2010/9/24 Peter Eisentraut :
> On tor, 2010-09-23 at 11:55 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> > select to_char(current_date,'tmday' collate "cs_CZ.utf8");
>>
>> I am thinking, collates can be used for this purpose too. I see some
>> impacts - this syntax changes a stable function to immutable and it
>>
Robert,
I noticed a problem at the definition of the view.
:
+UNION ALL
+SELECT
+ d.objoid, d.classoid, d.objsubid,
+ 'large object'::text AS objtype,
+ NULL::oid AS objnamespace,
+ d.objoid::text AS objname,
+ d.description
+FROM
+ pg_description d
+
On tor, 2010-09-23 at 11:55 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > select to_char(current_date,'tmday' collate "cs_CZ.utf8");
>
> I am thinking, collates can be used for this purpose too. I see some
> impacts - this syntax changes a stable function to immutable and it
> cannot be simple to solve.
I don'
On fre, 2010-09-24 at 09:32 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> We could support it also on MSVC.
> >> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/a7cwbx4t(v=VS.90).aspx --
> >> _strcoll_l
> >> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/45119yx
On tor, 2010-09-23 at 11:07 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On ons, 2010-09-22 at 12:29 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On ons, 2010-09-22 at 10:33 +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> > > It seems that the git move has broken the generation of the automatic
> > > snapshot tarballs - has anybo
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 6:03 AM, Dennis Björklund wrote:
> But I confess that I'm sort of murky on how ORDER affects the window
> frame, or how to rephrase this more sensibly.
The rows included in the calculation of the window function are per default
RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND CURR
(2010/09/24 11:53), Robert Haas wrote:
> 2010/9/23 KaiGai Kohei:
>>> Most of the contents of the new documentation section on external
>>> security providers seemed irrelevant to me, which I guess I can only
>>> blame myself for since I was the one who asked for that section to be
>>> created, and
Robert Haas writes:
> Perhaps. I know that in the past we have not documented hook
> functions, and I'm thinking that there may be people (in particular,
> possibly Tom) who have strong feelings about keeping it that way.
> Even if that's not the case, once we do start documenting the hooks,
> we
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think we need to further discuss how this is eventually going to get
> integrated with the query planner and the executor before we commit
> anything. The syntax support by itself is quite trivial.
There are no active discussions :-( I th
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Itagaki Takahiro
wrote:
> Overall, I think the FOREIGN TABLE DDL part is almost ready to commit if we
> accept the proposal itself. Of course we need more discussions about FDW
> Routines, but it must be developed based on the infrastructure.
I think we need to f
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 7:47 PM, SAKAMOTO Masahiko
wrote:
> Thanks for your comment. I've updated the patches.
I reviewed fdw_table20100917.patch.gz. It adds FOREIGN TABLE in the
SQL standard,
including CREATE/ALTER/DROP FOREIGN TABLE, information_schema (foreign_table
and foreign_table_options),
2010/9/23 KaiGai Kohei :
>> Most of the contents of the new documentation section on external
>> security providers seemed irrelevant to me, which I guess I can only
>> blame myself for since I was the one who asked for that section to be
>> created, and I didn't specify what it should contain all
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:58 PM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>> Ok. Just to be clear, here's what I have now
>
> Here's one I found that got missed. (Perhaps you need to configure
> --with-libxml to get it.)
Looks like it. Committed and back-patched to 8.0.
--
Robert Haa
Robert, thanks for your reviewing and revising.
(2010/09/23 13:28), Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> 2010/9/14 KaiGai Kohei:
>>> The attached patch is a revised version, but a bit difference from what
>>> I introduced yesterday.
>>
>> I am working throu
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> We could support it also on MSVC.
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/a7cwbx4t(v=VS.90).aspx -- _strcoll_l
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/45119yx3(v=VS.90).aspx -- _towupper_l
>
> Great.
If we support both glibc and m
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Ok. Just to be clear, here's what I have now
Here's one I found that got missed. (Perhaps you need to configure
--with-libxml to get it.)
