Re: [HACKERS] message string fixes

2008-01-20 Thread Teodor Sigaev
For example, in regis.c there are several strings talking about regis pattern. I had never heard of regis patterns. Turns out they are a fast regex subset, used AFAICT only by the ispell code. Searching the web I don't find any other reference to regises (regisen? reges?), so I think we should

Re: [HACKERS] Transaction Snapshot Cloning

2008-01-20 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 18:46 +, Gregory Stark wrote: To do something like that the user would have to create a prepared transaction to save the snapshot. I think that makes sense though since effectively it's just requiring that the user explicitly do what would otherwise be a hidden

Re: [HACKERS] Transaction Snapshot Cloning

2008-01-20 Thread Simon Riggs
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 11:56 +0100, Florian G. Pflug wrote: Tom Lane wrote: I'm not sure what the most convenient user API would be for an on-demand hard-read-only mode, but we can't use SET TRANSACTION READ ONLY for it. It'd have to be some other syntax. Maybe just use a GUC variable

Re: [HACKERS] Transaction Snapshot Cloning

2008-01-20 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Simon Riggs wrote: On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 18:46 +, Gregory Stark wrote: To do something like that the user would have to create a prepared transaction to save the snapshot. I think that makes sense though since effectively it's just requiring that the user explicitly do what would otherwise

Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning grammar

2008-01-20 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:12 +, Gregory Stark wrote: Wouldn't Segment Exclusion (maybe together with a specialized form of CLUSTERing) handle that case much better than partitioning? Without the need to name all those thousands of partitions and manage them manually. Firstly we

Re: [HACKERS] Transaction Snapshot Cloning

2008-01-20 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 12:37 +, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 18:46 +, Gregory Stark wrote: To do something like that the user would have to create a prepared transaction to save the snapshot. I think that makes sense though since

Re: [HACKERS] Transaction Snapshot Cloning

2008-01-20 Thread Gregory Stark
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 18:46 +, Gregory Stark wrote: To do something like that the user would have to create a prepared transaction to save the snapshot. I think that makes sense though since effectively it's just requiring that the user explicitly

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3

2008-01-20 Thread Greg Sabino Mullane
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 In MySQL I have a function SHA1, which is critical for storing and authenticating passwords. It sure would be nice to have this in core. Yeah, there's pgcrypto, but it's a bit overkill for people who simply want to do a SHA1, especially

[HACKERS] select statement details

2008-01-20 Thread Rick Vernam
I'm trying to determine if a select statement: 1 - causes execution of a Volatile function - or - 2 - causes execution of a nextval function (same/similar as #1 above?) from within tcop / postgres.c ?? Things like QueryIsReadOnly imply that select nextval('some_sequence') are read-only

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3

2008-01-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: I also realize that SHA1 is not a great solution these days either, but I'd at least like to see a discussion on moving Postgres to somewhere between only has md5() and all pg_crypto functions inside core, even if it only means a handful of SHA functions. Moving

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3

2008-01-20 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 05:24:11PM -, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: It sure would be nice to have this in core. Yeah, there's pgcrypto, but it's a bit overkill for people who simply want to do a SHA1, especially when they see we already have a md5(). md5() was added with the following

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3

2008-01-20 Thread Magnus Hagander
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: I also realize that SHA1 is not a great solution these days either, but I'd at least like to see a discussion on moving Postgres to somewhere between only has md5() and all pg_crypto functions inside core, even if it only means a handful of SHA

Re: [HACKERS] message string fixes

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Teodor Sigaev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: web I don't find any other reference to regises (regisen? reges?), so I think we should avoid using the term. How about just changing the messages to just say regular expression instead? It's just a combination of regular expression for ispell. Maybe

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3

2008-01-20 Thread Joe Conway
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: In summary: what would objections be to my writing a sha1() patch? There wasn't any discussion about it last time. It does seem a bit wierd to support one but not the other. It's also interesting to note that the implementation in the backed is commented with:

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In summary: what would objections be to my writing a sha1() patch? Mainly that no one else is dissatisfied with the current split between core and pgcrypto. The only reason md5() is in core is to support encryption of passwords in pg_shadow. There

[HACKERS] bgwriter_lru_multiplier blurbs inconsistent

2008-01-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Is the bgwriter_lru_multiplier parameter a limit on the number to scan or to write? GUC and docs seem to contradict one another. GUC says #: utils/misc/guc.c:1834 #, fuzzy msgid Background writer multiplier on average buffers to scan per round. The docs say Unless limited by

Re: [HACKERS] Transaction Snapshot Cloning

2008-01-20 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 15:11 +, Gregory Stark wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 18:46 +, Gregory Stark wrote: To do something like that the user would have to create a prepared transaction to save the snapshot. I think that makes sense though

Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] bgwriter_lru_multiplier blurbs inconsistent

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is the bgwriter_lru_multiplier parameter a limit on the number to scan or to write? GUC and docs seem to contradict one another. GUC says #: utils/misc/guc.c:1834 #, fuzzy msgid Background writer multiplier on average buffers to scan per round.

