On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the patch, but I think you forgot to worry about overflow:
rhaas=# select 9223372036854775807::money;
money
-$1.00
(1 row)
cash_in doesn't test for overflow, either (tested on 8.4.0, 9.0.3, and
Hi,
On 02/04/11 20:47, emanov wrote:
Hi all!
What i need is transform xml document to table like that:
insert into tmp(Name, Value)
select t.Name, t.Value from myxml.Nodes(/doc/person) as
t('Name:varchar|Value:int')
or similar. In fact I have many rows with many columns.
How I can do it with
On 04.04.2011 01:51, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 3:31 AM, Susanne Ebrechtsusa...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Is man really working on Windows?
Also the sentence says that the whole product isn't correct
installed just because docs aren't installed. Which also isn't
really true.
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Dave Page dp...@pgadmin.org writes:
I can't help thinking I must be missing something obvious here, but is
there any way to persist some data from PlanForeignScan to at least
BeginForeignScan in an FDW? I'm aware of
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
On 03.04.2011 19:38, Tom Lane wrote:
Dave Pagedp...@pgadmin.org writes:
I can't help thinking I must be missing something obvious here, but is
there any way to persist some data from
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Greg Stark gsst...@mit.edu wrote:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I have made very small modifications to a few files in the
documentation directory, which involve SGML entity declarations.
Currently they are all written lowercase, the patch makes them
uppercase. This won't affect SGML parsing, as SGML is case insensitive -
even though it is a good
On Sun, 3 Apr 2011 10:51:04 +0900
Shigeru Hanada shigeru.han...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/4/2 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote:
Should we also have support for comments on user mappings?
Oh, bugger. Yeah, probably.
I'd
On Apr 4, 2011, at 1:46 AM, Joseph Adams joeyadams3.14...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the patch, but I think you forgot to worry about overflow:
rhaas=# select 9223372036854775807::money;
money
-$1.00
(1
On Mon, April 4, 2011 7:02 am, Robert Haas wrote:
You have to feel sorry for the guy who deposits 9
quintillion dollars and then gets a note from the bank saying his account
is overdrawn...
Not really ...
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
Hello!
Here is the text of my proposal which I've recently applied to GSoC and have
mentioned before in
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/AANLkTimqFRmFdrYaesnJB8H4BuJo3j1SBdR1qmv=k...@mail.gmail.com
Any comments are welcome.
*Project name*
Fast GiST index build
*Synopsis*
Currently
Here is text of my GSoC proposal. Given details probably makes essence of my
proposal clear. Any comments are welcome.
*Name of project*
Q-gram indexing module
*
*
*Synopsis*
Currently PostgreSQL has support for trigram-based string collection
indexing in pg_trgm module. Indexes in pg_trgm was
Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
It would probably take less than a day to flesh out this idea and
make it happen, but it does seem like a rather large change for
late alpha.
what we're trying to avoid is committing new stuff that may require
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 6:40 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
working on exanding the cache to # xid
Folks,
I think it might be about time to start thinking concretely about when
we might like to kick beta1 out the door. The open issues list still
has 9 issues on it, but we now have patches awaiting review for most
of those issues (credit where credit is due: Fujii Masao, Noah Misch,
Joey
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Susanne Ebrecht susa...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
the second sentence says these features - and I would understand:
these features == man pages
Means, I would understand that the two sentences belong together and
both talk about man pages.
When we don't mention
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Alexander Korotkov aekorot...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to propose a q-gram module which would have following
differences in comparison with pg_trgm:
1) Focus on acceleration of edit distance (e.g. levenshtein distance)
queries and LIKE/ILIKE queries
2)
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:11 AM, Gabriele Bartolini
gabriele.bartol...@2ndquadrant.it wrote:
I have made very small modifications to a few files in the documentation
directory, which involve SGML entity declarations. Currently they are all
written lowercase, the patch makes them uppercase. This
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Apr 4, 2011, at 1:46 AM, Joseph Adams joeyadams3.14...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the patch, but I think you forgot to worry about overflow:
cash_in doesn't test for
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Apr 4, 2011, at 1:46 AM, Joseph Adams joeyadams3.14...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the patch, but I think
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:16 AM, Alexander Korotkov aekorot...@gmail.com wrote:
Project name
Fast GiST index build
Would/could/should this be implemented in a manner similar to the
existing GIN fast update feature?
It's occurred to me to wonder whether even btree indexes would benefit
from this
Gabriele Bartolini gabriele.bartol...@2ndquadrant.it writes:
I have made very small modifications to a few files in the
documentation directory, which involve SGML entity declarations.