-Kevin
*** a/contrib/xml2/.gitignore
--- b/contrib/xml2/.gitignore
***
*** 1,2
--- 1,3
+ /pgxml.sql
# G
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 20:42 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> If you want the behavior where the master doesn't acknowledge a
> commit
> to the client until the standby (or all standbys, or one of them
> etc.)
> acknowledges it, even if the standby is not currently connected, the
> master needs
Abhijit Menon-Sen writes:
> I'm using 1.7.3, yes. It has a bunch of timezone handling changes, but
> I'm not sure if there's anything related to your problem. If you don't
> have TZ set in your environment, I suppose the following patch *could*
> be relevant, since you're in -0400 and I'm in +0530
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue sep 23 17:36:07 -0400 2010:
> >> Obviously, all committers must now relocate to the UK.
> >
> > Yes, move here. I'll put the kettle on.
>
> I'm not sure that's the simplest solution to the problem at hand, but
> I'm game...
Hey, if it comes to that, I'
At 2010-09-23 17:37:51 -0400, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
>
> Hm. What git version are you using?
I'm using 1.7.3, yes. It has a bunch of timezone handling changes, but
I'm not sure if there's anything related to your problem. If you don't
have TZ set in your environment, I suppose the following pa
Abhijit Menon-Sen writes:
> At 2010-09-23 15:52:24 -0400, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
>> This is with a vanilla build of 1.7.2.3. Anybody else see this type
>> of symptom?
> Not me. I just tried various combinations of commit in one branch and
> cherry-pick in another, and the timestamp stays corr
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 23 September 2010 22:20, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>> On Sep 23, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Apparently somebody's confused between local and GMT time somewhere in
the
2010/9/20 Robert Haas :
> 4. TGL: "In any case, I'm amazed that it's not failing regression
> tests all over the place with those critical tests in
> make_sort_from_pathkeys lobotomized by random #ifdef FIXMEs. Perhaps
> we need some more regression tests...". Obviously, we need to remove
> that
At 2010-09-23 15:52:24 -0400, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
>
> Apparently somebody's confused between local and GMT time somewhere in
> there.
>
> This is with a vanilla build of 1.7.2.3. Anybody else see this type
> of symptom?
Not me. I just tried various combinations of commit in one branch and
c
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 15:31 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > The above case is one where I can see your point and it does sound
> > easier in that case. But I then think: "What happens after failover?".
> > We would then need to have 12 different standby.conf files, one on each
> > standby that descri
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 22:22 +0100, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 23 September 2010 22:20, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> > On Sep 23, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> Apparently somebody's confused between local and GMT time somewhere in
> >
On 23 September 2010 22:20, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Apparently somebody's confused between local and GMT time somewhere in
>>> there.
>>
>> Ouch. That rather sucks.
>
> Obviously, all comm
On Sep 23, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Apparently somebody's confused between local and GMT time somewhere in
>> there.
>
> Ouch. That rather sucks.
Obviously, all committers must now relocate to the UK.
Best,
David
--
Sent v
Josh Berkus writes:
> ... other than it just got forgotten?
We've been over that ground before. IIRC the conclusion was that
letting COPY TO pretend that a view is a table is a bad idea because
then people would complain about COPY FROM not working for it. You
can use
COPY (select * fro
... other than it just got forgotten?
dolszewski=# create view meh as select * from pg_tables;
CREATE VIEW
dolszewski=# copy meh to stdout;
ERROR: cannot copy from view "meh"
HINT: Try the COPY (SELECT ...) TO variant.
dolszewski=# copy (select * from meh) to stdout;
pg_catalogpg_statisticpostgr
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 23/09/10 18:08, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> Less important than any of the above, but still significant in my
>> book, I fear that conflict recording and dangerous structure
>> detection could become very convoluted and fragile if we
>> eliminate this structure for comm
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Well, its not at all hard to see how that could be configured, because I
> already proposed a simple way of implementing parameters that doesn't
> suffer from those problems. My proposal did not give roles to named
> standbys and is symmetrical
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Apparently somebody's confused between local and GMT time somewhere in
> there.
