I notice that there are more than a few projects on pgfoundry that are
marked as BSD licence but then the project files don't contain any
mention of the licence details. In some cases, projects are also clearly
marked Copyright of people or organizations.
For example, pg_batch is clearly marked
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 12:02 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
(1)
Smart or fast shutdown requested in PM_STARTUP state always removes
the backup_label
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 15:09 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 12:02 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
(1)
Smart or fast shutdown
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 15:09 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 12:02 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:01 PM,
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:57 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I notice that there are more than a few projects on pgfoundry that are
marked as BSD licence but then the project files don't contain any
mention of the licence details. In some cases, projects are also clearly
marked
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 15:09 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue,
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 07:53 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
For example, pg_batch is clearly marked BSD licence, yet the docs and
many of the files are marked Copyright (c) 2010, NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND
TELEPHONE CORPORATION.
Don't mix up copyright and licence. They are not the same thing at all.
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 16:05 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
ISTM that we can use XLogCtl-SharedRecoveryInProgress for that.
Is this OK?
That can change state at any time. Would that work?
Yes. XLogCtl-SharedRecoveryInProgress is set to TRUE only when
XLogCtl structure is initialized
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 07:53 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
For example, pg_batch is clearly marked BSD licence, yet the docs and
many of the files are marked Copyright (c) 2010, NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND
TELEPHONE CORPORATION.
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 16:05 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
ISTM that we can use XLogCtl-SharedRecoveryInProgress for that.
Is this OK?
That can change state at any time. Would that work?
Yes.
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 09:33 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
No - pgFoundry projects are licenced and copyright-attributed as their
authors see fit (as long as it's an open source licence of course).
Yes, are they open source licences?
All the options on pgFoundry are, yes.
The PostgreSQL
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
* the index grows as the size of the total data set, it's not limited
by partition size
* can't cheaply drop one partition any more, you have to vacuum the
(big) index first
So I wholeheartedly agree with the general
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:06 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If, as you say, the licence is unclear then whether-or-not it is an open
source licence must also be unclear.
I would suggest you, or anyone else who notices, open bugs on any
packages you want to use for which you find
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Dave, this is important and so this thread must have a clear resolution,
so we must stick to a single point and be clear about our logic and our
statements.
OK. I thought you were talking about copyright and licences
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 06:32 -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:06 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If, as you say, the licence is unclear then whether-or-not it is an open
source licence must also be unclear.
I would suggest you, or anyone else who notices, open
That is the case for *anything*. We could change the PostgreSQL
licence if we wanted, but it would take a huge amount of effort and
approval of every contributor ever whose work could be considered an
artistic contribution.
I doubt it. Do you think that every single contributor is
Thanks for your reply!
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 10:33 PM, Boszormenyi Zoltan z...@cybertec.at wrote:
In your design, the transaction commit on the master waits for its XID
to be read from the XLOG_XACT_COMMIT record and replied by the standby.
Right? This design seems not to be extensible to #2
Simon Riggs wrote:
That puts a fairly large hole in recommending that people visit
pgFoundry. That either needs to fixed or users will no longer be able to
trust PgFoundry.
pgFoundry is a resource we provide the community. The projects there are
the responsibility of their individual
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, I think I understand now. But, the SIGTERM sent by the postmaster
doesn't kill the recovery process unconditionally. It will invoke
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
BTW, What I'd like to see as a very first patch first is to change the
current poll loops in walreceiver and walsender to, well, not poll.
That's a requirement for synchronous replication, is very
Hi
I tried running pg_upgrade from the current snapshot of postgresql and
upgrading from 8.4.4 to the snapshot version. Everything seem to look fine
in the process and all that came out was only ok's but when I tried a
simple query on the databse it keeps throwing these message out of the back
On 05/18/2010 07:32 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
That puts a fairly large hole in recommending that people visit
pgFoundry. That either needs to fixed or users will no longer be able to
trust PgFoundry.
pgFoundry is a resource we provide the community. The projects
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 07:32 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
That puts a fairly large hole in recommending that people visit
pgFoundry. That either needs to fixed or users will no longer be able to
trust PgFoundry.
pgFoundry is a resource we provide the community. The
Greetings,
This doesn't seem right to me:
postgres=# select
postgres-# string_agg(column1::text order by column1 asc,',')
postgres-# from (values (3),(4),(1),(2)) a;
string_agg
1234
(1 row)
I'm thinking we should toss a syntax error here and force the 'order
by' to be at
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
This doesn't seem right to me:
postgres=# select
postgres-# string_agg(column1::text order by column1 asc,',')
postgres-# from (values (3),(4),(1),(2)) a;
string_agg
1234
(1 row)
Looks fine to me: you have two ordering columns
On 18 May 2010 16:37, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Greetings,
This doesn't seem right to me:
postgres=# select
postgres-# string_agg(column1::text order by column1 asc,',')
postgres-# from (values (3),(4),(1),(2)) a;
string_agg
1234
(1 row)
I'm thinking we
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
This doesn't seem right to me:
postgres=# select
postgres-# string_agg(column1::text order by column1 asc,',')
postgres-# from (values (3),(4),(1),(2)) a;
string_agg
1234
(1 row)
Greetings,
Under:
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/runtime-config-file-locations.html
We have:
ident_file (string)
Specifies the configuration file for ident authentication
(customarily called pg_ident.conf). This parameter can only be set
at server start.
