On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 08:26 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Conflict resolution improvements are important to include in this
release, as discussed many times. Proposal given here
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-12/msg01175.php
presents a viable
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
That was not the feedback I have received. Nobody has commented on that
to me, though many have commented on the need for the current patch. As
mentioned, I went to the trouble of running a meeting to gain additional
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 09:49 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 21:00 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I think it is a pretty important safety feature that we keep all the
WAL around that's needed to recover the standby. To avoid
out-of-disk-space
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Hmm, I'm sorry but that's bogus. Retaining so much WAL that we are
strongly in danger of blowing disk space is not what I would call a
safety feature. Since there is no way to control or restrain the number
of files for
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 09:20 +0100, Guillaume Smet wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
That was not the feedback I have received. Nobody has commented on that
to me, though many have commented on the need for the current patch. As
mentioned, I
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 17:31 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Hmm, I'm sorry but that's bogus. Retaining so much WAL that we are
strongly in danger of blowing disk space is not what I would call a
safety feature. Since there
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 08:26 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Conflict resolution improvements are important to include in this
release, as discussed many times. Proposal given here
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-12/msg01175.php
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:33 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
So what was the clear result?
I have spoken clearly enough. You were welcome to attend the Hot Standby
User Group. The fact that you did not expresses your own priorities
quite well, ISTM. Your protestations to know more about the
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Conflict resolution improvements are important to include in this
release, as discussed many times. Proposal given here
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-12/msg01175.php
presents a viable design to improve this.
Following patch is a
Hello,
We were asked by Enova Financial to improve the documentation of PL/Perl
database access functions.
Alvaro and me worked on that and we produced the patch that is attached. It
splits initial block of functions
into the groups with the description directly following each of the group,
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:33 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
So what was the clear result?
I have spoken clearly enough. You were welcome to attend the Hot Standby
User Group. The fact that you did not expresses your own priorities
quite well, ISTM. Your protestations to
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:10 +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
yeah and we keep finding major bugs nearly daily
Facts, please?
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
2010/1/29 Stefan Kaltenbrunner ste...@kaltenbrunner.cc:
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:33 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
So what was the clear result?
I have spoken clearly enough. You were welcome to attend the Hot Standby
User Group. The fact that you did not expresses
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:12 +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
There are many features we should add. I will add them in priority order
until forced to stop.
we are past the point of adding new features for 9.0 imho
So presumably we cannot add the new feature to start hot standby at
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:10 +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
yeah and we keep finding major bugs nearly daily
Facts, please?
5 seconds of time spent on archives.postgresql.org show at least the
following SR/HS related bugs in the last 7 days or so:
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:12 +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
There are many features we should add. I will add them in priority order
until forced to stop.
we are past the point of adding new features for 9.0 imho
So presumably we cannot add the new feature to start hot
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:20 +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:10 +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
yeah and we keep finding major bugs nearly daily
Facts, please?
5 seconds of time spent on archives.postgresql.org show at least the
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
How about extending the format of the string returned by
pg_last_xlog_receive/replay_location() to include the timeline ID? When
it currently returns e.g '6/200016C', it could return '1/6/200016C',
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
To improve the situation, I think that we need to use
checkpoint_segment/timeout as a trigger of restartpoint, regardless
of the checkpoint record. Though I'm not sure that is possible and
should be included in v9.0.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:02:23PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Tim Bunce wrote:
This is an updated version of the third of the patches to be split out
from the former 'plperl feature patch 1'.
It includes changes following discussions with Tom Lane and others.
Changes in this patch:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 07:49:37PM +, Tim Bunce wrote:
I think I missed this because the Xcode compiler on Snow Leopard is
fairly old (gcc 4.2.1).
For the record, gcc 4.2.1 does report the error. I'd missed it because
I'd done most of my builds with perl 5.8.x and the notnull attributes
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 5:08 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:33 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
So what was the clear result?