Ouch. That rather sucks.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-h
So my first attempt at using git cherry-pick didn't go so well.
The commit in master looks like
commit ee63981c1fe26299162b9c7f1218d7e3ef802409
Author: Tom Lane
Date: Thu Sep 23 15:34:56 2010 -0400
Avoid sharing subpath list structure when flattening nested AppendRels.
which is the co
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 15:20 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > decide to break it when we run into a feature that we really want that
> > > can't be had any other way? If we want to make breaking on-disk
> > > compatibility something that only happens every 5 years or so
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 13:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > Now, admittedly, in more complex topologies, and especially if you're
> > using configuration options that pertain to the behavior of
> > disconnected standbys (e.g. wait for them, or retain WAL for them),
> > you're goin
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 15:20 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > decide to break it when we run into a feature that we really want that
> > can't be had any other way? If we want to make breaking on-disk
> > compatibility something that only happens every 5 years or so, we had
> > better give people -
On 23/09/10 18:08, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Less important than any of the above, but still significant in my
book, I fear that conflict recording and dangerous structure
detection could become very convoluted and fragile if we eliminate
this structure for committed transactions. Conflicts among sp
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Robert Haas writes:
> >> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> Josh Berkus wrote:
> It would be a good project to add to the list of "easy TODOs to get
> started with."
> >
> >>> Except for
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue sep 23 14:33:06 -0400 2010:
> I'm worried about how we're going to manage that. First, as
> pg_upgrade becomes more mature, the penalty for breaking on-disk
> compatibility gets a LOT bigger. I'd like to think that "the next
> time we break on-disk comp
2010/9/23 David Fetter :
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 08:27:38PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> 2010/9/23 Hitoshi Harada :
>> > 2010/9/23 Pavel Stehule :
>> >> Hello
>> >>
>> >> 2010/9/22 Hitoshi Harada :
>> >>> 2010/9/22 Pavel Stehule :
>> Hello
>>
>> I found probably hard problem in c
Tom Lane writes:
> However, it seems that git isn't so willing to tell you about gitignore
> patterns that cover too much, i.e. match files that are already in the
> repository.
It seems to me that git-ls-files is what you want here :
http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-ls-files
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 08:27:38PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2010/9/23 Hitoshi Harada :
> > 2010/9/23 Pavel Stehule :
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> 2010/9/22 Hitoshi Harada :
> >>> 2010/9/22 Pavel Stehule :
> Hello
>
> I found probably hard problem in cooperation with window functions :(
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> The point is that SECURITY LABEL, as coded, will fail utterly unless
>> there is a label provider loaded. So you can't actually run it and
>> check the results in the catalog without loading a
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> Josh Berkus wrote:
It would be a good project to add to the list of "easy TODOs to get
started with."
>
>>> Except for the pg_upgrade issue.
>
>> Which is
2010/9/23 Hitoshi Harada :
> 2010/9/23 Pavel Stehule :
>> Hello
>>
>> 2010/9/22 Hitoshi Harada :
>>> 2010/9/22 Pavel Stehule :
Hello
I found probably hard problem in cooperation with window functions :(
>>
>> maybe I was confused. I found a other possible problems.
>>
>> The problem
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 22:11, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander writes:
>>> Do we know what the exact pattern would be for .sl and .dylib? Are
>>> they following the same basic pattern of .sl..?
>
>> Yes, they'll be just the same --- Makefile.shlib treats all those
>> extensions alik
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> The point is that SECURITY LABEL, as coded, will fail utterly unless
> there is a label provider loaded. So you can't actually run it and
> check the results in the catalog without loading a contrib module.
Urgh, yes, point. Well, we could test that
Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> Josh Berkus wrote:
> >>> It would be a good project to add to the list of "easy TODOs to get
> >>> started with."
>
> >> Except for the pg_upgrade issue.
