Re: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32

2005-07-28 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 28 July 2005 02:39 > To: Dave Page > Cc: PostgreSQL-development > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32 > > Dave Page wrote: > > Did anyone get a chance to think about this? I'd like to > fix

Re: [HACKERS] Sanity Check?

2005-07-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Why does the sanity check test start with a VACUUM? Why not a VACUUM > FULL? The test predates the existence of VACUUM FULL ;-); so that's what it did originally. I think I deliberately left it as-is during the 7.2 devel cycle, so that the new lazy-va

Re: [HACKERS] wal_buffer tests in

2005-07-28 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD
> I ran a wal_buffer test series. It appears that increasing the > wal_buffers is indeed very important for OLTP applications, > potentially resulting in as much as a 15% average increase in > transaction processing. > What's interesting is that this is not just true for 8.1, it's true for

Re: [HACKERS] snapshot build broken ...

2005-07-28 Thread Robert Treat
On Wednesday 20 July 2005 21:27, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Tom Lane wrote: > > "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> Fixed --- but maybe we ought to do something to test the > >>> INSTALL/HISTORY documentation build as we

Re: [HACKERS] wal_buffer tests in

2005-07-28 Thread Greg Stark
Josh Berkus writes: > Folks, > > I ran a wal_buffer test series. It appears that increasing the > wal_buffers is indeed very important for OLTP applications, potentially > resulting in as much as a 15% average increase in transaction processing. > What's interesting is that this is not jus

Re: [HACKERS] RESULT_OID Bug

2005-07-28 Thread Kevin McArthur
It is the only one that currently appears to _for this bug_. Kevin - Original Message - From: "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 11:57 AM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] RESULT_OID Bug Andrew - Supernews wrote: On 2005-07-27, M

Re: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32

2005-07-28 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 28 July 2005 14:29 > To: Dave Page > Cc: PostgreSQL-development > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32 > > Dave Page wrote: > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Bruce Momji

Re: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32

2005-07-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Dave Page wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 28 July 2005 02:39 > > To: Dave Page > > Cc: PostgreSQL-development > > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32 > > > > Dave Page wrote: > > > Did anyone get a chance

Re: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32

2005-07-28 Thread Tom Lane
"Dave Page" writes: > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> I would like to see how hard it would be to >> add #ifdefs to get the test program to run on Win32. > I did manage to get it to compile (though not work fully just yet), > however I had to use the full pthreads library rathe

Re: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32

2005-07-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > "Dave Page" writes: > > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> I would like to see how hard it would be to > >> add #ifdefs to get the test program to run on Win32. > > > I did manage to get it to compile (though not work fully just yet), > > however I had to use t

Re: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32

2005-07-28 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 28 July 2005 16:08 > To: Tom Lane > Cc: Dave Page; PostgreSQL-development > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] --enable-thread-safety on Win32 > > Tom Lane wrote: > > "Dave Page" writes: > > > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Basic documentation for ROLEs.

2005-07-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 08:24:02PM -0300, Tom Lane wrote: > Basic documentation for ROLEs. The user-manag chapter still needs to > be rewritten, but at least the reference pages are reasonably sane. I just noticed the "createuser" and "dropuser" pages may need adjustments as well ... are you sti

Re: [HACKERS] psql as an execve(2) interpreter

2005-07-28 Thread Jonah H. Harris
Brook, I have a lot of shell scripts that run as cron jobs and have considered this option. However, if you look at it carefully, SQL is totally different from say perl, php, bash, etc. for scripts which execute from the shell. Tom is right, it is much more valuable and supportable to call

Re: [HACKERS] Some new list.c primitives

2005-07-28 Thread Thomas Swan
On 7/28/05, Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Tom Lane wrote:> How about list_append_distinct and list_concat_distinct?Those names are fine with me. list_append_unique and list_concat_unique might be a little clearer, unless you want to retain the sqlism of distinct.

[HACKERS] Write past chunk end?

2005-07-28 Thread Magnus Hagander
I'm testing out the latest version of Palles ICU patch on win32, and I got the build syste mworking. But it no longer works when built - it used to... When initdb:ing with this version and -E UNICODE, I get: WARNING: detected write past chunk end in Analyze Column 01472ED0 Any ideas on how to de

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Basic documentation for ROLEs.

2005-07-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I just noticed the "createuser" and "dropuser" pages may need > adjustments as well ... are you still working on this? The programs themselves need adjustment, too :-(. I have a TODO note to look at them, but would be grateful if someone else could tak

Re: [HACKERS] Write past chunk end?

2005-07-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 07:51:02PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > I'm testing out the latest version of Palles ICU patch on win32, and I > got the build syste mworking. But it no longer works when built - it > used to... > > When initdb:ing with this version and -E UNICODE, I get: > WARNING: dete

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Basic documentation for ROLEs.

2005-07-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 01:59:10PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I just noticed the "createuser" and "dropuser" pages may need > > adjustments as well ... are you still working on this? > > The programs themselves need adjustment, too :-(. I have a TODO n

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Basic documentation for ROLEs.

