Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Add hstore_to_json()

2010-01-01 Thread Dimitri Fontaine
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes: Does anyone have any real-world experience with any of the JSON C libraries? I do not, but I see that YAJL http://lloyd.github.com/yajl/ is now in Fedora, and has a BSDish license It's there in debian too, unstable and testing, and should be there on

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Simon Riggs wrote: Attached is the patch I intend to commit, barring objections. This patch extends SIGINT to allow cancellation of transactions while idle in both HS and normal mode. How does AbortTransactionAndAnySubtransactions() differ from AbortOutOfAnyTransaction()? Having followed the

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 12:53 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: Attached is the patch I intend to commit, barring objections. This patch extends SIGINT to allow cancellation of transactions while idle in both HS and normal mode. How does

Re: [HACKERS] krb_server_keyfile setting doesn't work on Windows

2010-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 00:57, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: 2009/12/31 Hiroshi Inoue in...@tpf.co.jp: Magnus Hagander wrote: 2009/12/30 Hiroshi Inoue in...@tpf.co.jp: Hi, As far as I tested, the krb_server_keyfile setting in postgres.conf doesn't work on Windows. Because

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Jan 1, 2010, at 6:48 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com w We could either endlessly repeat this ERROR: current transaction is aborted because of conflict with recovery, commands ignored until end of transaction block +1 for this option. I'm also not sure why we would want to single

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Simon Riggs wrote: On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 12:53 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: I agree with Joachim's comments upthread that we should have a different function for forcefully aborting the whole transaction, and leave the current pg_cancel_backend() behavior alone. That would require

[HACKERS] Change to config.pl processing in the msvc build environment

2010-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
I'd like to apply the attached patch to the msvc build environment, which changes how config.pl is handled. (For the unenlightened, this is the replacement stuff we have for autoconf) Today, there is one config.pl. We ship it with a couple of defaults (which points to a very old installation of

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Gurjeet Singh
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 1, 2010, at 6:48 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com w We could either endlessly repeat this ERROR: current transaction is aborted because of conflict with recovery, commands ignored until end of transaction

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 07:08 -0800, Robert Haas wrote: On Jan 1, 2010, at 6:48 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com w We could either endlessly repeat this ERROR: current transaction is aborted because of conflict with recovery, commands ignored until end of transaction block +1 for

Re: [HACKERS] about some parameters

2010-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Jaime Casanova jcasa...@systemguards.com.ec writes: Every time i explain what is the fsync parameter for, the next thing i always say is: never turn it off, and now that we have synchronous_commit there is no good reason for turn fsync off... so why are we still let it be in the

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Jan 1, 2010, at 8:30 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 07:08 -0800, Robert Haas wrote: On Jan 1, 2010, at 6:48 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com w We could either endlessly repeat this ERROR: current transaction is aborted because of conflict with

[HACKERS] Win64 warnings about size_t

2010-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
I have adapted the win64 patches a bit, and now have a working build. As in it runs the regression tests fine. However, I have well over a thousand warnings of the type: conversion from 'size_t' to 'int', possible loss of data My first 5-6 checks of where these happen are all cases where we

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 17:14 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Which amounts to rejecting this patch, since *this* patch changes the behaviour of SIGINT for all senders, which is what I understood people desired, i.e. not just a change for Hot Standby. I assumed Joachim did not mean to veto

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 09:24 -0800, Robert Haas wrote: If we have other events that can asynchronously roll back a transaction, I would think they would deserve similar handling. Off the top of my head, I'm not sure if there are any such cases. Serialization failures, deadlocks,

Re: [HACKERS] Win64 warnings about size_t

2010-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: My first 5-6 checks of where these happen are all cases where we assign the result of strlen() something to an int, or call a function taking an int as parameter with the result of strlen() in there. Yeah. Getting rid of all those cases is

