On tor, 2012-03-01 at 19:19 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I think the best fix would be to rearrange _PrintFileData() so that it
doesn't use FH at all. Instead, we could define a separate
ArchiveHandle field IF that works more like OF, and then change
ahwrite() to use that.
Here is a patch
Hi All,
I am Atri Sharma.I am a C developer with experience in database
designing and database management systems.I have worked with
MySql,Oracle and other database systems.I have designed databases for
various projects as well.
I would be interested in developing the column reordering project
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
2. We assume that if values do exist that they have rows uniformly
distributed across the whole table like rungs on a ladder.
Well, yeah. That's sometimes wrong, but not always. In
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
My wish was to register this as both a common and significant bug,
It has definitely come up here before many times.
However at root the problem is part of the general class of not
understanding how two different columns
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
My wish was to register this as both a common and significant bug,
It has definitely come up here before many times.
However at root the problem is part
After my pg_upgrade commit yesterday, I started receiving dozens of spam
emails from github. I am not sure if it was because I was the
committer, or because I am subscribed to the github postgres feed.
Anyway, the spam has a URL at the bottom --- if you click on
notifications on that page, you
Greg Stark st...@mit.edu writes:
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
So I now propose reverting the earlier two patches (but not their
regression test cases of course) and instead hacking MergeAppend plan
building as per (2).
As a wise man once said, This is
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 11:29:31PM +0200, Alex wrote:
https://github.com/a1exsh/postgres/commits/uri
The point of the patch is to have one string with all connection options,
in standard format, yes? So why does not this work:
db = PQconnectdb(postgres://localhost);
?
--
marko
--
Sent
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 14:46, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
After my pg_upgrade commit yesterday, I started receiving dozens of spam
emails from github. I am not sure if it was because I was the
committer, or because I am subscribed to the github postgres feed.
Anyway, the spam has
Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes:
On Friday, March 16, 2012 10:52:55 PM Tom Lane wrote:
Something else I just came across is that there are assorted places that
are aware that ExplainStmt contains a Query, eg setrefs.c, plancache.c,
and those have got to treat CreateTableAsStmt
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 15:52, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 14:46, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
After my pg_upgrade commit yesterday, I started receiving dozens of spam
emails from github. I am not sure if it was because I was the
committer, or
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 03:52:39PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 14:46, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
After my pg_upgrade commit yesterday, I started receiving dozens of spam
emails from github. I am not sure if it was because I was the
committer, or because
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 04:05:44PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 15:52, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 14:46, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
After my pg_upgrade commit yesterday, I started receiving dozens of spam
emails
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 16:05, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 03:52:39PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 14:46, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
After my pg_upgrade commit yesterday, I started receiving dozens of spam
emails from
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 16:06, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 04:05:44PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 15:52, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 14:46, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
After my
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 04:08:08PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 16:06, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 04:05:44PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 15:52, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17,
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 16:39, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 04:08:08PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 16:06, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 04:05:44PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at
Hi, all
I am a student of Computer Science and Applied Math in a university in
Singapore. I'm planning to join Google Summer Code 2012 on PostgreSQL. It's
quite an honor to join the postgresql hacker community.
I have some postgresql developing experience while doing my school
project. I'm
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 04:40:52PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Yes, but I am surprised they are doing email linking with Postgres
community commits. It is a creative idea, but not something I would
think people would think of.
It's because we push a mirror of our git repository to
On 03/17/2012 04:39 AM, Atri Sharma wrote:
Hi All,
I am Atri Sharma.I am a C developer with experience in database
designing and database management systems.I have worked with
MySql,Oracle and other database systems.I have designed databases for
various projects as well.
I would be
Le vendredi 16 mars 2012 16:51:04, Andres Freund a écrit :
On Friday, March 16, 2012 04:47:06 PM Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 6:25 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
How are the results with sync_file_range(fd, 0, 0,
SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WRITE)?
That is much
Thanks Andrew.
