(2012/03/01 0:33), Tom Lane wrote:
I don't think that creating such a dependency is acceptable.
Even if we didn't mind the dependency, you said yourself that
contrib/postgresql_fdw's validator will accept stuff that's not
appropriate for dblink.
Agreed. I think that these two contrib modules
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Easier for who? I don't care for the idea of code that has to cope with
two page formats, or before long N page
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Any ideas about improving the error reporting more generally, so that
when reloading the dump fails, the user can easily see what went
belly-up, even if they didn't use -l?
The only idea I have is to write the psql log to
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Well, my evidence is that a parameterized path should pretty much
always include a paramaterized path somewhere in there - otherwise,
what is parameterization doing for us?
Well, yes, we know that much.
I didn't write what I
IBM has provided the PostgreSQL community with access to a couple of
IBM POWER7 machines through OSUOSL. Simon has access to one, carved
up into a couple of LPARs, for replication work, and there's a
buildfarm animal on there as well, I think; I have access to the
other, for performance testing.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Alexander Korotkov aekorot...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:09 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
That seems like a pretty narrow, uncommon use-case. Also, to get
accurate stats for such queries that way, you'd need really enormous
histograms.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Nathan Boley npbo...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I am starting to look at this patch now. I'm wondering exactly why the
decision was made to continue storing
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue mar 01 12:00:08 -0300 2012:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
No, just that we'd no longer have statistics relevant to that, and would
have to fall back on default selectivity assumptions. Do you think that
such
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 05:04:44PM +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
There is still one EOF in v3 getAnotherTuple() -
pqGetInt(tupnfields), please turn that one also to
protocolerror.
pqGetInt() returns EOF only when it wants additional reading from
network if the parameter `bytes' is
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
... After that I think maybe some testing of the
remaining CommitFest patches might be in order (though personally I'd
like to wrap this CommitFest up fairly soon) to see if any of those
improve things.
Besides
Hi,
One of our customer send us a patch he wrote for his needs (on
src/bin/scripts/vacuumdb.c, no doc were included).
He's using one schema per application and would like to be able to run
vacuumdb on each of them independently so he added the --schema|-n
option and send us the patch.
Reviewing
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Ants Aasma ants.aa...@eesti.ee wrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
... After that I think maybe some testing of the
remaining CommitFest patches might be in order (though personally I'd
like to wrap this CommitFest up
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
On 24.02.2012 22:55, Simon Riggs wrote:
A long time ago, in a galaxy far away, we discussed ways to speed up
data loads/COPY.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg00470.php
In
On tor, 2012-03-01 at 20:56 +0900, Shigeru Hanada wrote:
How about moving postgresql_fdw_validator into dblink,
That's probably a good move. If this were C++, we might try to subclass
this whole thing a bit, to avoid code duplication, but I don't see an
easy way to do that here.
with
On fre, 2012-02-24 at 11:10 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On tor, 2012-02-23 at 10:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
void * seems entirely reasonable given the two different usages, but
I would be happier if the patch added explicit casts whereever FH is
set to
And how would a DBA know that?
We'd add a column to pg_class that tracks which page version is in use
for each relation.
So a relation can't have some pages in Version 9.2, and other pages in
version 9.3? How will this work for 2TB tables?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
And how would a DBA know that?
We'd add a column to pg_class that tracks which page version is in use
for each relation.
So a relation can't have some pages in Version 9.2, and other pages in
version 9.3? How will this
So a relation can't have some pages in Version 9.2, and other pages in
version 9.3? How will this work for 2TB tables?
Not very well, but better than Tom's proposal to require upgrading the
entire cluster in a single off-line operation.
Yes, but the result will be that anyone with a 2TB
Why does CollectCheckedFunctions skip trigger functions? My only guess
is that at one point the checker was not supposed to know how to check
them, and a later version learned about it and this bit wasn't updated;
but maybe there's another reason?
--
Álvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com
On ons, 2012-02-29 at 22:47 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Hey, that's a good idea. I would always write the pg_dump output to a
log file. If the dump succeeds, I remove the file, if not, I tell
users to read the log file for details about the failure --- good
idea.
But we also need the server
On 01.03.2012 18:40, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
On 24.02.2012 22:55, Simon Riggs wrote:
What exactly does it do? Previously, we optimised COPY when it was
loading data into a newly created table or a
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
So a relation can't have some pages in Version 9.2, and other pages in
version 9.3? How will this work for 2TB tables?
Not very well, but better than Tom's proposal to require upgrading the
entire cluster in a single off-line operation.
WTF? That
On 1 March 2012 00:48, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
I'm curious about the LeafNode stuff. Is this something that could be
done by expression_tree_walker? I'm not completely familiar with it so
maybe there's some showstopper such as some node tags not being
supported, or
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue mar 01 12:00:08 -0300 2012:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I confess I am nervous about ripping this out. I am pretty sure we
will get complaints about it.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
My expectation is that this feature will make life a lot
easier for a lot of Postgres users.