Currently they are all written lowercase, the patch makes them
uppercase. This won't affect SGML
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I have the impression from the SSI threads that there might be an
issue or two there that needs to be dealt with, but there again I
think that there are patches already posted, and that we just need
to get around to dealing with them.
There are
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Should these items be on the open issues list?
Yes, please.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
At the risk of getting laughed at, how about, say, ~2 weeks from now?
Seems reasonable to me.
Plus or minus a couple of days based on people's schedules and which
day of the week we'd like the wrap to happen on.
Betas are usually done using the
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Should these items be on the open issues list?
Yes, please.
Done.
-Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:16 AM, Alexander Korotkov aekorot...@gmail.com
wrote:
Project name
Fast GiST index build
Would/could/should this be implemented in a manner similar to the
existing GIN fast update feature?
Fast build and fast update tend
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
At the risk of getting laughed at, how about, say, ~2 weeks from now?
Seems reasonable to me.
Plus or minus a couple of days based on people's schedules and which
day of the week
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Julia Jacobson julia.jacob...@arcor.de wrote:
After having done extensive web search and not found anybody to solve the
problem of interest on the general PostgreSQL mailing list, in the
PostgreSQL newsgroup on usenet or on the PostgreSQL IRC channel, I would
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Dave Page dp...@pgadmin.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
At the risk of getting laughed at, how about, say, ~2 weeks from now?
Seems reasonable to me.
Plus or minus a
Hi Robert (and Tom),
Il 04/04/11 16:57, Robert Haas ha scritto:
Forgive me for asking what may seem like a stupid question, but what's
not XML compliant about them now, and why do we care? The text is
only ever going to parse as SGML (not XML) so I guess I don't see why
it matters. I don't
Gabriele Bartolini gabriele.bartol...@2ndquadrant.it writes:
My intention was to start and change some simple documentation files in
order to make our conversion process from SGML to XML smoother, while
keeping the SGML compatibility of the original documentation intact.
AFAIK, the main
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Alexander Korotkov aekorot...@gmail.com
wrote:
I would like to propose a q-gram module which would have following
differences in comparison with pg_trgm:
1) Focus on acceleration of
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:16 AM, Alexander Korotkov aekorot...@gmail.com
wrote:
Project name
Fast GiST index build
Would/could/should this be implemented in a manner similar to the
existing GIN fast update feature?
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Shigeru HANADA
han...@metrosystems.co.jp wrote:
1) Who can comment on a user mapping?
Basically only the owner can comment on a object, but user mappings
don't have owner. So following rules for ALTER/DROP seems good
because they are similarly allowed to only
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Alexander Korotkov
aekorot...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:16 AM, Alexander Korotkov aekorot...@gmail.com
wrote:
Project name
Fast GiST index build
Would/could/should
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Alexander Korotkov
aekorot...@gmail.com wrote:
relatively small when q = 5. Accordingly, I think we should expect indexes
to be usable with at least with q = 5.
I defer to your opinion on this, since you know more about it than I
do. But I think it would still
Il 04/04/11 18:37, Tom Lane ha scritto:
AFAIK, the main stumbling block for that is that XML doesn't allow
abbreviated close tags (ie,foowhatever/). Which is something that
we are not likely to give up. So I'm not sure of the point of changing
something as trivial as entity declaration casing.
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Dan Ports d...@csail.mit.edu wrote:
While looking into a SSI bug, I noticed that we don't actually display
the pid of the holding transaction, even though we have that
information available.
The attached patch fixes that.
Committed.
--
Robert Haas
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Kohei Kaigai kohei.kai...@eu.nec.com wrote:
Sorry, I missed a permission check on invocation of trusted procedures.
When client's label getting switched to Y from X, we needed to check
process:transition permission between label X and label Y.
It is same
On 04.04.2011 18:37, Tom Lane wrote:
AFAIK, the main stumbling block for that is that XML doesn't allow
abbreviated close tags (ie,foowhatever/). Which is something that
we are not likely to give up. So I'm not sure of the point of changing
something as trivial as entity declaration casing.
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Susanne Ebrecht susa...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
My information is that DocBook 5.0 won't support SGML anymore.
Which means - sooner or later a reaction is needed.
Ouch.
Even if that doesn't turn out to be the case, this is pretty harmless,
so maybe we should
Betas are usually done using the regular release process, which is
wrap-on-Thursday-release-on-Monday (to accommodate both packagers who
work weekdays and those who can only spare time on weekends). So we'd
really be talking about code freeze on the 14th if we want release on
the 18th.