2005-07-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Would you post your whole to-do list for roles? This is more or less verbatim (now you know what kind of notes I keep): Do we want ROLE to be GUC_REPORT? Should RESET ALL reset ROLE?? Got some problems with rolling back SET SESSION AUTH (won't rest

Re: [HACKERS] Some new list.c primitives

2005-07-28 Thread Tom Lane
Thomas Swan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 7/28/05, Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Tom Lane wrote: >>> How about list_append_distinct and list_concat_distinct? >> Those names are fine with me. > list_append_unique and list_concat_unique might be a little clearer, unless > you want to

Re: [HACKERS] wal_buffer tests in

2005-07-28 Thread Josh Berkus
Greg, > You have wal_buffer set to 2048? That's pretty radical compared to the > default of just 5. Your tests shows you had to go to this large a value > to see the maximum effect? No, take a look at the graph. It looks like we got the maximum effect from a wal_buffers somewhere between 64 an

Re: [HACKERS] [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance

2005-07-28 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 09:31:39PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote: > After seeing the discussion about how bad the disk performance is with a > lot of scsi controllers on linux, I'm wondering if we should run some > disk tests to see how things look. I'd be very interested to see how FreeBSD compares to L

Re: [HACKERS] [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance

2005-07-28 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 07:32:34PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > This 4-way has 8GB of memory and four Adaptec 2200s controllers attached > > to 80 spindles (eight 10-disk arrays). For those familiar with the > > schema, here is a visual of the disk layout: > > http://www.osdl.org/projects/dbt

Re: [HACKERS] [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance

2005-07-28 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 05:14:41PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 09:31:39PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote: > > After seeing the discussion about how bad the disk performance is with a > > lot of scsi controllers on linux, I'm wondering if we should run some > > disk tests to see how

Re: [HACKERS] Interesting COPY edge case...

2005-07-28 Thread Tom Lane
Chris Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > create or replace function build_table (integer) returns integer as ' > begin > execute ''copy foo to stdout;''; > return 1; > end' language plpgsql; > The result: > /* [EMAIL PROTECTED]/dba2 in=*/ select try_copy(1); > ERROR: unexpected error -2 in

[HACKERS] MySQL to PostgreSQL for SugarCRM

2005-07-28 Thread Denis Lussier
Title: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] MySQL to PostgreSQL, was ENUM type At EnterpriseDB we're doing a little project along these lines.   In our lab, and soon for our company, we are running SugarCRM on EDB-Postgres.   Alas you say, but SugarCRM only supports MySQL:   EDB ships a nifty java based E

Re: [HACKERS] [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance

2005-07-28 Thread Mark Wong
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 17:19:34 -0500 "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 05:14:41PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 09:31:39PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote: > > > After seeing the discussion about how bad the disk performance is with a > > > lot of sc

Re: [HACKERS] [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance

2005-07-28 Thread Mark Wong
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 17:17:25 -0500 "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 07:32:34PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > This 4-way has 8GB of memory and four Adaptec 2200s controllers attached > > > to 80 spindles (eight 10-disk arrays). For those familiar with the > > >

Re: [HACKERS] [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance

2005-07-28 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 04:15:31PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 17:17:25 -0500 > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 07:32:34PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > > This 4-way has 8GB of memory and four Adaptec 2200s controllers attached > > > > to

Re: [HACKERS] [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance

2005-07-28 Thread Mark Wong
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:48:09 -0500 "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 04:15:31PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 17:17:25 -0500 > > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 07:32:34PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > >

Re: [HACKERS] [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance

2005-07-28 Thread Mark Wong
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 16:55:55 -0700 Mark Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:48:09 -0500 > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 04:15:31PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote: > > > On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 17:17:25 -0500 > > > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED

[HACKERS] Information Schema DBMS VERSION wrong

2005-07-28 Thread Michael Fuhr
The following query doesn't return the version of PostgreSQL currently running, but rather the version of initdb that initialized the cluster: SELECT character_value FROM information_schema.sql_implementation_info WHERE implementation_info_name = 'DBMS VERSION'; Is that the intended or desired be

Re: [HACKERS] Race conditions, race conditions!

2005-07-28 Thread Qingqing Zhou
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > > WARNING: relation "t1" page 196 is uninitialized --- fixing > TRAP: FailedAssertion("!PageHeader) ((PageHeader) pageHeader))->pd_upper == 0))", File: "hio.c", Line: 263) > LOG: server process (PID 11296) was terminated by signal 6 > Inspired by this

Re: [HACKERS] Information Schema DBMS VERSION wrong

2005-07-28 Thread Tom Lane
Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The following query doesn't return the version of PostgreSQL currently > running, but rather the version of initdb that initialized the cluster: > SELECT character_value > FROM information_schema.sql_implementation_info > WHERE implementation_info_name =