Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] WAL logging freezing

2006-11-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 11:04 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: It seems that we're converging on the conclusion that not truncating clog early is the least bad alternative. This has the advantage of making things a lot simpler --- we won't need to track minxid at all. Allow me to summarize what I think

Re: [HACKERS] Extended protocol logging

2006-11-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 23:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Dave Cramer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: These are logs from Beta 2. With what logging settings? log_duration has rather different behavior from what it used to do. I think it would be useful to have the log results from a test program in

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Index greater than 8k

2006-11-01 Thread Teodor Sigaev
We are trying to get something faster than ~ '%foo%'; Which Tsearch2 does not give us :) Hmm, why not with GIN? :) Although, right now GIN doesn't support prefix search, it's possible to use it. Brain storm method: Develop a dictionary which returns all substring for lexeme, for example for

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Index greater than 8k

2006-11-01 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Teodor Sigaev wrote: We are trying to get something faster than ~ '%foo%'; Which Tsearch2 does not give us :) Hmm, why not with GIN? :) Although, right now GIN doesn't support prefix search, it's possible to use it. Well they run 8.1 :) Joshua D. Drake Brain storm method: Develop a

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] WAL logging freezing

2006-11-01 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do we need another GUC? I thought your observation about a PITR slave having that set lower than its master still remains unresolved. No, AFAICS that's not an issue in this design. The facts-on-the-ground are whatever is recorded in pg_class.relvacuumxid,

Re: [HACKERS] Extended protocol logging

2006-11-01 Thread Dave Cramer
On 31-Oct-06, at 11:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Dave Cramer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: These are logs from Beta 2. With what logging settings? log_duration has rather different behavior from what it used to do. to be honest I don't know, and looking at the logs I suspect that this is just

[HACKERS] [Fwd: pg_migrator: in-place upgrade tool at pgFoundry]

2006-11-01 Thread korryd
EnterpriseDB has created a new project at pgFoundry - http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pg-migrator/ pg_migrator is a tool that can in-place upgrade existing data without the usual dump/reload cycle. The pg_migrator project site (at pgFoundry) contains a complete implementation of the

[HACKERS] ¿¿¿past chunk end???

2006-11-01 Thread luis garcia
Hi We have been making some modifications to postgres catalog, butit seems to be a problem with one of the fields we just added, exactlyin the time when inserting the right values to that specific field. 1. This is what It happens:**template1=# CREATE TABLE

Re: [HACKERS] Extended protocol logging

2006-11-01 Thread Dave Cramer
On 1-Nov-06, at 6:18 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 23:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Dave Cramer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: These are logs from Beta 2. With what logging settings? log_duration has rather different behavior from what it used to do. I think it would be useful

Re: [HACKERS] Design Considerations for New Authentication Methods

2006-11-01 Thread Stephen Frost
* Henry B. Hotz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I've been looking at adding SASL or GSSAPI as an auth method. I have some questions about how to handle the flow of control changes. Great! I'd love to see that implemented, personally, so if you're looking for help, please let me know. round

[HACKERS] IN(subselect returning few values ...)

2006-11-01 Thread Stephen Frost
All, * Josh Berkus (josh@agliodbs.com) wrote: The plain non-VALUES list form is also significantly faster than it was, but I think it will only result in a bitmap indexscan plan type. Yeah, even bitmapscans break down at 1000 values ... In a similar vein, perhaps 8.2 fixes this but I

Re: [HACKERS] Design Considerations for New Authentication Methods

2006-11-01 Thread Henry B. Hotz
On Oct 31, 2006, at 8:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Henry B. Hotz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I notice that all the authentication (pg_fe_sendauth()) is done inside PWConnectPoll(), which sounds like something that isn't expected to block on network access. That's right. Is this behavior important

Re: [HACKERS] Extended protocol logging

2006-11-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 10:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 23:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: With what logging settings? log_duration has rather different behavior from what it used to do. I think it would be useful to have the log results

Re: [HACKERS] Design Considerations for New Authentication Methods

2006-11-01 Thread Henry B. Hotz
On Nov 1, 2006, at 6:33 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: * Henry B. Hotz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I've been looking at adding SASL or GSSAPI as an auth method. I have some questions about how to handle the flow of control changes. Great! I'd love to see that implemented, personally, so if

Re: [HACKERS] [Fwd: Index Advisor]

2006-11-01 Thread Kai-Uwe Sattler
Hi Gurjeet, I include pgsql-hackers in this discussion ... Am 01.11.2006 um 17:38 schrieb Gurjeet Singh: Hi Kai, I am working with Simon at EnterpriseDB, and am currently working on porting your patch to 8.2 sources. I have done a quick hack to make it work on 8.2; please find the

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Index greater than 8k

2006-11-01 Thread tomas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:55:04PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: We are not storing bytea [...] [...] Hmm, have you tried to create a functional trigram index on the equivalent of strings(bytea_column) or something like that? Hrm. Sorry for

Re: [HACKERS] ¿¿¿past chunk end???