>
> > Which is a big "except".
>
> Yeah
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> It would be a good project to add to the list of "easy TODOs to get
>>> started with."
>> Except for the pg_upgrade issue.
> Which is a big "except".
Yeah. That constraint is what leads me to
2010/9/23 Pavel Stehule :
> Hello
>
> 2010/9/22 Hitoshi Harada :
>> 2010/9/22 Pavel Stehule :
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> I found probably hard problem in cooperation with window functions :(
>
> maybe I was confused. I found a other possible problems.
>
> The problem with median function is probably inside
On 23/09/10 20:03, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas writes:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Um ... so how does this standby know what master to connect to, what
password to offer, etc? I don't think that "pass down parameters after
connecting" is likely to cover anything but a s
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> Most of the contents of the new documentation section on external
>> security providers seemed irrelevant to me, which I guess I can only
>> blame myself for since I was the one who asked for t
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> On 9/22/10 6:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > I think you missed the point of my response, which is that there are
>> > easily 106 more-pressing things to work on than the size of timetz.
>> > Do you know of any actual use ca
Attached is the current implementation redone with poll. It lands at
around 10.5 usecs, right above pipe, but better than the current
implementation.
As to the other questions: yes, this would matter for sync replication.
Cosider an enterprise use case with 10Gb network & SSDs (not at all
u
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 11:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > What other problems are there that mean we *must* have a file?
>
> Well, for one thing, how do you add a new slave? If its configuration
> comes from a system catalog, it seems that it has to already be
> replicating before it knows what its
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 16:18 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> There's a program called pg_readahead somewhere on pgfoundry by NTT that
> will help if it's the single-threadedness of I/O. Before handing the WAL
> file to the server, it scans it through and calls posix_fadvise for all
> the block
Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 9/22/10 6:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I think you missed the point of my response, which is that there are
> > easily 106 more-pressing things to work on than the size of timetz.
> > Do you know of any actual use cases for it?
>
> It would be a good project to add to the lis
On 9/22/10 6:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think you missed the point of my response, which is that there are
> easily 106 more-pressing things to work on than the size of timetz.
> Do you know of any actual use cases for it?
It would be a good project to add to the list of "easy TODOs to get
started
2010/9/23 Hans-Jürgen Schönig :
> sorry for not getting back to you sooner. i am currently on the road for some
> days.
> we got the top 3 things fixed already. however, some code seems to be relying
> on a sorted list somewhere(???).
> we are in the process of sorting out most of the stuff.
> i
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 17:32, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> Are we sure that's going to stop the DOS issue?
>
>> As long as it's done right, I don't see how it wouldn't.
>
> There might be a cleaner way to do it, but aft
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Um ... so how does this standby know what master to connect to, what
>>> password to offer, etc? I don't think that "pass down parameters after
>>> connecting" is like
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Um ... so how does this standby know what master to connect to, what
>> password to offer, etc? I don't think that "pass down parameters after
>> connecting" is likely to cover anything but a small subset of the
>> config
Robert Haas writes:
> Now, admittedly, in more complex topologies, and especially if you're
> using configuration options that pertain to the behavior of
> disconnected standbys (e.g. wait for them, or retain WAL for them),
> you're going to need to adjust the configs. But I think that's likely
>
On Sep 23, 2010, at 3:29 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:29 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:57:00PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> 2010/9/3 Hans-Jürgen Schönig :
On Sep 2, 2010, at 1:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I agree. Explicit partitioning may o
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
>> On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 11:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Well, for one thing, how do you add a new slave? If its configuration
>>> comes from a system catalog, it seems that it has to already be
>>> replicating before it kn
Simon Riggs writes:
> On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 11:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, for one thing, how do you add a new slave? If its configuration
>> comes from a system catalog, it seems that it has to already be
>> replicating before it knows what its configuration is.
> At the moment, I'm not
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 13:00 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> I think it should be a separate config file, and I think it should be
>> a config file that can be edited using DDL commands as you propose.
