Joel Jacobson j...@gluefinance.com wrote:
I applied all the changes on 9.0beta manually and then it compiled without
any assertion failures.
I also changed the oids to a different unused range, since the ones I used
before had been taken in 9.0beta1.
Thanks, but you still need to test
On 24/05/10 22:49, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Josh Berkus's message of vie may 21 17:57:35 -0400 2010:
Problem: currently, if your database has a large amount of cold data,
such as 350GB of 3-year-old sales transactions, in 8.4 vacuum no longer
needs to touch it thanks to the
(2010/05/25 12:19), Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Stephen Frostsfr...@snowman.net wrote:
* KaiGai Kohei (kai...@ak.jp.nec.com) wrote:
We have two options; If the checker function takes the list of
RangeTblEntry,
it will be comfortable to ExecCheckRTPerms(), but not
I started a wiki article for brainstorming the JSON API:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/JSON_API_Brainstorm . I also made
substantial changes to the draft of the API based on discussion here
and on the #postgresql IRC channel.
Is it alright to use the wiki for brainstorming, or should it stay
On May 25, 2010, at 6:08 , Sam Vilain wrote:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/sql-savepoint.html
Lead us to believe that if you roll back to the same savepoint name
twice in a row, that you might start walking back through the
savepoints. I guess I missed the note on ROLLBACK TO
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm, OK, I think that makes sense. Would you care to propose a patch?
Yep. Here is the patch.
This patch distinguishes normal shutdown from
Some performance problems have been reported on HS from two users: Erik
and Stefan.
The characteristics of those issues have been that performance is
* sporadically reduced, though mostly runs at full speed
* context switch storms reported as being associated
So we're looking for something that
On 25/05/10 13:03, Florian Pflug wrote:
On May 25, 2010, at 6:08 , Sam Vilain wrote:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/sql-savepoint.html
Lead us to believe that if you roll back to the same savepoint name
twice in a row, that you might start walking back through the
savepoints. I
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
(2)
pg_ctl -ms stop emits the following warning whenever there is the
backup_label file in $PGDATA.
WARNING: online backup mode is active
Shutdown will not complete until pg_stop_backup() is called.
This
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
Of course, if people want to suggest tests that just shouldn't be
included, I can go through and strip things out.
Well... I'm a little reluctant to believe that we should have 3.3M of
tests for the entire backend and 5M of tests just for psql.
KaiGai,
* KaiGai Kohei (kai...@ak.jp.nec.com) wrote:
OK, the attached patch reworks it according to the way.
I havn't looked at it yet, but the hook was added to ExecCheckRTPerms(),
not RTE. This was for two main reasons- it seemed simpler to us and it
meant that any security module
On May 25, 2010, at 12:18 , Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 25/05/10 13:03, Florian Pflug wrote:
On May 25, 2010, at 6:08 , Sam Vilain wrote:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/sql-savepoint.html
Lead us to believe that if you roll back to the same savepoint name
twice in a row, that
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 5:37 AM, Joseph Adams
joeyadams3.14...@gmail.com wrote:
I started a wiki article for brainstorming the JSON API:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/JSON_API_Brainstorm . I also made
substantial changes to the draft of the API based on discussion here
and on the
On May 25, 2010, at 3:21 , Tom Lane wrote:
Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org writes:
The subtle point here is whether you consider the view from the outside
(in the sense of what a read-only transaction started at an arbitrary time
can or cannot observe), or from the inside (what updating
,--- I/Alex (Mon, 24 May 2010 12:25:18 -0400) *
| No equivalent of FETCH_COUNT is available at the libpq level, so I
| assume that the interface I am using is smart enough not to send
| gigabytes of data to FE.
|
| Where does the result set (GBs of data) reside after I call
| PQexecPrepared?