jes...@krogh.cc wrote:
Hi
I tried running pg_upgrade from the current snapshot of postgresql and
upgrading from 8.4.4 to the snapshot version. Everything seem to look fine
in the process and all that came out was only ok's but when I tried a
simple query on the databse it keeps throwing
jes...@krogh.cc wrote:
Hi
I tried running pg_upgrade from the current snapshot of postgresql and
upgrading from 8.4.4 to the snapshot version. Everything seem to look
fine
in the process and all that came out was only ok's but when I tried a
simple query on the databse it keeps throwing
Hello everyone,
We are seeing the following error message occasionally in the postgres logs:
2010-05-13 23:49:03 PDT ERROR: unexpected data beyond EOF in block 4106698 of
relation custom_discoveryprofile
2010-05-13 23:49:03 PDT HINT: This has been seen to occur with buggy kernels;
consider
On 05/18/2010 09:22 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 07:32 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
That puts a fairly large hole in recommending that people visit
pgFoundry. That either needs to fixed or users will no longer be able to
trust PgFoundry.
pgFoundry is a
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Greetings,
Under:
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/runtime-config-file-locations.html
We have:
ident_file (string)
Specifies the configuration file for ident authentication
(customarily
* Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote:
That definitely looks wrong. How about this?
Looks good to me, but I'd add a link to the Username Maps page.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
jes...@krogh.cc wrote:
on the old and new servers, but if you can only provide these values on
one of the two servers, it is still useful. Thanks.
Hi Bruce, thanks for your prompt response.
First the new one..
Great.
j...@pal:~$ psql -p 5433
psql (9.0beta1)
Type help for help.
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
* Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote:
That definitely looks wrong. How about this?
Looks good to me, but I'd add a link to the Username Maps page.
Done and applied.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me:
On 2010-05-18 20:52, Bruce Momjian wrote:
This line above looks very odd because I didn't think the template0
datfrozenxid could be advanced. Can I see the output of this query:
SELECT datname, datfrozenxid, datallowconn FROM pg_database;
Only from the old database:
data=#
Jesper Krogh wrote:
On 2010-05-18 20:52, Bruce Momjian wrote:
This line above looks very odd because I didn't think the template0
datfrozenxid could be advanced. Can I see the output of this query:
SELECT datname, datfrozenxid, datallowconn FROM pg_database;
Only from the
On 18/05/10 07:41, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
BTW, What I'd like to see as a very first patch first is to change the
current poll loops in walreceiver and walsender to, well, not poll.
That's a requirement
jes...@krogh.cc wrote:
First the new one..
j...@pal:~$ psql -p 5433
psql (9.0beta1)
Type help for help.
data=# SELECT datname, datfrozenxid FROM pg_database;
datname | datfrozenxid
---+--
template0 | 654
postgres | 2374592801
data |
Excerpts from jesper's message of mar may 18 13:22:12 -0400 2010:
j...@pal:~$ psql data
psql (9.0beta1, server 8.4.1)
WARNING: psql version 9.0, server version 8.4.
Some psql features might not work.
Type help for help.
data# SELECT datname, datfrozenxid FROM pg_database;
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from jesper's message of mar may 18 13:22:12 -0400 2010:
j...@pal:~$ psql data
psql (9.0beta1, server 8.4.1)
WARNING: psql version 9.0, server version 8.4.
Some psql features might not work.
Type help for help.
data# SELECT datname,
Excerpts from Tony Sullivan's message of mar may 18 13:19:13 -0400 2010:
Hello everyone,
We are seeing the following error message occasionally in the postgres logs:
2010-05-13 23:49:03 PDT ERROR: unexpected data beyond EOF in block 4106698 of
relation custom_discoveryprofile
2010-05-13
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of vie may 14 15:03:57 -0400 2010:
Maybe a better solution is to have some kind of notion of a default-only
entry, which is sufficient to insert the default into the struct but
isn't accepted as a user-settable item.
This patch (for 8.4, but applies fuzzily to
Hi.
I'm trying to do a test move of one of our applications onto 9.0beta1.
We use storable and serializes data into a bytea column in the database.
This script uses that:
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
use Storable;
use DBI;
use DBD::Pg;
use Data::Dumper;
my $dbh =
On 17/05/10 04:40, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 16:53 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
Attached patch rearranges the walsender loops slightly to fix the above.