I have spoken clearly enough. You were welcome to attend the Hot Standby
User Group. The fact that you did not expresses your
I'm still trying to collect all the bits to be able to read and
return several types of data in C functions.
I'm looking for quick ways to deal with ArrayType.
I'd expect some helper because these kind of operation should be
frequent and without any helper (function/macro) they really make
the
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 07:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 5:08 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:33 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
So what was the clear result?
I have spoken clearly enough. You were welcome to attend the Hot
2010/1/29 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Hi Michael,
Michael Glaesemann wrote:
We came across a regexp that takes very much longer than expected.
PostgreSQL 8.4.1 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc (GCC)
4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-44), 64-bit
SELECT 'ooo...'
2010/1/29 Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com:
I just found a few of these errors in a log file during some pgbench testing
tonight. Linux, recent CVS HEAD; given the range of systems and versions
this has been reported against now, this bug doesn't look like a platform or
version/build
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
It's a good question if that still makes sense with Hot Standby. Perhaps
we should redefine smart shutdown in standby mode to shut down as soon
as all read-only connections have died.
Okay. Let's
This is an updated version of the third of the patches to be
split out from the former 'plperl feature patch 1'.
It includes changes following discussions with Tom Lane and others.
Changes in this patch:
- Added plperl.on_perl_init GUC for DBA use (PGC_SIGHUP)
SPI functions are not available
Hi Robert,
I've also spent some time reviewing this patch since it is a
pre-requisite to the KNNGiST patch. I did have a much more comprehensive
list of suggestions, but it seems you've managed to resolve most of
these with your latest re-write. Please find some more comments inline:
Here's an
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:33 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I even *fixed* that already, but you decided to take it out before
committing. I then added it to the list of must-fix items in the TODO
list, but you took that out too. I have no objection to doing things
in smaller steps, but this
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 7:34 AM, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
m...@webthatworks.it wrote:
I'm still trying to collect all the bits to be able to read and
return several types of data in C functions.
I'm looking for quick ways to deal with ArrayType.
I'd expect some helper because these kind of
Simon Riggs wrote:
I removed code that you mentioned was
buggy because I don't have time to fix it and it is not high enough up
the priority list. We have discussed all of these things before yet you
raise them again as if those things have never been said.
*sigh*. Yeah, we've been through
The fundamental disagreement here is over what qualifies as a
wishlist item, aka a feature or added functionality. And what
qualifies as a must-fix bug.
Priorities are context sensitive. If this were early in the cycle then
working on bigger impact features like conflict resolution code might
be
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 16:44 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
I removed code that you mentioned was
buggy because I don't have time to fix it and it is not high enough up
the priority list. We have discussed all of these things before yet you
raise them again as if those
Magnus Hagander wrote:
2010/1/29 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
(There's a badly needed CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in this code BTW)
Incidentally, I ran across the exact same issue with a non-greedy
regexp with a client earlier this week, and put on my TODO to figure
out a good place
Jonah H. Harris escribió:
The syntax is listagg(expression [, delimiter]) WITHIN GROUP (order by
clause) [OVER partition clause]
If a delimiter is defined, it must be a constant.
Query: SELECT listagg(a, ',') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY a) FROM foo;
Result: aaa,bbb,ccc
So that's how Oracle
2010/1/29 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Jonah H. Harris escribió:
The syntax is listagg(expression [, delimiter]) WITHIN GROUP (order by
clause) [OVER partition clause]
If a delimiter is defined, it must be a constant.
Query: SELECT listagg(a, ',') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY a)
Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Was looking for general feedback on whether the way I've converted this
to use 64 bit integers for the account numbers seems appropriate, and to
see if there's any objection to fixing this in general given the
potential downsides.