Re: [HACKERS] Win64 warnings about size_t

2010-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 18:47, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: My first 5-6 checks of where these happen are all cases where we assign the result of strlen() something to an int, or call a function taking an int as parameter with the result of

Re: [HACKERS] Win64 warnings about size_t

2010-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 18:47, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I think MSVC is just complaining about something gcc doesn't.  If you can disable this specific warning it'd be a good plan. Yeah, that should be doable. According to

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Robert Haas
On Jan 1, 2010, at 9:42 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 09:24 -0800, Robert Haas wrote: If we have other events that can asynchronously roll back a transaction, I would think they would deserve similar handling. Off the top of my head, I'm not sure if

Re: [HACKERS] Serializable Isolation without blocking

2010-01-01 Thread Albe Laurenz
Kevin Grittner wrote: It seems to me that the hard part of this problem is to describe the general mechanism by which conflicts will be detected, with specific references to the types of data structures that will be used to hold that information. Well, the general approach to tracking SIREAD

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 10:15 -0800, Robert Haas wrote: Hmm. I don't think I can get a serialization failure, deadlock, or out of memory error while my session is idle. Agreed. As a point of note, now that we can cancel idle transactions there isn't any future blocker from making

Re: [HACKERS] Thoughts on statistics for continuously advancing columns

2010-01-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Thu, 2009-12-31 at 21:29 +, Simon Riggs wrote: On Thu, 2009-12-31 at 15:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes: Why not get both max() and min(), then rebase the histogram according to those values. That way the histogram can still move significantly and

Re: [HACKERS] uintptr_t for Datum

2010-01-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tor, 2009-12-31 at 13:44 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes: Tom Lane wrote: BTW, it looks like the patch is showing a manual change to pg_config.h.in. Don't do that. Run autoheader. I wasn't aware autoheader existed. Is that

Re: [HACKERS] Win64 warnings about size_t

2010-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 18:59, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 18:47, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I think MSVC is just complaining about something gcc doesn't.  If you can disable this specific warning it'd be a good

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Add hstore_to_json()

2010-01-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tor, 2009-12-31 at 11:12 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: David E. Wheeler wrote: On Dec 31, 2009, at 1:04 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I think the primary use will be to load a JSON value into Perl or Python and process it there. So a json type that doesn't have any interesting

Re: [HACKERS] Win64 warnings about size_t

2010-01-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On fre, 2010-01-01 at 20:01 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: .\src\backend\utils\mmgr\aset.c(701): warning C4334: '' : result of 32-bit shift implicitly converted to 64 bits (was 64-bit shift intended?) .\src\backend\utils\mmgr\aset.c(705): warning C4334: '' : result of 32-bit shift

[HACKERS] win32 socket definition

2010-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
The win64 port has showed that we have two sockets declared incorrectly. They are supposed to be declared as SOCKET on win32, but they are declared as int. See attached patch. Given that SOCKET is actually defined as int on win32 (no warnings or anything there, just on win64), I'm inclined to

Re: [HACKERS] Win64 warnings about size_t

2010-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 20:12, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: On fre, 2010-01-01 at 20:01 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:   .\src\backend\utils\mmgr\aset.c(701): warning C4334: '' : result of 32-bit shift implicitly converted to 64 bits (was 64-bit shift intended?)  

Re: [HACKERS] Win64 warnings about size_t

2010-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 20:12, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: This shouldn't be a problem for the same reason that casting size_t to int is not a problem in the PostgreSQL backend code, but perhaps writing 1L ... would fix it. 1L didn't

Re: [HACKERS] win32 socket definition

2010-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: The win64 port has showed that we have two sockets declared incorrectly. They are supposed to be declared as SOCKET on win32, but they are declared as int. See attached patch. Given that SOCKET is actually defined as int on win32 (no warnings or

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Windows x64 [repost]

2010-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 11:42, Tsutomu Yamada tsut...@sraoss.co.jp wrote: 2) use appropriate macro and datatypes for Windows API.   enables more than 32bits shared memory. Are you sure this one should use __noop, and not __nop? __noop: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/s6btaxcs.aspx