2010/5/25 Dan Ports d...@csail.mit.edu:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:24:07AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Replicating or recreating the whole predicate locking and conflict
detection on slaves is not feasible for performance reasons. (I
won't elaborate unless someone feels that's not
Alex Goncharov wrote:
,--- I/Alex (Mon, 24 May 2010 12:25:18 -0400) *
| No equivalent of FETCH_COUNT is available at the libpq level, so I
| assume that the interface I am using is smart enough not to send
| gigabytes of data to FE.
|
| Where does the result set (GBs of data) reside after I
At 2010-05-25 07:35:34 -0400, alex-goncha...@comcast.net wrote:
| Where does the result set (GBs of data) reside after I call
| PQexecPrepared? On BE, I hope?
Unless you explicitly declare and fetch from an SQL-level cursor, your
many GBs of data are going to be transmitted to libpq, which
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:57, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 5:37 AM, Joseph Adams
joeyadams3.14...@gmail.com wrote:
I started a wiki article for brainstorming the JSON API:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/JSON_API_Brainstorm . I also made
substantial
KaiGai,
* KaiGai Kohei (kai...@ak.jp.nec.com) wrote:
OK, the attached patch reworks it according to the way.
Reviewing this patch, there are a whole slew of problems.
#1: REALLY BIG ISSUE- Insufficient comment updates. You've changed
function definitions in a pretty serious way as well as
,--- Abhijit Menon-Sen (Tue, 25 May 2010 17:26:18 +0530) *
| Unless you explicitly declare and fetch from an SQL-level cursor, your
| many GBs of data are going to be transmitted to libpq, which will eat
| lots of memory. (The wire protocol does have something like cursors,
| but libpq does
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Have you read the docs? It does mention the issue with /contrib and
stuff. How do I document a limitation I don't know about? This is all
very vague. Please suggest some wording.
OK, here's an attempt. Please
On 05/25/2010 07:35 AM, Alex Goncharov wrote:
,--- I/Alex (Mon, 24 May 2010 12:25:18 -0400) *
| No equivalent of FETCH_COUNT is available at the libpq level, so I
| assume that the interface I am using is smart enough not to send
| gigabytes of data to FE.
|
| Where does the result set (GBs
* KaiGai Kohei (kai...@ak.jp.nec.com) wrote:
* DoCopy() and RI_Initial_Check() were reworked to call ExecCheckRTEPerms()
with locally built RangeTblEntry.
Maybe I missed it somewhere, but we still need to address the case where
the user doesn't have those SELECT permissions that we're looking
I've been reading the SQL/XML standard and discovered that it defines a
function named XMLEXISTS that does exactly what the todo item
xpath_exists defines. My original patch named the function as per the
todo but I think using the function name from the standard is a better
idea. So this patch
Alex Goncharov wrote:
,--- I/Alex (Mon, 24 May 2010 12:25:18 -0400) *
| No equivalent of FETCH_COUNT is available at the libpq level, so I
| assume that the interface I am using is smart enough not to send
| gigabytes of data to FE.
|
| Where does the result set (GBs of data) reside after
Well, I think it's fine to use the wiki for brainstorming, but before
you change the design you probably need to talk about it here. You
can't rely on everyone on -hackers to follow changes on a wiki page
somewhere. It looks like the API has been overhauled pretty heavily
since the last
Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Have you read the docs? ?It does mention the issue with /contrib and
stuff. ?How do I document a limitation I don't know about? ?This is all
very vague. ?Please suggest some wording.
OK, here's an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
3. Have CheckConnection do longjmp(sigint_interrupt_jmp) after resetting
...
Now #1 might be the best long-term solution but I have no particular
appetite to tackle it, and #2 is just too ugly to contemplate. That
leaves #3, which is a bit
On Tue, May 25, 2010 16:31, Mike Fowler wrote:
I've been reading the SQL/XML standard and discovered that it defines a
function named XMLEXISTS that does exactly what the todo item
xpath_exists defines. My original patch named the function as per the
todo but I think using the function name
Erik Rijkers wrote:
libxml2.x86_64 2.6.26-2.1.2.8 installed
libxml2-devel.x86_642.6.26-2.1.2.8 installed
Thanks for testing my patch Erik. It turns out I've got libxml2
installed at version 2.7.5. Searching the gnome mailing lists, it turns
out xmlXPathCompiledEvalToBoolean
On Sun, 2010-05-23 at 16:21 -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
In some systems (data warehousing, replication), the order of commits is
important, since that is the order in which changes have become visible.