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 10:33:22AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
There are patches for all known issues except one. Dan Ports was
able to replicate the latest issue uncovered by YAMAMOTO Takashi
using a particular DBT-2 configuration, found the issue, and posted
a patch:
Well, it would be
When I was investigating this report:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2011-03/msg00349.php
besides providing a straightforward fix here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2011-03/msg00352.php
I noted that there was nearby code which needed review, as it didn't
seem safe
I wrote:
IMO the real problem is essentially that GUC assign hooks have two
functions, checking and canonicalization of the value-to-be-stored
versus executing secondary actions when an assignment is made; and
there's no way to get at just the first one. So we cannot canonicalize
the value
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Even if that doesn't turn out to be the case, this is pretty harmless,
so maybe we should just apply it and move on.
I have no great objection to the patch as such; just wondering what the
roadmap is.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Dan Ports d...@csail.mit.edu wrote:
I see Robert committed that one already. If there's a consensus that
omitting the pid for committed transactions is the right thing to do,
I'm happy to put together a patch. I think that is a better approach
than trying to
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Even if that doesn't turn out to be the case, this is pretty harmless,
so maybe we should just apply it and move on.
I have no great objection to the patch as such; just wondering what
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Susanne Ebrecht susa...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Anyway, I figured out there is another argument for XML:
My information is that DocBook 5.0 won't support SGML anymore.
Which means - sooner or later a reaction is needed.
Yes, indeed.
I don't think that during
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Dan Ports d...@csail.mit.edu wrote:
I see Robert committed that one already. If there's a consensus
that omitting the pid for committed transactions is the right
thing to do, I'm happy to put together a patch. I think that is a
better approach than
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I wrote:
IMO the real problem is essentially that GUC assign hooks have two
functions, checking and canonicalization of the value-to-be-stored
versus executing secondary actions when an assignment is made; and
there's no way
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Dan Ports d...@csail.mit.edu wrote:
I see Robert committed that one already. If there's a consensus
that omitting the pid for committed transactions is the right
thing to
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
When I was investigating this report:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2011-03/msg00349.php
besides providing a straightforward fix here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2011-03/msg00352.php
I noted that there
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Given these rules, a check_hook and assign_hook could cooperate to store
additional data in what guc.c thinks is just a pointer to a string
value, ie, there can be more data after the
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Christopher Browne cbbro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Susanne Ebrecht susa...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Anyway, I figured out there is another argument for XML:
My information is that DocBook 5.0 won't support SGML anymore.
Which means -
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Christopher Browne cbbro...@gmail.com wrote:
There are arguments as to why to switch to version 5, which is,
indeed, XML-only.
http://www.docbook.org/tdg5/en/html/ch01.html#introduction-why-to-switch
AFAICT, the
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Given these rules, a check_hook and assign_hook could cooperate to store
additional data in what guc.c thinks is just
On 4/4/11, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Christopher Browne cbbro...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Susanne Ebrecht susa...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Anyway, I figured out there is another argument for XML:
My information is that
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Another variant would be to allow the check_hook to pass back a separate
void * value that could be passed on to the assign_hook, containing
any necessary derived data. This is
On 04.04.2011 21:08, Tom Lane wrote:
Indeed. One thing I'd like to know is whether docbook v5 is any more
portable/easier to install
Unfortunately, as far as I know - there isn't a huge difference.
regards,
Susanne
--
Susanne Ebrecht - 2ndQuadrant
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support,
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Another variant would be to allow the check_hook to pass back a separate
void * value that could be passed on to the
Excerpts from Gabriele Bartolini's message of lun abr 04 13:18:21 -0400 2011:
Il 04/04/11 18:37, Tom Lane ha scritto:
AFAIK, the main stumbling block for that is that XML doesn't allow
abbreviated close tags (ie,foowhatever/). Which is something that
we are not likely to give up. So I'm
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Greg Stark gsst...@mit.edu wrote:
On
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Gabriele Bartolini's message of lun abr 04 13:18:21 -0400 2011:
Il 04/04/11 18:37, Tom Lane ha scritto:
AFAIK, the main stumbling block for that is that XML doesn't allow
abbreviated close tags
My not yet complete attempt at doing a Windows build produces several of
these warnings during the build phase:
Hash %ENV missing the % in argument 1 of each() at -e line 1.