>> But it CAN'T be a system catalog, becaus
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 11:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
> > ISTM that we can have a system catalog and still have cascading slaves.
> > If we administer the catalog via the master, why can't we administer all
> > slaves, however they cascade, via the master too?
>
> > What other
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 17:32, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Are we sure that's going to stop the DOS issue?
> As long as it's done right, I don't see how it wouldn't.
There might be a cleaner way to do it, but after a moment's inspection
of the script, I'd be inclined to j
Simon Riggs writes:
> ISTM that we can have a system catalog and still have cascading slaves.
> If we administer the catalog via the master, why can't we administer all
> slaves, however they cascade, via the master too?
> What other problems are there that mean we *must* have a file?
Well, for
Andrew Dunstan writes:
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 17:16, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'm still wondering why we don't simply lobotomize git-cvsserver to
>>> refuse requests to check out anything except the active branch tips.
> Are we sure that's going to stop the DOS issue?
The claimed denial of servi
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 17:32, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 09/23/2010 11:18 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 17:16, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
>>> Magnus Hagander writes:
So, I found (with some helpful hints from Robert who caught the final
nail in the coffin)
David Fetter wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:17:35AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 09/23/2010 10:58 AM, David Fetter wrote:
Back to a question you asked earlier, what exactly still depends on
CVS right now, as in which buildfarm animals, what parts of the NLS
processes? Also as you asked
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 13:00 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think it should be a separate config file, and I think it should be
> a config file that can be edited using DDL commands as you propose.
> But it CAN'T be a system catalog, because, among other problems, that
> rules out cascading slaves,
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 13:31 -0700, Ganesh Venkitachalam-1 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been playing around with measuring the latch implementation in 9.1,
> and here are the results of a ping-pong test with 2 processes signalling
> and waiting on the latch. I did three variations (linux 2.6.18, nehalem
On 09/23/2010 11:18 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 17:16, Tom Lane wrote:
Magnus Hagander writes:
So, I found (with some helpful hints from Robert who caught the final
nail in the coffin) a good reason why we really can't run a
git-cvsserver globally.
Any user can point
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:17:35AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 09/23/2010 10:58 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> >Back to a question you asked earlier, what exactly still depends on
> >CVS right now, as in which buildfarm animals, what parts of the NLS
> >processes? Also as you asked earlier,
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 17:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
>> So, I found (with some helpful hints from Robert who caught the final
>> nail in the coffin) a good reason why we really can't run a
>> git-cvsserver globally.
>
>> Any user can point their cvs client at the repository. A
On 09/23/2010 10:58 AM, David Fetter wrote:
Back to a question you asked earlier, what exactly still depends on
CVS right now, as in which buildfarm animals, what parts of the NLS
processes? Also as you asked earlier, what else?
At least one buildfarm member, spoonbill, is known to have issu
Magnus Hagander writes:
> So, I found (with some helpful hints from Robert who caught the final
> nail in the coffin) a good reason why we really can't run a
> git-cvsserver globally.
> Any user can point their cvs client at the repository. And check out
> an arbitrary branch, tag *or individual
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 23/09/10 02:14, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> There is a rub on the other point, though. Without transaction
>> information you have no way of telling whether TN committed
>> before T0, so you would need to assume that it did. So on this
>> count, there is bound to be
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 04:38:27PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 16:11, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >> On 09/23/2010 09:55 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>
> >> > Stupid question, but can't we just create a CVSROOT fed from
> >> > git, and use the normal
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 16:11, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 09/23/2010 09:55 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Stupid question, but can't we just create a CVSROOT fed from git, and
>> > use the normal CVS server to feed sites?
>> >
>>
>> Where is it going to get the
Robert,
First off, thanks alot for working on this. My apologies for not having
time to help out. A few minor comments:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Most of the contents of the new documentation section on external
> security providers seemed irrelevant to me, which I guess I
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 09/23/2010 09:55 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >
> > Stupid question, but can't we just create a CVSROOT fed from git, and
> > use the normal CVS server to feed sites?