This information could theoretically be extracted from the WAL, but
scanning the entire WAL
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 12:40 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
I agree that #4 should be done last, but it will be needed, not in the
least by your employer ;-) . I don't see any obvious way to make #4
compatible with any
On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 22:20 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
Second, we need to discuss about how to specify the synch
level. There are three approaches:
* Per standby
Since the purpose, location and H/W resource often differ
from one standby to another, specifying level per standby
(i.e.,
On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 18:29 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
If people agree that the above is our roadmap, implementing
per-standby first makes sense, and then we can implement per-session
GUC later.
IMHO per-standby sounds simple, but is dangerously simplistic,
explained on another part of the
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 19:12 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm, OK, I think that makes sense. Would you care to propose a patch?
Yep. Here is the
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Synchronous replication implies that a commit should wait. This wait is
experienced by the transaction, not by other parts of the system. If we
define robustness at the standby level then robustness depends upon
unseen
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 19:12 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm, OK, I
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Mike Fowler m...@mlfowler.com wrote:
Erik Rijkers wrote:
libxml2.x86_64 2.6.26-2.1.2.8 installed
libxml2-devel.x86_64 2.6.26-2.1.2.8 installed
Thanks for testing my patch Erik. It turns out I've got libxml2 installed at
version 2.7.5.
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 12:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Synchronous replication implies that a commit should wait. This wait is
experienced by the transaction, not by other parts of the system. If we
define robustness
Hello All:
In the code (costsize.c), I see that effective_cache_size is set
to DEFAULT_EFFECTIVE_CACHE_SIZE.
This is defined as follows in cost.h
#define DEFAULT_EFFECTIVE_CACHE_SIZE 16384
But when I say
show shared_buffers in psql I get,
shared_buffers 28MB
In postgresql.conf
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Joseph Adams
joeyadams3.14...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I think it's fine to use the wiki for brainstorming, but before
you change the design you probably need to talk about it here. You
can't rely on everyone on -hackers to follow changes on a wiki page
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If we define robustness at the standby level then robustness
depends upon unseen administrators, as well as the current
up/down state of standbys. This is action-at-a-distance in its
worst form.
Maybe, but I
Howdy,
This tiny doc patch adds _PG_init to the skeleton example code for a
PL. The information is quite valuable to PL authors, who might miss it
when it is described in the shared library documentation.
This patch was based off of 6e2ba96 in the git mirror and a colorized
diff can be viewed
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 12:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Synchronous replication implies that a commit should wait. This wait is
experienced by the transaction, not by other parts of the system. If we
define robustness
Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Mike Fowler m...@mlfowler.com wrote:
Erik Rijkers wrote:
libxml2.x86_64 2.6.26-2.1.2.8 installed
libxml2-devel.x86_642.6.26-2.1.2.8 installed
Thanks for testing my patch Erik. It turns out I've got libxml2
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 11:52 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If we define robustness at the standby level then robustness
depends upon unseen administrators, as well as the current
up/down state of standbys.
Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of mar may 25 04:41:30 -0400 2010:
On 24/05/10 22:49, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I think this is nonsense. If you have 3-years-old sales transactions,
and your database has any interesting churn, tuples those pages have
been frozen for a very long
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 11:52 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If we define robustness at the standby level then robustness
depends upon
On 25/05/10 19:49, MMK wrote:
Hello All:
In the code (costsize.c), I see that effective_cache_size is set to
DEFAULT_EFFECTIVE_CACHE_SIZE.
This is defined as follows in cost.h
#define DEFAULT_EFFECTIVE_CACHE_SIZE 16384
But when I say
show shared_buffers in psql I get,
shared_buffers
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 13:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 11:52 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If we define
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Mike Fowler m...@mlfowler.com wrote:
We're unlikely to accept this patch if it changes the minimum version
of libxml2 required to compile PostgreSQL
Why? 2.6.27 is almost 4 years old.