I went through the link. Here is my idea:
I believe we can build a middle layer that encapsulates the physical
details from the user and gives him/her a VIEW that is actually generated by
the system itself. That means, we have a system such as:
LOGICAL LAYER
--
MIDDLE
Hi all,
In follow up to my last mail, attached below, for performance, we can build
a graph with edges having weight in sense of performance wise and padding
saving wise . Then , we can build a minimal spanning tree, and the tree
generated would be our order of columns . When any changes are made
While looking at this I also noticed that DECLARE CURSOR uses a
structure that's randomly different in yet a third way: we start
with a utility statement containing a query, and then flip that
upside down so that the SELECT Query contains a utility statement!
I have a vague feeling that I'm the
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
But it would mean we have about 1.7x more runs that need to be merged
(for initially random data). Considering the minimum merge order is
6, that increase in runs is likely not to lead to an additional level
of merging,
On Saturday, March 17, 2012 06:45:27 PM Tom Lane wrote:
I'm not sure that anybody cares about being able to fire command
triggers on DECLARE CURSOR
I actually think it would make sense to explicitly not fire command triggers
there given that DECLARE CURSOR actually potentially is somewhat
Excerpts from Atri Sharma's message of sáb mar 17 05:39:10 -0300 2012:
Hi All,
I am Atri Sharma.I am a C developer with experience in database
designing and database management systems.I have worked with
MySql,Oracle and other database systems.I have designed databases for
various projects
HI Alvaro,
I did send a complete description to the mailing list, based on your past
discussions. I don’t know if you got it.
Please let me know if I should re-send the mail trail.
Atri
-Original Message-
From: Alvaro Herrera [mailto:alvhe...@commandprompt.com]
Sent: 18 March 2012
Excerpts from Atri Sharma's message of sáb mar 17 15:48:13 -0300 2012:
HI Alvaro,
I did send a complete description to the mailing list, based on your past
discussions. I don’t know if you got it.
I read it, but I don't see how is the client involved.
--
Álvaro Herrera
Hi Alvaro,
Thanks for going through my description.
I was going through the posts,when I realised that if we give each client the
flexibility of defining his/her own order with complete control,that would be
probably the right way(IMHO).
I mean,if the user sees,not the physical
On Saturday, March 17, 2012, Atri Sharma atri.j...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Alvaro,
Thanks for going through my description.
I was going through the posts,when I realised that if we give each client
the flexibility of defining his/her own order with complete control,that
would be probably the
Hi Dave,
I believe,with the ALTER command,we plan to give the user power to modify
ordering . Don't we?
Atri
From: Dave Page [mailto:dp...@pgadmin.org]
Sent: 18 March 2012 00:46
To: Atri Sharma
Cc: Alvaro Herrera; Pg Hackers
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Regarding column reordering project
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Atri Sharma atri.j...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Dave,
I believe,with the ALTER command,we plan to give the user power to modify
ordering . Don’t we?
And how is that different from a view that orders the columns as the
user wishes?
--
Jaime Casanova
On 03/17/2012 03:07 PM, Atri Sharma wrote:
Hi Alvaro,
Thanks for going through my description.
I was going through the posts,when I realised that if we give each client the
flexibility of defining his/her own order with complete control,that would be
probably the right way(IMHO).
I
On Saturday, March 17, 2012, Atri Sharma atri.j...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Dave,
I believe,with the ALTER command,we plan to give the user power to modify
ordering . Don’t we?
Probably, but that's not relevant to my point as far as I can see - I was
objecting to your suggestion that the middle
On 03/17/2012 04:42 PM, Dave Page wrote:
On Saturday, March 17, 2012, Atri Sharma atri.j...@gmail.com
mailto:atri.j...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Dave,
I believe,with the ALTER command,we plan to give the user power to
modify ordering . Don’t we?