Yes. It's hard to overstate the apparent utility of this feature in
the general category of visibility and profiling.
--
On 3/1/12 1:57 PM, Daniel Farina wrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
My expectation is that this feature will make life a lot
easier for a lot of Postgres users.
Yes. It's hard to overstate the apparent utility of this feature in
the general
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of jue mar 01 18:51:38 -0300 2012:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue mar 01 12:00:08 -0300 2012:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I confess I am nervous about
Jehan-Guillaume (ioguix) de Rorthais j...@dalibo.com writes:
One of our customer send us a patch he wrote for his needs (on
src/bin/scripts/vacuumdb.c, no doc were included).
He's using one schema per application and would like to be able to run
vacuumdb on each of them independently so he
What about MCV's? Will those be removed as well?
Sure. Those seem even less useful.
Ya, this will destroy the performance of several queries without some
heavy tweaking.
Maybe this is bad design, but I've gotten in the habit of storing
sequences as arrays and I commonly join on them. I
Nathan Boley npbo...@gmail.com writes:
Maybe this is bad design, but I've gotten in the habit of storing
sequences as arrays and I commonly join on them. I looked through my
code this morning, and I only have one 'range' query ( of the form
described up-thread ), but there are tons of the form
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 5:40 AM, Marti Raudsepp ma...@juffo.org wrote:
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 09:49, Jaime Casanova ja...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
i little review...
Thanks! By the way, you should update to the v7 patch.
just tried it and it fail when initializing on make check
creating
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Why isn't your customer using autovacuum? If there are concrete
reasons why that doesn't get the job done for him, it would be
more useful in the long run to work on fixing that.
FWIW, we're using autovacuum here, at slightly more aggressive
settings from
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of jue mar 01 18:51:38 -0300 2012:
How would we make it optional? There's noplace I can think of to stick
such a knob ...
Uhm, attoptions?
Oh, I had forgotten we had that mechanism already. Yeah, that might
[ sorry Tom, reply all this time... ]
What do you mean by storing sequences as arrays?
So, a simple example is, for transcripts ( sequences of DNA that are
turned into proteins ), we store each of the connected components as
an array of the form:
exon_type in [1,6]
splice_type = [1,3]
and
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
So a relation can't have some pages in Version 9.2, and other pages in
version 9.3? How will this work for 2TB tables?
Not very well, but better than Tom's proposal to require
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue mar 01 21:23:06 -0300 2012:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
So a relation can't have some pages in Version 9.2, and other pages in
version 9.3? How will this work for
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On tor, 2012-01-12 at 21:25 -0800, probabble wrote:
Compiling on Ubuntu 10.04 LTS AMD64 on a GoGrid virtual machine from
2012-01-12 checkout.
Bison upgraded to v2.5, and downgraded to v2.4.1
Make process for both
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue mar 01 21:23:06 -0300 2012:
and that, further, you were arguing that we should not support
multiple page versions.
I don't think we need to support multiple page versions, if multiple
means 2.
2012/3/2 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net:
with renaming to dblink_fdw_validator?
Well, it's not the validator of the dblink_fdw, so maybe something like
basic_postgresql_fdw_validator.
-1 for same reason. It's not the validator of basic_postgresql_fdw.
Using fdw in the name of validator
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue mar 01 21:23:06 -0300 2012:
and that, further, you were arguing that we should not support
multiple page versions.
I don't think we
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 08:45:26AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Any ideas about improving the error reporting more generally, so that
when reloading the dump fails, the user can easily see what went
belly-up, even if they
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 10:17:04PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On ons, 2012-02-29 at 22:47 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Hey, that's a good idea. I would always write the pg_dump output to a
log file. If the dump succeeds, I remove the file, if not, I tell
users to read the log file for
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
One thing I'm not too sure about is how to extend the page format to
handle optional features. For example, suppose we want to add 2 bytes
to the page header for a checksum (or 4 bytes, or any other number).
Ideally, I'd like to not use up those 2
On 1 March 2012 22:09, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
On 3/1/12 1:57 PM, Daniel Farina wrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
My expectation is that this feature will make life a lot
easier for a lot of Postgres users.
Yes. It's hard to
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
One thing I'm not too sure about is how to extend the page format to
handle optional features. For example, suppose we want to add 2 bytes
to the page header for a checksum (or 4
Hi All,
While working on something in XC, I hit upon an assertion failure. While
this is in XC code, I believe there can be a way of reproducing this on
vanilla PostgreSQL as well. I could not do so even after several tries,
unless I add some code or run it through debugger. Here is the theory
Pavan Deolasee pavan.deola...@gmail.com writes:
If client is running a ROLLBACK statement and sends a statement cancel
signal to the server and if the cancel signal gets processed after the
transaction AbortTransaction() is completed, but before
CleanupTransaction() is called, I think the
47 matches
Mail list logo