I believe the attached patch is the fix for that.
diff --git i/src/tools/msvc/builddoc.bat
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of lun abr 04 16:26:07 -0400 2011:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Gabriele Bartolini's message of lun abr 04 13:18:21 -0400
2011:
Il 04/04/11 18:37, Tom Lane ha scritto:
AFAIK, the main
Il 04/04/11 22:26, Robert Haas ha scritto:
I think you still need to update Solution.pm to match.
Here it is, including change of 3 'Id' attributes (I made them lowercase).
Thanks,
Gabriele
--
Gabriele Bartolini - 2ndQuadrant Italia
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
OK. Please comment the crap out of whatever you do, or maybe even add
a README. This stuff is just a bit arcane, and guideposts help a lot.
We already have a README for that ;-). PFA, a patch to
src/backend/utils/misc/README describing the proposed
On Apr 1, 2011, at 12:08 AM, Alexey Klyukin wrote:
Hi Selena,
On Mar 30, 2011, at 11:42 PM, Selena Deckelmann wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Alexey Klyukin al...@commandprompt.com
wrote:
I did a little bit of work on this, and we discussed it here:
On 04/04/2011 04:41 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
My not yet complete attempt at doing a Windows build produces several of
these warnings during the build phase:
Hash %ENV missing the % in argument 1 of each() at -e line 1.
I believe the attached patch is the fix for that.
I am not
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm OK with this.
The attached patch merges synchronous_replication into synchronous_commit.
With the patch, valid values of synchronous_commit are on (waits for local
flush and sync rep), off (waits for neither local
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 23:08, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
On 04/04/2011 04:41 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
My not yet complete attempt at doing a Windows build produces several of
these warnings during the build phase:
Hash %ENV missing the % in argument 1 of each() at -e
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
OK. Please comment the crap out of whatever you do, or maybe even add
a README. This stuff is just a bit arcane, and guideposts help a lot.
We already have a README for that ;-).
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 11:45 AM, David E. Wheeler da...@kineticode.com wrote:
But I'm assuming that at some point there's going to be something a bit more
robust: specifically, requiring a minimum version, perhaps something like:
requires = 'foo 1.0, bar 0.31.4'
Or maybe:
requires = 'foo
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 11:45 AM, David E. Wheeler da...@kineticode.com
wrote:
* I think we're going to need a formal version string spec for extensions.
I agree.
I don't. We deliberately decided *not* to have any wired-in
interpretation of
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 11:45 AM, David E. Wheeler da...@kineticode.com
wrote:
* I think we're going to need a formal version string spec for extensions.
I agree.
I don't. We
On Apr 4, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Once 9.1 is out, it'll probably be too late to dictate any semantics for
version numbers, because somebody will have done something incompatible
with it before 9.2 is released. If we are going to try to insist on
this, now is the time.
Yes,
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't. We deliberately decided *not* to have any wired-in
interpretation of extension numbers, and I don't think that decision
needs to be reversed. David can choose to enforce something for stuff
distributed through
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
Well, the flip side is that if you have appropriate logging turned on,
you might be able to go back and look at what the transaction that
took the lock actually did, which won't be possible if you arbitrarily
throw the PID away.
What'd be horribly
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
... In particular I'm really skeptical of the theory that we need
or should want version restrictions in Requires references. The
equivalent feature in RPM is deprecated for
Aidan Van Dyk ai...@highrise.ca writes:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh, really? How can you possibly get by without it? Dependencies of
this type are all over the place.
I think the general movement is toward *feature* dependancies. So for
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
Well, the flip side is that if you have appropriate logging turned on,
you might be able to go back and look at what the transaction that
took the lock actually did, which won't
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Avoid assuming there will be only 3 states for synchronous_commit.
Also avoid hardcoding the current default state by giving it the name
on and replace with a meaningful name that reflects its behaviour.
Coding only, no
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 07:04:59PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
What'd be horribly useful would be the pid and the *time* that the lock
was taken.. ?Knowing just the pid blows, since the pid could technically
end up reused
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Committed with some additional hacking. In particular, I believe that
your version made SYNCHRONOUS_COMMIT_LOCAL equivalent to
SYNCHRONOUS_COMMIT_OFF, which was wrong; and your replacement of
synchronous_replication by
Thanks for the review.
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 12:47:18 -0400
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Shigeru HANADA
han...@metrosystems.co.jp wrote:
1) Who can comment on a user mapping?
Basically only the owner can comment on a object, but user mappings
Attached is an updated version of the patch to allow conversion of
int4/int8 directly to money. I added overflow checks, dropped
int2-cash, and updated the documentation.
- Joey
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/datatype.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/datatype.sgml
index ecc79e2..13b888d 100644
---
88 matches
Mail list logo