> >
>
> Where is it going to get the ,v files that CVS uses from? git-cvsserver
> emulates a
On 09/23/2010 09:55 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Stupid question, but can't we just create a CVSROOT fed from git, and
use the normal CVS server to feed sites?
Where is it going to get the ,v files that CVS uses from? git-cvsserver
emulates a CVS server from git. It doesn't create a CVS rep
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> I assume most buildfarm clients are off static IPs (at least as seen
> >> from the servers - they may be behind a NAT device, but that one
> >> having static out)? If so, it seems simply easier to use pserver...
> >>
> >
> > Yes, I think we should have a VM. Is that so h
On 22/09/10 23:31, Ganesh Venkitachalam-1 wrote:
I've been playing around with measuring the latch implementation in 9.1,
and here are the results of a ping-pong test with 2 processes signalling
and waiting on the latch. I did three variations (linux 2.6.18, nehalem
processor).
One is the curren
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:29 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:57:00PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> 2010/9/3 Hans-Jürgen Schönig :
>> > On Sep 2, 2010, at 1:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> >> I agree. Explicit partitioning may open up some additional
>> >> optimization possibiliti
sorry
little bit fixed patch
Pavel
2010/9/23 Pavel Stehule :
> Hello
>
> I moved a "median" function to core.
>
> + doc part
> + regress test
>
> Regards
>
> Pavel Stehule
>
>
> 2010/9/20 Hitoshi Harada :
>> 2010/8/19 Pavel Stehule :
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> I am sending a prototype implementation of f
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Ganesh Venkitachalam-1
wrote:
> I've been playing around with measuring the latch implementation in 9.1, and
> here are the results of a ping-pong test with 2 processes signalling and
> waiting on the latch. I did three variations (linux 2.6.18, nehalem
> processor
Hello
I moved a "median" function to core.
+ doc part
+ regress test
Regards
Pavel Stehule
2010/9/20 Hitoshi Harada :
> 2010/8/19 Pavel Stehule :
>> Hello
>>
>> I am sending a prototype implementation of functions median and
>> percentile. This implementation is very simple and I moved it to
On 23/09/10 15:26, Csaba Nagy wrote:
Unfortunately it was quite long time ago we last tried, and I don't
remember exactly what was bottlenecked. Our application is quite
write-intensive, the ratio of writes to reads which actually reaches the
disk is about 50-200% (according to the disk stats - y
On 09/22/2010 05:03 AM, sub...@cse.iitb.ac.in wrote:
Actually, I used palloc() to set the stack base address.
And I am trying to create only a single thread, then also it is causing
problem.
Did you not understand when people told you this wasn't going to work?
Don't create any thr
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 12:02 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 23/09/10 11:34, Csaba Nagy wrote:
> > In the meantime our DBs are not able to keep in sync via WAL
> > replication, that would need some kind of parallel WAL restore on the
> > slave I guess, or I'm not able to configure it properly
Hi all,
Some time ago I was also interested in this feature, and that time I
also thought about complete setup possibility via postgres connections,
meaning the transfer of the files and all configuration/slave
registration to be done through normal backend connections.
In the meantime our DBs ar
Hi,
I've been playing around with measuring the latch implementation in 9.1,
and here are the results of a ping-pong test with 2 processes signalling
and waiting on the latch. I did three variations (linux 2.6.18, nehalem
processor).
One is the current one.
The second is built on native se
Hi Craig,
Almost Japanese software emit log files by encoding of the server the
software running on. I'm not sure it is the best way or not, but
Japanese users taking it for granted.
So I feel that Japanese users would hope that postgre server has same
style with other software, cause many adminis
So, Can I increase the stack depth limit to a large value ?
> On 22/09/10 12:03, sub...@cse.iitb.ac.in wrote:
>> Actually, I used palloc() to set the stack base address.
>> And I am trying to create only a single thread, then also it is causing
>> problem.
>> Actually, I created all the data-str
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