In the past we've
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 2:08 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
First, you can't just remove support for the escape syntax from \d
commands without some discussion of whether or not that's the right
thing to do, and I don't think it is. The cases where this will
potentially
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Was looking for general feedback on whether the way I've converted this
to use 64 bit integers for the account numbers seems appropriate, and to
see if there's any objection to fixing
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 06:32:20AM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
I know. Patches were already posted for that,
waiting for Michael to review and apply it.
Just came back from another trip. Patch works on my system, so I committed it.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De,
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 12:56 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
I think we should extend the time available to make sure we have a
sensible set of features for 9.0. The heat of this discussion tells me
that we are going to be lacking features that are must-have to someone,
whether or not they are in
So I never realized the consequences of this little heuristic in
analyze.c in the handling of very low cardinality columns where we
want to just capture the complete list of values in the mcv and throw
away the histogram:
else if (toowide_cnt == 0 nmultiple == ndistinct)
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 14:52 +, Greg Stark wrote:
You said I think we should extend the time available to make sure we
have a sensible set of features for 9.0. Perhaps part of the problem
is that I couldn't understand what your patch did from the description
you posted and can't evaluate
Michael Meskes írta:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 06:32:20AM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
I know. Patches were already posted for that,
waiting for Michael to review and apply it.
Just came back from another trip. Patch works on my system, so I committed
it.
Michael
Thanks.
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
So that's how Oracle supports ordered aggregates? Interesting -- we
just got that capability but using a different syntax. Hmm, the
SQL:200x draft also has within group specification which seems the
standard way to do the ORDER BY stuff for
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:20 +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:10 +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
yeah and we keep finding major bugs nearly daily
Facts, please?
5 seconds of time spent on archives.postgresql.org show at
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I find it doubtful that it's actually necessary in Oracle's version
of listagg ...
Eh?
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E11882_01/server.112/e10592/functions087.htm
Defines:
*LISTAGG* (measure_expr [, 'delimiter_expr'])
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Jonah H. Harris jonah.har...@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I find it doubtful that it's actually necessary in Oracle's version
of listagg ...
Eh?
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com
wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 12:56 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
I think we should extend the time available to make sure we have a
sensible set of features for 9.0. The heat of this discussion tells me
that we are going to
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 12:23 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
Exactly. It would be nice to see 9.0 come out in 2010, and we're not
going to get there unless we start fixing the issues that are actually
release-blockers, rather than adding new features. Hot Standby was
committed with at least one
Jonah H. Harris jonah.har...@gmail.com writes:
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E11882_01/server.112/e10592/functions087.htm
Defines:
*LISTAGG* (measure_expr [, 'delimiter_expr'])
*WITHIN GROUP* (order_by_clause) [*OVER* query_partition_clause]
Hmph. I don't know what would possess
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 12:23 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
Two months on, there is
zero sign of any activity on that front
I'm surprised that you call 14 commits in 28 days following a publicly
available priority list: zero sign of activity.
Further discussion seems pointless.
--
Simon Riggs
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 12:23 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
Two months on, there is
zero sign of any activity on that front
I'm surprised that you call 14 commits in 28 days following a publicly
available priority list: zero
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 18:08 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 12:23 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
Two months on, there is
zero sign of any activity on that front
I'm surprised that you call 14 commits in 28 days following a publicly
available priority list: zero sign of
2010/1/28 KaiGai Kohei kai...@ak.jp.nec.com:
(2010/01/29 9:58), KaiGai Kohei wrote:
(2010/01/29 9:29), Robert Haas wrote:
2010/1/28 KaiGai Koheikai...@ak.jp.nec.com:
(2010/01/29 0:46), Robert Haas wrote:
2010/1/27 KaiGai Koheikai...@ak.jp.nec.com:
Hmm, indeed, this logic (V3/V5) is busted.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 2:43 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/1/28 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
with get_fn_expr_arg_stable() we are able to fix second parameter
without some performance issues.
No, that will create its own
On Jan 29, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
I haven't even looked at this code - I sort of assumed Itagaki was
handling this one. But it might be good to make sure that the docs
have been read through by a native English speaker prior to commit...