Because we work hard to minimize our dependencies and make them as
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 19:08 +0200, Alastair Turner wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
...
The best parameter we can specify is the number of servers that we wish
to wait for confirmation from. That is a definition that easily manages
the
On 05/25/2010 01:09 PM, Mike Fowler wrote:
Why? 2.6.27 is almost 4 years old.
RHEL 5 ships with 2.6.26. I imagine that supporting it is very
desirable, regardless of its age, since that is unfortunately still the
latest version of RHEL.
-- m. tharp
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 13:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
So I agree that we need to talk about whether or not we want to do
this. I'll give my opinion. I am not sure how useful this really is.
Consider a master with two standbys. The master commits a
transaction and waits for one of the two
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
...
The best parameter we can specify is the number of servers that we wish
to wait for confirmation from. That is a definition that easily manages
the complexity of having various servers up/down at any one time. It
Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Mike Fowler m...@mlfowler.com wrote:
We're unlikely to accept this patch if it changes the minimum version
of libxml2 required to compile PostgreSQL
Why? 2.6.27 is almost 4 years old.
Because we work hard to minimize our
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Mike Fowler m...@mlfowler.com wrote:
We're unlikely to accept this patch if it changes the minimum version
of libxml2 required to compile PostgreSQL
Why? 2.6.27 is almost 4 years old.
Because we work hard to
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org writes:
This sounds like extending Xid to 64 bits, without having to store the
high bits everywhere. Was this discussed in the PGCon devs meeting?
Yeah, that's what it would amount to. It was not discussed at the dev
meeting --- it was an idea that came
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 02:00:42PM +0200, Nicolas Barbier wrote:
I don't understand the problem. According to me, in the context of
SSI, a read-only slave can just map SERIALIZABLE to the technical
implementation of REPEATABLE READ (i.e., the currently-existing
SERIALIZABLE). The union of the
On May 25, 2010, at 20:18 , Dan Ports wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 02:00:42PM +0200, Nicolas Barbier wrote:
I don't understand the problem. According to me, in the context of
SSI, a read-only slave can just map SERIALIZABLE to the technical
implementation of REPEATABLE READ (i.e., the
Excerpts from Jesper Krogh's message of mié may 19 15:01:18 -0400 2010:
But the distribution is very flat at the end, the last 128 values are
excactly
1.00189e-05
which means that any term sitting outside the array would get an estimate of
1.00189e-05 * 350174 / 2 = 1.75 ~ 2 rows
I don't
Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
Hm, so in fact SSI sometimes allows the database to be
inconsistent, but only as long as nobody tries to observe it?
Not exactly. The eventually-persisted state is always consistent,
but there can be a transitory committed state which would violate
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 08:35:44PM +0200, Florian Pflug wrote:
Hm, so in fact SSI sometimes allows the database to be inconsistent, but only
as long as nobody tries to observe it?
Yes. Note that even while it's in an inconsistent state, you can still
perform any query that doesn't observe the
Jan Wieck janwi...@yahoo.com wrote:
Have you ever looked at one of those queries, that Londiste or
Slony issue against the provider DB in order to get all the log
data that has been committed between two snapshots? Is that really
the best you can think of?
No, I admit I haven't. In fact,
Simon Riggs wrote:
How we handle degraded mode is important, yes. Whatever parameters we
choose the problem will remain the same.
Should we just ignore degraded mode and respond as if nothing bad had
happened? Most people would say not.
If we specify server1 = synch and server2 = async we then
Hi,
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 19:08 +0200, Alastair Turner wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The best parameter we can specify is the number of servers that we wish
to wait for confirmation from.
This
Hello Heikki:
This is what the documentation says (see below).
But it does not tell my anything about what the actual buffer size is.
How do I know what the real buffer size is? I am using 8.4.4 and I am running
only one query at a time.
Cheers,
MMK.