Re: [HACKERS] Win64 warnings about size_t

2010-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 20:33, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 20:12, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: This shouldn't be a problem for the same reason that casting size_t to int is not a problem in the PostgreSQL

Re: [HACKERS] IntArray in c.h

2010-01-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tor, 2009-12-31 at 11:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: The definition of c.h is bogus anyway. You might think it contains includes and defines to set up a portable C environment, which is what the first half indeed does. But then things like

Re: [HACKERS] win32 socket definition

2010-01-01 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 20:41, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: The win64 port has showed that we have two sockets declared incorrectly. They are supposed to be declared as SOCKET on win32, but they are declared as int. See attached patch. Given

Re: [HACKERS] Serializable Isolation without blocking

2010-01-01 Thread Kevin Grittner
Albe Laurenz wrote: If I remember right, one necessity for the SIREAD lock technique was that SIREAD locks taken by a transaction have to be kept after the transaction has ended. Correct. An SIREAD lock must be held until completion of the last serializable transaction holding a snapshot

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Kris Jurka
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009, Simon Riggs wrote: On Thu, 2009-12-31 at 15:41 +0100, Joachim Wieland wrote: I still think that we should have three transaction cancel modes, one to cancel an idle transaction, another one to cancel a running query and a third one that just cancels the transaction

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2010-01-01 at 15:31 -0500, Kris Jurka wrote: On Thu, 31 Dec 2009, Simon Riggs wrote: On Thu, 2009-12-31 at 15:41 +0100, Joachim Wieland wrote: I still think that we should have three transaction cancel modes, one to cancel an idle transaction, another one to cancel a running

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Add hstore_to_json()

2010-01-01 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Peter Eisentraut wrote: IMNSHO it's essential. I think Peter's approach of ignoring this requirement is extremely shortsighted. Whose requirement is it? I'm not ignoring it, but so far no one has actually said that it is a requirement and why. Mine for one :-). Quite apart from

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Add hstore_to_json()

2010-01-01 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes: Peter Eisentraut wrote: Whose requirement is it? I'm not ignoring it, but so far no one has actually said that it is a requirement and why. Mine for one :-). I think there are a couple of interacting factors here. We are not likely to want to go

Re: [HACKERS] Cancelling idle in transaction state

2010-01-01 Thread Joachim Wieland
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: I would recommend we make SIGINT do cancel-anything, and handle everything else via SIGUSR1, including CancelRequest. I'm not going to do that; I'm going to make HS conflict resolution work, which means putting in enough

Re: [HACKERS] Change to config.pl processing in the msvc build environment

2010-01-01 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Magnus Hagander wrote: I therefor propose that we rename this file to config.pl.default, and change the scripts to first load config.pl.default, and then load config.pl if it exists. config.pl then lives completely outside the source tree (should be in .cvsignore) and won't show up in any

[HACKERS] Testing with concurrent sessions

2010-01-01 Thread Kevin Grittner
There has been periodic discussion here about allowing psql to deal with multiple sessions, or possibly creating another tool to allow this sort of test. Is anyone working on this? It's very soon going to be critical that I be able to test particular interleavings of statements in particular

Re: [HACKERS] Win64 warnings about size_t

2010-01-01 Thread Bruce Momjian
Magnus Hagander wrote: I have adapted the win64 patches a bit, and now have a working build. As in it runs the regression tests fine. However, I have well over a thousand warnings of the type: conversion from 'size_t' to 'int', possible loss of data My first 5-6 checks of where these happen

Re: [HACKERS] about some parameters

2010-01-01 Thread Craig Ringer
Tom Lane wrote: Jaime Casanova jcasa...@systemguards.com.ec writes: Every time i explain what is the fsync parameter for, the next thing i always say is: never turn it off, and now that we have synchronous_commit there is no good reason for turn fsync off... so why are we still let it be in