I did and revised them slightly. There
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:45 PM, David E. Wheeler da...@kineticode.com wrote:
On Jan 29, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
I haven't even looked at this code - I sort of assumed Itagaki was
handling this one. But it might be good to make sure that the docs
have been read through by a
On Jan 29, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
I did and revised them slightly. There isn't much, just a brief comment in
the table of aggregate functions. The documentation for all the functions on
that page could use a little love, frankly.
Want to take a short at it?
ENOTUITS! /me
Mark, do you need my data to reproduce results from
http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/wiki/2009-07-27 ?
Oleg
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
Hi Robert,
I've also spent some time reviewing this patch since it is a
pre-requisite to the KNNGiST patch. I did have a much more
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
That function *seriously* needs documentation, in particular the fact
that it's a no-op on machines without the right kernel call. The name
you've chosen is very bad for those semantics. I'd pick something
else myself.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Mark Cave-Ayland
mark.cave-ayl...@siriusit.co.uk wrote:
I'm happy that the code is a reasonable implementation of an RB-Tree, at
least with respect to the link to the related public domain source that
was posted. In terms of location, I think utils/misc is a
sri...@postgresql.org (Simon Riggs) writes:
Log Message:
---
Augment WAL records for btree delete with GetOldestXmin() to reduce
false positives during Hot Standby conflict processing. Simple
patch to enhance conflict processing, following previous discussions.
Controlled by
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Mark Cave-Ayland
mark.cave-ayl...@siriusit.co.uk wrote:
... In terms of location, I think utils/misc is a reasonable
place for it to live since I see it as analogous to the hash table
implementation, i.e. it's a
Tom Lane wrote:
sri...@postgresql.org (Simon Riggs) writes:
Log Message:
---
Augment WAL records for btree delete with GetOldestXmin() to reduce
false positives during Hot Standby conflict processing. Simple
patch to enhance conflict processing, following previous discussions.
Tom Lane wrote:
In the past we've rejected proposed patches for pgbench on the grounds
that they would make results non-comparable to previous results. So the
key question here is how much this affects the speed. Please be sure to
test that on a 32-bit machine, not a 64-bit one.
Sheesh,
All,
Is there a working list of HS must-fix items somewhere which people
agree on? Or are we still lacking consensus?
--Josh Berkus
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Fujii,
I guess that the startup process and the walreceiver should wait
for all read only backends to exit in smart shutdown case. It's
because those backends might be waiting for the record that conflicts
with their queries to be replayed. Is this OK? Or we should kill the
startup process
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:41 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
All,
Is there a working list of HS must-fix items somewhere which people
agree on? Or are we still lacking consensus?
VACUUM FULL, I believe is one.
Joshua D. Drake
--Josh Berkus
--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
--
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.ushttp://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
If not now, when?
-Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
On Jan 29, 2010, at 11:51 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
+1
David
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
I saw some odd pgstat output during an initdb on Windows today:
The files belonging to this database system will be owned by user
pgrunner.
This user must also own the server process.
The database cluster will be initialized with locale C.
The default database encoding has
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
I'm inclined to think we're going to have enough problems without that.
Changing that default will break, approximately speaking, every single
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 14:04 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
sri...@postgresql.org (Simon Riggs) writes:
Log Message:
---
Augment WAL records for btree delete with GetOldestXmin() to reduce
false positives during Hot Standby conflict processing. Simple
patch to enhance conflict
I wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
I'm inclined to think we're going to have enough problems without that.
BTW, core already had that discussion, but maybe I should
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
I'm inclined to think we're going to have enough problems without that.
Changing that default will break, approximately
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 13:42, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
I'm inclined to think we're going to have enough problems without
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
I'm inclined to think we're going to have enough problems without that.
In response to Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
I'm inclined to think we're going to have enough problems without that.