Probably, but that's not relevant to my
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Daniel Farina wrote:
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 04:14:03PM -0700, Daniel Farina wrote:
I imagine the problem is a race condition whereby a pid might be
reused by another process owned
I've found a couple more issues in the CTAS patch:
1. Previous versions delivered a SELECT n command tag for either
spelling of the command:
regression=# select * into t1 from int8_tbl;
SELECT 6
regression=# create table t2 as select * from int8_tbl;
SELECT 6
With the patch I get
regression=#
On Saturday, March 17, 2012 11:04:30 PM Tom Lane wrote:
I've found a couple more issues in the CTAS patch:
1. Previous versions delivered a SELECT n command tag for either
spelling of the command:
regression=# select * into t1 from int8_tbl;
SELECT 6
regression=# create table t2 as
Is there anything that I could be doing to help bring this patch
closer to a committable state? I'm thinking of the tests in particular
- do you suppose it's acceptable to commit them more or less as-is?
The standard for testing contrib modules seems to be a bit different,
as there is a number of
Excerpts from Simon Riggs's message of lun mar 05 15:28:59 -0300 2012:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Regarding performance, the good thing about this patch is that if you
have an operation that used to block, it might now not block. So maybe
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
12789 28.2686 libc-2.13.so strcoll_l
6802 15.0350 postgres text_cmp
I'm still curious how it would compare to call strxfrm and sort the
resulting binary blobs. I don't think the
Excerpts from Simon Riggs's message of mar mar 06 18:33:13 -0300 2012:
The lock modes are correct, appropriate and IMHO have meaningful
names. No redesign required here.
Not sure about the naming of some of the flag bits however.
Feel free to suggest improvements ... I've probably seen
Excerpts from Simon Riggs's message of mar mar 06 17:28:12 -0300 2012:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
We provide four levels of tuple locking strength: SELECT FOR KEY UPDATE is
super-exclusive locking (used to delete tuples and more
This thread evolved out of an attempt to implement
pg_terminate_backend for non-superusers. I thought -- probably
erroneously -- that the major objection to that was the known
possibility of a PID-cycling race condition, whereby a signal could be
misdirected, in the case of terminate_backend,
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
But it would mean we have about 1.7x more runs that need to be merged
(for initially random data). Considering the minimum merge order is
6, that
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway, I think the logtape could use redoing. When your tapes are
actually physically tape drives, it is necessary to build up runs one
after the
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Mine too. We don't want a column ordering that's different for everyone.
That's a recipe for mass confusion. We want to be able to mutate the
ordering for everyone, and for everyone to see the same ordering. That means
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 8:50 AM, HuangQi huangq...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm quite glad if you could offer me some advices. Thanks a lot for your
help!
Thank you for your interest! However, I am a little confused precisely
what you are thinking about implementing. Are there particular access
(Sorry, Daniel. Forgot to cc pgsql-hackers.)
Hi, Daniel
Thanks a lot for your response.
As I can see for now, in my FYP, as the acyclic schema has the property
that it has a join tree. I will check how many join trees it has and
investigate any best option for the RSN schema. If it does
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Farina [mailto:dan...@heroku.com]
Sent: 18 March 2012 06:30
To: Andrew Dunstan
Cc: Dave Page; Atri Sharma; Alvaro Herrera; Pg Hackers
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Regarding column reordering project for GSoc 2012
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Andrew Dunstan
-Original Message-
From: jcasa...@systemguards.com.ec [mailto:jcasa...@systemguards.com.ec] On
Behalf Of Jaime Casanova
Sent: 18 March 2012 01:04
To: Atri Sharma
Cc: Dave Page; Alvaro Herrera; Pg Hackers
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Regarding column reordering project for GSoc 2012
On Sat,
There's a double free in the current HEAD's pg_dump. Fix attached.
diff --git a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c
index 2b0a5ff..57a6ccb 100644
*** a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c
--- b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c
*** dumpBlobs(Archive *fout, void *arg)
*** 2372,2379
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Good. The only exit handler I've seen so far is
pgdump_cleanup_at_exit. If there's no other one, is it okay to remove
all of this stacking functionality (see on_exit_nicely_index /
MAX_ON_EXIT_NICELY) from dumputils.c
54 matches
Mail list logo