XLogSend() now only sends up to MAX_SEND_SIZE bytes (== XLOG_SEG_SIZE /
2) in one round and returns to the main loop after that
On 2010-05-18 21:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jesper Krogh wrote:
On 2010-05-18 20:52, Bruce Momjian wrote:
This line above looks very odd because I didn't think the template0
datfrozenxid could be advanced. Can I see the output of this query:
SELECT datname, datfrozenxid,
On 17/05/10 12:36, Jim Nasby wrote:
On May 15, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
What exactly is the user trying to monitor? If it's how far behind is
the standby, the difference between pg_current_xlog_insert_location()
in the master and pg_last_xlog_replay_location() in the standby
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 14:54, Jesper Krogh jes...@krogh.cc wrote:
Hi.
I'm trying to do a test move of one of our applications onto 9.0beta1.
We use storable and serializes data into a bytea column in the database.
[ snip insert/select using bytea ]
8.4
id |
This is an area that the SQL standard didn't think through very clearly
(IMHO). They actually have two ways of specifying functions like this, one
is the ordered aggregate section that this syntax is modeled on, which is
indeed very confusing for multi-parameter aggregates. The other is the
Jesper Krogh wrote:
On 2010-05-18 21:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jesper Krogh wrote:
On 2010-05-18 20:52, Bruce Momjian wrote:
This line above looks very odd because I didn't think the template0
datfrozenxid could be advanced. Can I see the output of this query:
SELECT
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 17:06 -0400, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 17/05/10 04:40, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 16:53 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
Attached patch rearranges the walsender loops slightly to fix the above.
XLogSend() now only sends up to MAX_SEND_SIZE bytes (==
On 2010-05-18 23:12, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
set bytea_output 'escape';
That was it. Knowing what the problem was I had no problem finding it in
the release notes.
May I ask whats the reason is for breaking the compatibillity?
--
Jesper
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 17:08 -0400, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 17/05/10 12:36, Jim Nasby wrote:
On May 15, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
What exactly is the user trying to monitor? If it's how far behind is
the standby, the difference between
On 18/05/10 17:17, Simon Riggs wrote:
There's no reason that the buffer size we use for XLogRead() should be
the same as the send buffer, if you're worried about that. My point is
that pq_putmessage contains internal flushes so at the libpq level you
gain nothing by big batches. The read() will
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 15:20, Jesper Krogh jes...@krogh.cc wrote:
On 2010-05-18 23:12, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
set bytea_output 'escape';
That was it. Knowing what the problem was I had no problem finding it in the
release notes.
May I ask whats the reason is for breaking the compatibillity?
--On 18. Mai 2010 23:20:26 +0200 Jesper Krogh jes...@krogh.cc wrote:
That was it. Knowing what the problem was I had no problem finding it in
the release notes.
May I ask whats the reason is for breaking the compatibillity?
Efficency, if i am allowed to call it this way. The new hex
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 03:26:17PM -0600, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 15:20, Jesper Krogh jes...@krogh.cc wrote:
On 2010-05-18 23:12, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
set bytea_output 'escape';
That was it. Knowing what the problem was I had no problem finding it in the
release
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 17:25 -0400, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 18/05/10 17:17, Simon Riggs wrote:
There's no reason that the buffer size we use for XLogRead() should be
the same as the send buffer, if you're worried about that. My point is
that pq_putmessage contains internal flushes so at
hi,
i mistakenly had posted this to pgsql-bugs already and got a response
(see below - edited). i'm posting here since afaik it is the way i
should be requesting new features. my suggestion is to add a
DATESTYLE format to match the format specified for date time strings
in ecmascript
On May 17, 2010, at 3:30 , Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
On May 14, 2010, at 22:54 , Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org writes:
All in all, I believe that
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, I think I understand now. But, the SIGTERM sent by the postmaster
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
Will do. Thanks for the link.
Here is an updated version that works for SHARE locks too.
(This message mainly serves as a way to link the updated patch to the commit
fest entry. Is this how I'm supposed to do that, or am I
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Ben Hockey neonstalw...@gmail.com wrote:
hi,
i mistakenly had posted this to pgsql-bugs already and got a response (see
below - edited). i'm posting here since afaik it is the way i should be
requesting new features. my suggestion is to add a DATESTYLE format
2010/5/19 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Ben Hockey neonstalw...@gmail.com wrote:
hi,
i mistakenly had posted this to pgsql-bugs already and got a response (see
below - edited). i'm posting here since afaik it is the way i should be
requesting new
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
In terms of removing the backup label file, can we simply have an
additional boolean in the postmaster that indicates whether we've ever
reached PM_RUN, and only consider removing the backup file if so?
Yes, but I
67 matches
Mail list logo