2006-11-01 Thread imad
Carefully check all the palloc's you are doing in your code. This warning is shown when you write some extra bytes to the memory and size of your data goes beyond the allocated size. --Imad EnterpriseDB (www.enterprisedb.com) On 11/1/06, luis garcia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi We have been

Re: [HACKERS] ¿¿¿pas

2006-11-01 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 08:49:48AM -0400, luis garcia wrote: Hi We have been making some modifications to postgres catalog, but it seems to be a problem with one of the fields we just added, exactly in the time when inserting the right values to that specific field. Well, it's a bit hard to

Re: [HACKERS] IN(subselect returning few values ...)

2006-11-01 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Working on 8.1 I've recently been annoyed at the need to translate a sub-select inside an IN () clause into a fixed list of contents (the results of the sub-select, exactly) in order to get better performance. Better performance than what? Ever since

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Case Preservation disregarding case

2006-11-01 Thread Chuck McDevitt
Sorry, my last mail wasn't well thought out. Yes, the information_schema needs the case-folded name (although it might be ok to add additional columns to the information_schema for extra information). But, stepping back from all that, what is it the users want? 1) When re-creating a CREATE

[HACKERS] Index ignored with is not distinct from, 8.2 beta2

2006-11-01 Thread JEAN-PIERRE PELLETIER
I've reposted this from pgsql-performance where I got no response. == Hi, I wanted to use exp1 is not distinct from exp2 which I tough was syntaxic sugar for exp1 is not null and exp2 is not null and exp1 = exp2 or exp1 is null and exp2 is null but my

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Writing WAL for relcache invalidation: pg_internal.init

2006-11-01 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Enclose a patch for new WAL records for relcache invalidation. I don't think this works. RelationCacheInitFileInvalidate is executed post-commit, which means that there's a window between commit and where you propose to write the WAL entry. A crash and

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Writing WAL for relcache invalidation:pg_internal.init

2006-11-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 12:05 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: I think we're probably better off to just forcibly remove the init file during post-recovery cleanup. The easiest place to do this might be BuildFlatFiles, which has to scan pg_database anyway ... Presumably not rebuilding it, since we can

Re: [HACKERS] IN(subselect returning few values ...)

2006-11-01 Thread Stephen Frost
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Working on 8.1 I've recently been annoyed at the need to translate a sub-select inside an IN () clause into a fixed list of contents (the results of the sub-select, exactly) in order to get better performance.

Re: [HACKERS] ¿¿¿past chunk end???

2006-11-01 Thread luis garcia
Hi, thanks for your answers...Carefully check all the palloc's you are doing in your code.This warning is shown when you write some extra bytes to the memoryand size of your data goes beyond the allocated size. There's no problem in the memory allocation, just in relfrequency, that's the Big

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Index greater than 8k

2006-11-01 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On 11/1/06, Teodor Sigaev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Brain storm method: Develop a dictionary which returns all substring for lexeme, for example for word foobar it will be 'foobar fooba foob foo fo oobar ooba oob oo obar oba ob bar ba ar'. And make GIN functional index over your column

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Index greater than 8k

2006-11-01 Thread Alvaro Herrera
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:55:04PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: We are not storing bytea [...] [...] Hmm, have you tried to create a functional trigram index on the equivalent of strings(bytea_column) or something like that? Hrm. Sorry for my impolite

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Index greater than 8k

2006-11-01 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006, Joshua D. Drake wrote: Yes we do (and can) expect to find text among the bytes. We have searches running, we are just running into the maximum size issues for certain rows. you can use substr() to be safe, if schema change doesn't available Sincerely, Joshua D.

Re: Re: [HACKERS] ¿¿¿past chunk end???

2006-11-01 Thread Tom Lane
luis garcia [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well about the changes I have made, they are working just fine. All the structures length have been updated and as I said we added 7 new fields to pg_class structure and there was no problem. The problem here is with relfrequency only. pg_class is