQL most definitely works great on Solaris x86 ! At UC
Berkeley, we have our undergraduate students hack on the
internals of PostgreSQL in the upper-division Introduction to
Database Systems class ..
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 02:31:03PM -0800, Sailesh Krishnamurthy wrote:
Another thing I toyed with was having an implementation of a
Tid-List-Fetch .. sorting a TID-list from an index and fetching the
records of the relation off the sorted list for better IO
performance. AFAICT something like
Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have all of the above database systems installed on the Windows 2000
machine I am typing this message from. DB/2 7.1
Oracle 8.1.7 and 9.2.0.5
MySQL 4.0.12
Sybase Adaptive Server 12.0
Informix Dynamic Server 9.2
(Also SapDB, Firebird
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 02:31:03PM -0800, Sailesh Krishnamurthy wrote:
Another thing I toyed with was having an implementation of a
Tid-List-Fetch .. sorting a TID-list from an index and fetching the
records of the relation off the sorted list for
On 2003.11.17 14:48:08 -0500, Rod Taylor wrote:
The PostgreSQL group has recently had a patch submitted with a snippet
of code from FreeBSDs src/bin/mkdir/mkdir.c.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/bin/mkdir/mkdir.c?annotate=1.27
Is this intentionally under the 4 clause license or
78 matches
Mail list logo