Sets the planner's assumption about the
2010/5/25 Dan Ports d...@csail.mit.edu:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 02:00:42PM +0200, Nicolas Barbier wrote:
I don't understand the problem. According to me, in the context of
SSI, a read-only slave can just map SERIALIZABLE to the technical
implementation of REPEATABLE READ (i.e., the
On May 25, 2010, at 20:48 , Dan Ports wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 08:35:44PM +0200, Florian Pflug wrote:
Hm, so in fact SSI sometimes allows the database to be inconsistent, but
only as long as nobody tries to observe it?
Yes. Note that even while it's in an inconsistent state, you can
2010/5/25 Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org:
On May 25, 2010, at 20:18 , Dan Ports wrote:
T3, which is a read-only transaction, sees the incremented date and an
empty list of receipts. But T1 later commits a new entry in the
receipts table with the old date. No serializable ordering allows this.
Hi guys,
(I tried the question in another forum first)
Does someone have any ideas how I can hide data without the meta data
noticing? To explain further, I would like to save some collection of data
where the meta-data does not see it. I am trying to do some security through
obscurity. It is
2010/5/25 Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org:
Hm, but for there to be an actual problem (and not a false positive), an
actual dangerous circle has to exist in the dependency graph. The
existence of a dangerous structure is just a necessary (but not
sufficient) and easily checked-for condition for
Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
Hm, but for there to be an actual problem (and not a false
positive), an actual dangerous circle has to exist in the
dependency graph. The existence of a dangerous structure is just a
necessary (but not sufficient) and easily checked-for condition
for
On 5/24/2010 9:30 AM, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
In light of the proposed purging scheme, how would it be able to distinguish
between those two cases (nothing there yet vs. was there but purged)?
There is a difference between an empty
Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com writes:
So, Tom, so you think it's possible that the planner isn't noticing
all those nulls and thinks it'll just take a row or two to get to the
value it needs to join on?
I dug through this and have concluded that it's really an oversight in
the patch I
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Hector Beyers hqbey...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi guys,
(I tried the question in another forum first)
Does someone have any ideas how I can hide data without the meta data
noticing? To explain further, I would like to save some collection of data
where the meta-data
Jan Wieck janwi...@yahoo.com writes:
No, I meant how will the *function* know, if a superuser and/or some
background process can purge records at any time?
The data contains timestamps which are supposedly taken in commit order.
You can *not* rely on the commit timestamps to be in exact
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 21:19 +0200, Yeb Havinga wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
How we handle degraded mode is important, yes. Whatever parameters we
choose the problem will remain the same.
Should we just ignore degraded mode and respond as if nothing bad had
happened? Most people would say
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
maybe we should get serializable working and committed on one
node first and then worry about how to distribute it. I think
there might be other approaches to this problem
Well, I've got two or three other ideas on how we can manage this
for HS, but
On 5/25/2010 12:03 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sun, 2010-05-23 at 16:21 -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
In some systems (data warehousing, replication), the order of commits is
important, since that is the order in which changes have become visible.
This information could theoretically be extracted from
Alvaro,
This sounds like extending Xid to 64 bits, without having to store the
high bits everywhere. Was this discussed in the PGCon devs meeting?
Essentially, yes.
One of the main objections to raising XID to 64-bit has been the per-row
overhead. But adding 4 bytes per page wouldn't be
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 16:41 -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
On 5/25/2010 12:03 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sun, 2010-05-23 at 16:21 -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
In some systems (data warehousing, replication), the order of commits is
important, since that is the order in which changes have become
On 5/24/2010 9:30 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 22/05/10 16:35, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkusj...@agliodbs.com writes:
From a discussion at dinner at pgcon, I wanted to send this to the list
for people to poke holes in it:
Somebody (I think Joe or Heikki) poked a big hole in this last
MMK,
But it does not tell my anything about what the actual buffer size is.
How do I know what the real buffer size is? I am using 8.4.4 and I am
running only one query at a time.