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3

2008-01-20 Thread David Fetter
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 01:42:21PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In summary: what would objections be to my writing a sha1() patch? Mainly that no one else is dissatisfied with the current split between core and pgcrypto. The only reason md5() is

[HACKERS] Minor bug in src/port/rint.c

2008-01-20 Thread Mark Cave-Ayland
Hi everyone, I believe that there is a small bug in src/port/rint.c when the input parameter has a fractional part of 0.5 which is demonstrated by the attached program. It appears that the PG version of rint() rounds in the wrong direction with respect to glibc. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ./test

Re: [HACKERS] bgwriter_lru_multiplier blurbs inconsistent

2008-01-20 Thread Greg Smith
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Is the bgwriter_lru_multiplier parameter a limit on the number to scan or to write? GUC and docs seem to contradict one another. It adjusts the target for how many clean buffers it wants to either find or create. This always increases the number

Re: [HACKERS] Minor bug in src/port/rint.c

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Mark Cave-Ayland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I believe that there is a small bug in src/port/rint.c when the input parameter has a fractional part of 0.5 which is demonstrated by the attached program. It appears that the PG version of rint() rounds in the wrong direction with respect to glibc.

Re: [HACKERS] message string fixes

2008-01-20 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Maybe the right phrase to use is ispell regular expression. In any case we need to document what the limitations are compared to regular regular expressions (ahem). Do you know offhand what the rules are? There is a fallback to regex if expression isn't supported by regis (see call of

Re: [HACKERS] message string fixes

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Teodor Sigaev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is a fallback to regex if expression isn't supported by regis (see call of RS_isRegis() in spell.c). Oh. So in that case, the messages Alvaro is worried about ereport(ERROR,

Re: [HACKERS] Minor bug in src/port/rint.c

2008-01-20 Thread Magnus Hagander
Tom Lane wrote: Mark Cave-Ayland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I believe that there is a small bug in src/port/rint.c when the input parameter has a fractional part of 0.5 which is demonstrated by the attached program. It appears that the PG version of rint() rounds in the wrong direction with

Re: [HACKERS] Minor bug in src/port/rint.c

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: Considering that probably every modern platform has rint(), I doubt it's worth spending time on our stopgap version to try to make it fully IEEE-compliant ... Except win32. Hasn't it got something equivalent? This is IEEE-required

Re: [HACKERS] bgwriter_lru_multiplier blurbs inconsistent

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is nothing incorrect here, it's just not as clear as it could be. Here's a V2 that tries to clear that up: Unless limited by varnamebgwriter_lru_maxpages/, the number of dirty buffers written in each round is based on the number of new buffers that

Re: [HACKERS] Minor bug in src/port/rint.c

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Mark Cave-Ayland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The big question is, of course, how much difference does this make? Probably not a lot. If we can find an IEEE-compliant rounding function on Windows, I'd be happy to see rint() fixed to call it; beyond that I think it's not worth troubling with.

Re: [HACKERS] message string fixes

2008-01-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Teodor Sigaev wrote: aren't user-facing errors at all, and should be demoted to elog's, correct? elog(ERROR, invalid regis pattern: \%s\, str); Hmm. If regis detects an error in expression then it will be an error for regex library too. At least, it was supposed to be. And

Re: [HACKERS] message string fixes

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Teodor Sigaev wrote: Hmm. If regis detects an error in expression then it will be an error for regex library too. At least, it was supposed to be. And those that are not, probably are not what the user intends anyway, with the pattern language being

Re: [HACKERS] Minor bug in src/port/rint.c

2008-01-20 Thread Magnus Hagander
Tom Lane wrote: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: Considering that probably every modern platform has rint(), I doubt it's worth spending time on our stopgap version to try to make it fully IEEE-compliant ... Except win32. Hasn't it got something equivalent? This

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: generic function, constructor function

2008-01-20 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello The different-numbers-of-arguments bit is what I'm objecting to. Just register the function as foo(ANY), foo(ANY,ANY), foo(ANY,ANY,ANY), etc, and you're done without breaking anything else. I found simple solution, it uses ANY, but number of necessary ANY arguments is generated

Re: [HACKERS] message string fixes

2008-01-20 Thread Teodor Sigaev
aren't user-facing errors at all, and should be demoted to elog's, correct? elog(ERROR, invalid regis pattern: \%s\, str); Hmm. If regis detects an error in expression then it will be an error for regex library too. At least, it was supposed to be. -- Teodor Sigaev

Re: [HACKERS] Minor bug in src/port/rint.c

2008-01-20 Thread Mark Cave-Ayland
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 16:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Your proposed fix wouldn't make it act the same as glibc, only move the differences around. I believe glibc's default behavior for the ambiguous cases is round to nearest even number. You propose replacing round towards zero, which is what

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] setof record out syntax and returning records

2008-01-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
This thread made me try this example. Note that there's a WARNING in the spot where I pressed tab. alvherre=# create or replace function foo (out pg_class) language plpgsql as $$ declare i pg_class%rowtype; begin for i in select * from pg_class loop return next; end loop; end; $$; ERROR:

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] setof record out syntax and returning records

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: alvherre=# set lc_messWARNING: problem in alloc set PL/PgSQL function context: detected write past chunk end in block 0xb541d0, chunk 0xb562c0 ages to 'C'; WARNING: problem in alloc set PL/PgSQL function context: detected write past chunk en d in

[HACKERS] Bug in psql/enum

2008-01-20 Thread David Fetter
Folks, 8.3's psql is ponderously unhelpful when getting the type description of an enum, so I'd like to propose a new column in the \dT output which can contain those values in an array format. Yes, I know it looks like a new feature, but it's really a bug fix. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter

Re: [HACKERS] bgwriter_lru_multiplier blurbs inconsistent

2008-01-20 Thread Greg Smith
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008, Tom Lane wrote: I think the main problem is the qualifying clause up front in a place of prominence. Here's a V3 try That one looks good to me. These are small details but better to get it right now. -- * Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gregsmith.com

Re: [HACKERS] message string fixes

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: It looks to me like RS_isRegis() needs to be tightened up a bit anyway: it will accept ^foo which is valid regex but not valid regis, leading to an error being thrown which is not what we want. I experimented with this and verified that the error could be reached with a hacked-up

Re: [HACKERS] message string fixes

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Additionally, I would like to apply the attached patch. Are there objections? So far I think you only applied one half of that? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1:

Re: [HACKERS] bgwriter_lru_multiplier blurbs inconsistent

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, 20 Jan 2008, Tom Lane wrote: I think the main problem is the qualifying clause up front in a place of prominence. Here's a V3 try That one looks good to me. These are small details but better to get it right now. OK, committed. Back to

Re: [HACKERS] Bug in psql/enum

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 8.3's psql is ponderously unhelpful when getting the type description of an enum, so I'd like to propose a new column in the \dT output which can contain those values in an array format. ... and how wide is your screen, again?

[HACKERS] Anyone tried PG with Perl 5.10?

2008-01-20 Thread Tom Lane
I read that Perl 5.10 is about to hit Fedora rawhide. Anyone know if it will work with plperl and/or DBD::Pg? If there are fixes needed in plperl, it'd sure be nice if they were in 8.3 ... regards, tom lane ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] SHM_HUGETLB on Linux 2.6.

2008-01-20 Thread Kohei KaiGai
Kurt Roeckx wrote: Hi, Has anyone tried to use the huge tlb support of the Linux 2.6 kernel? If you compile the kernel with support for it (CONFIG_HUGETLBFS), you can call shmget() with a SHM_HUGETLB parameter so that it will use larger pages. Has anyone tried to use it? Is it worth trying to

[HACKERS] mklink of pg_standby

2008-01-20 Thread Hiroshi Saito
Hi Simon, and Dave,Magnus. About pg_standby, a link option cause a problem in windows(XP and 2k,2k3). It is because the call of mklink is needed. Then, they are the new programs of VISTA and 2008. It is CreateSymbolicLink of API of kernel32.lib is equipped with mklink.

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3

2008-01-20 Thread Florian Weimer
* David Fetter: Is there any country with laws so benighted that they restrict secure hashing algorithms? Right now, there's a contest between SHA1 and MD5 as to which one gets broken first, and SHA1 appears to be in the lead. SHAn for n1 could preempt the awfulness of losing this race.

Re: [HACKERS] mklink of pg_standby

2008-01-20 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 15:36 +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote: Hi Simon, and Dave,Magnus. About pg_standby, a link option cause a problem in windows(XP and 2k,2k3). It is because the call of mklink is needed. Then, they are the new programs of VISTA and 2008. It is CreateSymbolicLink of API of