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 15:45 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
I'm inclined to think we're going to have enough problems
Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
With the release of Postgres 9.0, should we consider changing the
default for 'standard_conforming_strings'?
I'm inclined to think we're going to have enough problems without that.
BTW, core already had that discussion,
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
(4) The 8.3 issue wasn't nearly as bad as Tom is making it out to be.
Yes, there was a lot of WTF going on, but only by people that aren't
paying attention anyway and the work to fix it was pretty nominal.
The big mistake we made in 8.3 is not having those compatibility
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 13:42, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
[ still bearing scars from the 8.3 implicit-cast business, which we
didn't think would generate nearly the backlash it did... ]
Yeah that was my first reaction. But then again we also
Josh Berkus wrote:
I guess that the startup process and the walreceiver should wait
for all read only backends to exit in smart shutdown case. It's
because those backends might be waiting for the record that conflicts
with their queries to be replayed. Is this OK? Or we should kill the
Tom Lane wrote:
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 13:42, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
[ still bearing scars from the 8.3 implicit-cast business, which we
didn't think would generate nearly the backlash it did... ]
Yeah that was my first reaction. But
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 14:03, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 13:42, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I stand by the position that it's way too late in the cycle for
insufficiently-thought-out proposals for major behavioral
I stand by the position that it's way too late in the cycle for
insufficiently-thought-out proposals for major behavioral changes.
I don't see how announcing this earlier in the dev cycle would help, at
all. The people who read -hackers have been using
standards-conforming-strings for years.
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 14:03, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 13:42, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I stand by the position that it's way too late in the cycle for
insufficiently-thought-out
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
After skimming the thread Bruce linked:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-04/msg00512.php
It certainly seems insufficiently-thought-out. :(
Just as a clarification, while the GUC was *added* in 8.1, it was
read-only with a value of
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
initializing dependencies ... WARNING: pgstat wait timeout
WARNING: pgstat wait timeout
ok
vacuuming database template1 ... WARNING: pgstat wait timeout
WARNING: pgstat wait timeout
ok
copying template1 to template0 ... WARNING: pgstat wait
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
I stand by the position that it's way too late in the cycle for
insufficiently-thought-out proposals for major behavioral changes.
I don't see how announcing this earlier in the dev cycle would help, at
all.
We would have more than no-time-at-all to test
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
Well, since I asked in April of 2009, at the beginning of the cycle, 6
years after the introduction of the variable, and we still are not doing
it, then let's stop pretending we will ever do it.
We have made forward progress since that thread (we fixed
On Friday 29 January 2010 23:34:09 Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
I stand by the position that it's way too late in the cycle for
insufficiently-thought-out proposals for major behavioral changes.
I don't see how announcing this earlier in the dev cycle would help,
Andres Freund wrote:
On Friday 29 January 2010 23:34:09 Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
I stand by the position that it's way too late in the cycle for
insufficiently-thought-out proposals for major behavioral changes.
I don't see how announcing this earlier
Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes:
What about anouncing in the 9.0 releasenotes that it will be removed in 9.1?
That seems quite useless.
I note that we've made such statements before and not followed through
on them; one that just came up again is that contrib/xml2 is a couple
releases
On Thu, 2010-01-21 at 09:27 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Right, that's the way a standby server (= one still in recovery) has
always behaved. It has made sense in the past: it's not in the spirit
of smart shutdown to kill the WAL replay immediately. smart means
wait for recovery to
Comments:
* In standard_ProcessUtility(), case NotifyStmt, you add a comment:
/* XXX the new listen/notify version can be enabled
* for Hot Standby */
but I don't think that's correct. We may be able to support LISTEN
on the standby, but not NOTIFY (right?). I don't think we
On Friday 29 January 2010 23:54:15 Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes:
What about anouncing in the 9.0 releasenotes that it will be removed in
9.1?
That seems quite useless.
I note that we've made such statements before and not followed through
on them; one that
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