Please move this discussion to the pgsql-general or pgsql-performance
lists. pgsql-hackers is for working on
Correct. The problem actually are aborted transactions. Just because an
XID is really old doesn't mean it was committed.
Yes, that's the main issue with my idea; XIDs which fell off the CLOG
would become visible even if they'd aborted.
Do we get a bit in the visibility map for a page which
On 5/25/2010 4:50 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 16:41 -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
On 5/25/2010 12:03 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sun, 2010-05-23 at 16:21 -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
In some systems (data warehousing, replication), the order of commits is
important, since that is the
Florian Pflug wrote:
On May 25, 2010, at 12:18 , Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 25/05/10 13:03, Florian Pflug wrote:
On May 25, 2010, at 6:08 , Sam Vilain wrote:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/sql-savepoint.html
Lead us to believe that if you roll back to the same
On 19/05/10 21:01, Jesper Krogh wrote:
The document base is arount 350.000 documents and
I have set the statistics target on the tsvector column
to 1000 since the 100 seems way of.
So for tsvectors the statistics target means more or less at any time
track at most 10 * target lexemes
(2010/05/25 21:44), Stephen Frost wrote:
KaiGai,
* KaiGai Kohei (kai...@ak.jp.nec.com) wrote:
OK, the attached patch reworks it according to the way.
Reviewing this patch, there are a whole slew of problems.
#1: REALLY BIG ISSUE- Insufficient comment updates. You've changed
function
(2010/05/25 22:59), Stephen Frost wrote:
* KaiGai Kohei (kai...@ak.jp.nec.com) wrote:
* DoCopy() and RI_Initial_Check() were reworked to call ExecCheckRTEPerms()
with locally built RangeTblEntry.
Maybe I missed it somewhere, but we still need to address the case where
the user doesn't
On May 25, 2010, at 22:16 , Simon Riggs wrote:
All of these issues show why I want to specify the synchronisation mode
as a USERSET. That will allow us to specify more easily which parts of
our application are important when the cluster is degraded and which
data is so critical it must reach
Hector,
* Hector Beyers (hqbey...@gmail.com) wrote:
Does someone have any ideas how I can hide data without the meta data
noticing? To explain further, I would like to save some collection of data
where the meta-data does not see it. I am trying to do some security through
obscurity. It is
There is an open item pg_controldata - machine readable? in the list:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items
The proposal by Joe Conway is adding a new contib module.
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4b959d7a.6010...@joeconway.com
It was recommended to me to forward this to -hackers.
Regards,
Mark
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mark Wong mark...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:57 AM
Subject: PDXPUG Day at OSCON 2010
To: pgsql-annou...@postgresql.org
Thanks to the generosity of O'Reilly, we will be
* KaiGai Kohei (kai...@ak.jp.nec.com) wrote:
#2: REALLY BIG ISSUE- You've added ExecutorCheckPerms_hook as part of
this patch- don't, we're in feature-freeze right now and should not be
adding hooks at this time.
The patch is intended to submit for the v9.1 development, not v9.0, isn't
* KaiGai Kohei (kai...@ak.jp.nec.com) wrote:
The reason why user must have SELECT privileges on the PK/FK tables is
the validateForeignKeyConstraint() entirely calls SPI_execute() to verify
FK constraints can be established between two tables (even if fallback path).
And, the reason why
This open item is for replacing PGDLLIMPORT markers for PG_MODULE_MAGIC
and PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1 to __declspec(dllexport) because they are always
expored by user modules rather than by the core codes.
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20100329184705.a60e.52131...@oss.ntt.co.jp
The fix is
I've been experimenting with SSL setups involving chains of CA
certificates, ie, where the server or client cert itself is signed by
an intermediate CA rather than a trusted root CA. This appears to work
well enough on the server side if you configure the server correctly
(see discussion of bug
On 5/25/2010 4:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Jan Wieck janwi...@yahoo.com writes:
No, I meant how will the *function* know, if a superuser and/or some
background process can purge records at any time?
The data contains timestamps which are supposedly taken in commit order.
You can *not* rely on
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo