At 2014-06-29 22:25:54 +0530, a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
>
> I think the really right thing to do would be to have two separate
> columns, one with "all", "sameuser", "samerole", "replication", or
> empty; and the other an array of database names.
After sleeping on it, I realised that the code wo
2014-06-29 21:09 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane :
> Vik Fearing writes:
> > On 06/21/2014 10:11 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >> Is any reason or is acceptable incompatible change CONNECTION_LIMIT
> >> instead CONNECTION LIMIT? Is decreasing parser size about 1% good enough
> >> for breaking compatibility?
>
>
Hello, I have received inquiries related to blocked communication
several times for these weeks with different symptoms. Then I
found this message from archive,
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Escaping-a-blocked-sendto-syscall-without-causing-a-restart-td5740855.html
> Subject: Escaping a
On 06/29/2014 02:19 AM, Matheus de Oliveira wrote:
> Hi Hackers,
>
> I have worked on that patch a little more. So now I have functional
> patch (although still WIP) attached. The feature works as following:
>
> - Added a boolean parameter "only_temp_files" to pg_tablespace.spcoptions;
> - This p
I checked that it's reporting the right tableoid now.
BTW, why aren't you using the tlist passed to this function? I guess
create_scan_plan() passes tlist after processing it, so that should be used
rather than rel->reltargetlist.
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> (2014/
Hi.
I thought I'd review this patch, since pgaudit uses the
pg_event_trigger_dropped_objects function.
I went through the patch line by line, and I don't really have anything
to say about it. I notice that there are some XXX/FIXME comments in the
code, but it's not clear if those need to (or can
Le lundi 30 juin 2014 16:43:38 Michael Paquier a écrit :
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote:
> > >> This seems to be related to re-using the table-name between
> >
> > invocations. The
> >
> > >> attached patch should fix point 2. As for point 1, I don't know the
> >
> > c
On 30 June 2014 12:24, Pavel Stehule Wrote:
>>I have reviewed this patch. Please find my review comments below:
>>1. Command start-up option (e.g. -a/--echo-all for --ECHO=all), for new
>>functionality is not provided.
>all not options entered via psql variables has psql option and psql comm
On 2014-06-30 11:04:53 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2014-06-29 11:53:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Andres Freund
> > > I think it is better to have some discussion about it. Apart from this,
> > > to
Hi,
I've just rerun valgrind for the first time in a while and saw the
following splat. My guess is it exists since bb38fb0d43c, but that's
blindly guessing:
==2049== Use of uninitialised value of size 8
==2049==at 0x4FE66D: EndPrepare (twophase.c:1063)
==2049==by 0x4F231B: PrepareTransac
Thank you for sharing updated patch. I have compared it with MSVC and
configure generated build i.e.
*MacOSX (*--with-extra-version "-30JUN"*)*
pc1dotnetpk:inst asif$ ./bin/psql -d postgres
> psql (9.5devel-30JUN)
> Type "help" for help.
> postgres=# select version();
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> +if (secs <= 0)
> +secs = 1;/* Always sleep at least 1 sec */
> +
> +sleeptime = secs * 1000 + usecs / 1000;
>
> The above is the code which caused that problem. 'usecs' should have been
> reset to zero when 'secs' are round
If I understand correctly, the design of this patch has already been
considered earlier and rejected. So I guess the patch should also be
marked rejected?
-- Abhijit
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql
(2014/06/30 17:47), Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
I checked that it's reporting the right tableoid now.
Thank you for the check.
BTW, why aren't you using the tlist passed to this function? I guess
create_scan_plan() passes tlist after processing it, so that should be
used rather than rel->reltargetl
2014-06-30 11:20 GMT+02:00 Rajeev rastogi :
> On 30 June 2014 12:24, Pavel Stehule Wrote:
>
>
>
> >>I have reviewed this patch. Please find my review comments below:
>
> >>1. Command start-up option (e.g. -a/--echo-all for --ECHO=all), for
> new functionality is not provided.
>
> >all not opt
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-06-29 19:44:21 +0530, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
>> At 2014-06-27 00:51:02 +0200, p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
>> >
>> > Also based on Alvaro's comment, I replaced the scanf parsing code with
>> > strtoul(l) function.
>>
>> As far as I
At 2014-06-30 12:48:30 +0200, pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> +
> + Print a failed SQL commands to standard error output. This is
> + equivalent to setting the variable ECHO to
> + errors.
No "a", just "Print failed SQL commands …".
> --e.
> +-e. If set to
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:14 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> Right now PostgreSQL appears to rely on the absence of the tablespace
> directory as a flag to tell it "don't start up, something's badly wrong
> here".
>
>
Well, in fact the behavior is just to give a LOG message:
LOG: could not open t
On 2014-06-30 19:57:58 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Andres Freund
> wrote:
> > On 2014-06-29 19:44:21 +0530, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> >> At 2014-06-27 00:51:02 +0200, p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Also based on Alvaro's comment, I replaced the scanf
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> (2014/06/30 17:47), Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>
>> I checked that it's reporting the right tableoid now.
>>
>
> Thank you for the check.
>
>
> BTW, why aren't you using the tlist passed to this function? I guess
>> create_scan_plan() passes tli
2014-06-30 13:01 GMT+02:00 Abhijit Menon-Sen :
> At 2014-06-30 12:48:30 +0200, pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > +
> > + Print a failed SQL commands to standard error output. This is
> > + equivalent to setting the variable ECHO to
> > + errors.
>
> No "a", just "Print fa
Hi Haribabu,
I am not able to apply latest patch on REL9_4_STABLE or master branch i.e.
pc1dotnetpk:postgresql asif$ git apply
> ~/core/min_max_support_for_inet_datatypes/inet_agg_v4.patch
> fatal: unrecognized input
pc1dotnetpk:postgresql asif$ patch -p0 <
> ~/core/min_max_support_for_inet_dat
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Asif Naeem wrote:
> Patch looks good to me. I think it is ready for committer. Thanks.
Thanks for the extra checks and for taking the time to review it.
--
Michael
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Asif Naeem wrote:
Thank you for sharing up
At 2014-06-30 16:35:45 +0500, anaeem...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> pc1dotnetpk:postgresql asif$ patch -p0 <
> > ~/core/min_max_support_for_inet_datatypes/inet_agg_v4.patch
> > can't find file to patch at input line 3
> > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
> > The text leading up to this was
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> No, I think it's going to be *much* simpler than that. How about I
>> take a crack at this next week and then either (a) I'll see why it's a
>> bad idea and we can go from there or (b) you can review what I come up
>> with and tell me why i
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Ronan Dunklau
wrote:
> BOOLARRAYOID should be defined to 1000, not 1003 (which clashes against
> NAMEARRAYOID).
>
Oops, a bad copy-paste. Thanks for catching that.
I had a more detailed look at the postgres_fdw patch:
1) Having an example of options usable with p
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
> Sorry for the late reply. Thanks for the test.
> Please find the re-based patch with a temp fix for correcting the problem.
> I will a submit a proper patch fix later.
>
>
Please note that the new patch still gives assertion error:
TRAP: Fa
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I disagree with Stephen's proposal that this should be in core, or
>> that it needs its own dedicated syntax. I think contrib is a great
>> place for extensions like this. That makes it a whole lot easier for
>> people to develop customize
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> > An interesting question we haven't much considered is: who can set up
>> > policies and add then to users? Maybe we should flip this around, and
>> > instead of adding users to policies, we should exempt users from
>> > policies.
>> >
>>
Hi,
On 2014-06-30 08:03:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> No, I think it's going to be *much* simpler than that. How about I
> >> take a crack at this next week and then either (a) I'll see why it's a
> >> bad idea and we can go from there
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> > An interesting question we haven't much considered is: who can set up
> >> > policies and add then to users? Maybe we should flip this around, and
> >> > instead of adding users to policies
Etsuro Fujita writes:
> Done. I think this is because create_foreignscan_plan() makes reference
> to attr_needed, which isn't computed for inheritance children.
I wonder whether it isn't time to change that. It was coded like that
originally only because calculating the values would've been a
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I don't exactly see how an extension or contrib module is going to be
> > able to have a reasonable catalog structure which avoids the risk that
> > renaming an object (role, schema, t
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> I think it continues in the tradition of making s_lock.h ever harder to
> follow. But it's still better than what we have now from a correctness
> perspective.
Well, as you and I have discussed before, someday we probably need to
get rid of
At 2014-06-30 09:39:29 -0400, sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
>
> I certainly don't feel like it's the solution which extension authors
> are looking for and will be happy with
I don't know if there are any other extension authors involved in this
discussion, but I'm not shedding any tears over the idea
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> > I'm not a fan of the EXEMPT approach..
>>
>> Just out of curiosity, why not?
>
> I don't see it as really solving the flexibility need and it feels quite
> a bit more complicated to reason about. Would someone who is EXEMPT
> from one pol
Abhijit,
* Abhijit Menon-Sen (a...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> At 2014-06-30 09:39:29 -0400, sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
> > I certainly don't feel like it's the solution which extension authors
> > are looking for and will be happy with
>
> I don't know if there are any other extension authors invol
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I don't see it as really solving the flexibility need and it feels quite
> > a bit more complicated to reason about. Would someone who is EXEMPT
> > from one policy on a given table still have
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I think the fact that pgaudit does X and you think it should do Y is a
>> perfect example of why we're nowhere close to being ready to push
>> anything into core. We may very well want to do that someday, but not
>> yet.
>
> That's fine- bu
On 12 May 2014 17:14, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 05/12/2014 06:26 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>
>>> >With the new "commit-in-progress" status in clog, we won't need the
>>> >sub-committed clog status anymore. The "commit-in-progress" status will
>>> >achieve the same thing.
>>
>> Wouldn't that
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 11:06:26AM -0700, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>
>>> Here is v2.
>
>> I've taken the liberty of making an extension that uses this.
>> Preliminary tests indicate a 10x performance improvement over th
On 2014-06-30 10:05:44 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I think it continues in the tradition of making s_lock.h ever harder to
> > follow. But it's still better than what we have now from a correctness
> > perspective.
>
> Well, as you and I h
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> I think the fact that pgaudit does X and you think it should do Y is a
> >> perfect example of why we're nowhere close to being ready to push
> >> anything into core. We may very well want to
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:03:06AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > David Fetter wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 11:06:26AM -0700, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> >
> >>> Here is v2.
> >
> >> I've taken the liberty of making an extension that use
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:13 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
> Hello, I have received inquiries related to blocked communication
> several times for these weeks with different symptoms. Then I
> found this message from archive,
>
> http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Escaping-a-blocked-sendto-sys
Just writing to check in.
I haven't done anything to look into allowing arrays of composites for input
to PL/Python function. I made the submitted modification for a specific
project that I'm working on that involves python code that returns data
structures.
I also have no idea about a more e
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> > Solaris seems to run with TSO enabled for SPARC (whereas linux uses RMO,
>> > relaxed memory ordering), so it's probably fine to just use the compiler
>> > barrier.
>>
>> If it isn't, that's a change that has nothing to do with making
>>
In 9.4 we've the below block of code to walsender.c as
/*
* We only send regular messages to the client for full decoded
* transactions, but a synchronous replication and walsender shutdown
* possibly are waiting for a later location. So we send pings
* containing the flush location every no
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 4:25 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> > To make pin/unpin et al safe without acquiring the spinlock the pincount
>> > and the flags had to be moved into one variable so that when
>> > incrementing the pincount you automatically get the flagbits back. If
>> > it's currently valid
Joshua Yanovski writes:
> Proof of concept initial patch for enabling index only scans for
> partial indices even when an attribute is not in the target list, as
> long as it is only used in restriction clauses that can be proved by
> the index predicate. This also works for index quals, though t
On 2014-06-30 11:38:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Andres Freund
> wrote:
> >> Now, we want to make these
> >> operations compiler fences as well, and AIUI your proposal for that is
> >> to make NEW_S_UNLOCK(lock) = out of line function call + S_LOCK(dummy)
> >>
David Fetter wrote:
> It's missing a few pieces like surfacing transition table names.
> I'll work on those. Also, it's not clear to me how to access the
> pre- and post- relations at the same time, this being necessary
> for many use cases. I guess I need to think more about how that
> would
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Are there any known issues when changing the attnums?
like :
airport=# update pg_attribute set attnum = 3 where attname = 'abc' and
attrelid = 18328;
UPDATE 1
airport=# update pg_attribute set attnum = 2 where attname = 'foo' and
attrelid = 183
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-06-30 11:38:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Andres Freund
>> wrote:
>> >> Now, we want to make these
>> >> operations compiler fences as well, and AIUI your proposal for that is
>> >> to make NEW_S
On 2014-06-30 12:15:06 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> More broadly, it doesn't seem consistent. I think that other projects
> also sometimes write code that acquires a spinlock while holding
> another spinlock, and we don't do that; in fact, we've elevated that
> to a principle, regardless of whether
Robert Haas writes:
> ... this again is my point: why can't we make the same argument about
> two spinlocks situated on the same cache line? I don't have a bit of
> trouble believing that doing the same thing with a couple of spinlocks
> could sometimes work out well, too, but Tom is adamantly op
Abhijit Menon-Sen writes:
> I don't think it's fair to mark this as returned with feedback without a
> more detailed review (I think of returned with feedback as providing a
> concrete direction to follow). I've set it back to "needs review".
> Does anyone else want to look at this patch?
I offe
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> The existing coding rules also discourage spinlocking within a spinlock,
> and the reason for that is that there's no very clear upper bound to the
> time required to obtain a spinlock, so that there would also be no clear
> upper bound to the ti
2014-06-30 12:38 GMT+02:00 Abhijit Menon-Sen :
> If I understand correctly, the design of this patch has already been
> considered earlier and rejected. So I guess the patch should also be
> marked rejected?
>
I didn't find a related message.
?
Regards
Pavel
>
> -- Abhijit
>
On 2014-06-30 12:46:29 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> But trying to use a spinlock
> >> acquire-release to shore up problems with the spinlock release
> >> implementation makes my head explode.
> >
> > Well, it actually makes some sense. Nearly any TAS() implementation is
> > going to have some mem
geohas writes:
> Are there any known issues when changing the attnums?
> airport=# update pg_attribute set attnum = 3 where attname = 'abc' and
> attrelid = 18328;
> UPDATE 1
> airport=# update pg_attribute set attnum = 2 where attname = 'foo' and
> attrelid = 18328;
> UPDATE 1
I assume you quic
On 2014-06-30 13:15:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > The existing coding rules also discourage spinlocking within a spinlock,
> > and the reason for that is that there's no very clear upper bound to the
> > time required to obtain a spinlock, so
Andres Freund wrote:
> c) We already allow to set pretty much all aspects of the control file
>via resetxlog - there seems little point of not having the ability to
>change the system identifier.
I think it's pretty much a given that pg_resetxlog is a tool that can
have disastrous effects
Robert Haas writes:
> I'm personally not convinced that we're approaching this topic in the
> right way. I'm not convinced that it's at all reasonable to try to
> emulate atomics on platforms that don't have them. I would punt the
> problem into the next layer and force things like lwlock.c to h
On 2014-06-30 12:54:10 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > ... this again is my point: why can't we make the same argument about
> > two spinlocks situated on the same cache line? I don't have a bit of
> > trouble believing that doing the same thing with a couple of spinlocks
> > cou
On 2014-06-30 19:44:47 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-06-30 13:15:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > People who write code that uses atomics are not
> > likely to think about how those algorithms will actually perform when
> > those atomics are merely emulated, and I suspect that means that in
Abjit, all:
If we're adding log_line_prefix support for cluster_name (something I
think is a good idea), we need to also add it to CSVLOG. So, where do
we put it in CSVLog?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postg
On 2014-06-30 12:10:53 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Abjit, all:
>
> If we're adding log_line_prefix support for cluster_name (something I
> think is a good idea), we need to also add it to CSVLOG. So, where do
> we put it in CSVLog?
That was shot down (unfortunately imo), and I don't think anybod
Abhijit Menon-Sen writes:
> I've attached a patch to contrib/unaccent as outlined in my review the
> other day.
I went to commit this, and while testing I realized that the current
implementation of unaccent_lexize is only capable of coping with "src"
strings that are single characters in the cur
* From: Noah Misch [mailto:n...@leadboat.com]
> I liked the proposal here; was there a problem with it?
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-
> id/ca+tgmoz3ake4enctmqmzsykc_0pjl_u4c_x47ge48uy1upb...@mail.gmail.com
You're referring to the suggestion of accepting and ignoring the option on
non-Windo
At 2014-06-30 15:19:17 -0400, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
>
> Anyway, this raises the question of whether the current patch is
> actually a desirable way to do things, or whether it would be better
> if the unaccenting rules were like "base-char accent-char" ->
> "base-char".
It might be useful to b
On 2014-06-30 13:45:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > I'm personally not convinced that we're approaching this topic in the
> > right way. I'm not convinced that it's at all reasonable to try to
> > emulate atomics on platforms that don't have them. I would punt the
> > problem
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 07:28:03PM +, Christian Ullrich wrote:
> * From: Noah Misch [mailto:n...@leadboat.com]
>
> > I liked the proposal here; was there a problem with it?
> > http://www.postgresql.org/message-
> > id/ca+tgmoz3ake4enctmqmzsykc_0pjl_u4c_x47ge48uy1upb...@mail.gmail.com
>
> You
Hi,
attached is v5 of the patch. The main change is that scaling the number
of buckets is done only once, after the initial hash table is build. The
main advantage of this is lower price. This also allowed some cleanup of
unecessary code.
However, this new patch causes warning like this:
WAR
* From: Noah Misch [mailto:n...@leadboat.com]
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 07:28:03PM +, Christian Ullrich wrote:
> > * From: Noah Misch [mailto:n...@leadboat.com]
> > > I liked the proposal here; was there a problem with it?
> > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-
> > > id/ca+tgmoz3ake4enctmq
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Dilip kumar wrote:
...
>
> Updated patch is attached in the mail..
Thanks Dilip.
I get a compiler warning when building on Windows. When I started
looking into that, I see that two files have too much code duplication
between them:
src/bin/scripts/vac_parallel.
I would like to put on the record that there are a few deleted B-Tree
pages in a freshly initdb'd database. As my btreecheck tools shows:
mgd=# select bt_index_verify(indexrelid::regclass::text) from pg_index;
NOTICE: 0: page 12 of index "pg_attribute_relid_attnam_index" is deleted
LOCATION:
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 5:51 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> Thanks for the review!
>
>
> On 06/27/2014 09:12 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> Looking at this patch, it does not compile when assertions are enabled
>> because of this assertion in heapam.c:
>> Assert(recdata == data + datalen);
>> It
On 2014-06-30 19:22:59 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-06-30 12:46:29 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >, which if I understand you correctly are ARM without GCC
> > atomics, Sparc, and MIPS.
>
> I've to revise my statement on MIPS, it actually looks safe. I seem to
> have missed that it has its
On 30.6.2014 23:12, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Hi,
>
> attached is v5 of the patch. The main change is that scaling the number
> of buckets is done only once, after the initial hash table is build. The
> main advantage of this is lower price. This also allowed some cleanup of
> unecessary code.
>
> Ho
Abhijit Menon-Sen writes:
> At 2014-06-30 15:19:17 -0400, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
>> Anyway, this raises the question of whether the current patch is
>> actually a desirable way to do things, or whether it would be better
>> if the unaccenting rules were like "base-char accent-char" ->
>> "base-
Zombie thread arise!
I was searching for old threads on a specific problem and came across
this patch that was dropped due to concerns about SnapshotNow:
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
>> Well it's super-exclusive-vacuum-lo
Jeff Janes wrote:
> In particular, pgpipe is almost an exact duplicate between them,
> except the copy in vac_parallel.c has fallen behind changes made to
> parallel.c. (Those changes would have fixed the Windows warnings). I
> think that this function (and perhaps other parts as
> well--"exit_h
On 06/29/2014 03:10 PM, Patrick Finnegan wrote:
> And it also runs on the 11/780 which can have multiple CPUs... but I've
> never seen support for using more than one CPU (and the NetBSD page
> still says "NetBSD/vax can only make use of one CPU on multi-CPU
> machines"). If that has changed, I'd
On 06/29/2014 10:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Is there anyone in the NetBSD/VAX community who would be willing to
>>> host a PG buildfarm member?
>
>> I could put together a simh-based machine (i.e., fast) on a vm, if
>> nobody else has stepped up for this.
>
> No other volunteers have emerged, s
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Dave McGuire wrote:
> On 06/29/2014 03:10 PM, Patrick Finnegan wrote:
> > And it also runs on the 11/780 which can have multiple CPUs... but I've
> > never seen support for using more than one CPU (and the NetBSD page
> > still says "NetBSD/vax can only make use o
Dave McGuire skrev 2014-06-29 21:01:
On 06/29/2014 02:58 PM, Patrick Finnegan wrote:
Last I checked, NetBSD doesn't support any sort of multiprocessor VAX.
Multiprocessor VAXes exist, but you're stuck with either Ultrix or VMS
on them.
Hi Pat, it's good to see your name in my inbox.
N
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Dave McGuire wrote:
> On 06/29/2014 02:58 PM, Patrick Finnegan wrote:
> > Last I checked, NetBSD doesn't support any sort of multiprocessor VAX.
> > Multiprocessor VAXes exist, but you're stuck with either Ultrix or VMS
> > on them.
>
> Hi Pat, it's good to see
Last I checked, NetBSD doesn't support any sort of multiprocessor VAX.
Multiprocessor VAXes exist, but you're stuck with either Ultrix or VMS on
them.
Pat
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave McGuire writes:
> > On 06/29/2014 10:54 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> Maybe I'm j
Hi,
On 2014-06-28 15:08:45 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> Otherwise it looks good to me.
So, I'd looked at it with an eye towards committing it and found some
more things. I've now
* added the restriction that the cluster name can only be ASCII. It's
shown from several clusters with differing en
Well, the issue from our point of view is that a lot of what we care about
testing is extremely low-level hardware behavior, like whether spinlocks
work as expected across processors. It's not clear that a simulator would
provide a sufficiently accurate emulation.
OTOH, the really nasty issues l
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 07:44:47PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-06-30 13:15:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I'm personally not convinced that we're approaching this topic in the
> > right way. I'm not convinced that it's at all reasonable to try to
> > emulate atomics on platforms that d
Abhijit Menon-Sen writes:
> At 2014-06-30 15:19:17 -0400, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
>> It's not unlikely that we want this patch *and* an improvement that
>> allows multi-character src strings
> I think it's enough to apply just this patch, but I wouldn't object to
> doing both if it were easy. I
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 09:16:45PM +, Christian Ullrich wrote:
> * From: Noah Misch [mailto:n...@leadboat.com]
> > Yes; the consequence of ignoring ^C is that the test postmaster would
> > persist indefinitely after the ^C. The system under test doesn't care per
>
> No it won't, please see be
(2014/06/30 20:17), Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Etsuro Fujita
mailto:fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp>> wrote:
(2014/06/30 17:47), Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
BTW, why aren't you using the tlist passed to this function? I guess
create_scan_plan() passes t
(2014/06/30 22:48), Tom Lane wrote:
> Etsuro Fujita writes:
>> Done. I think this is because create_foreignscan_plan() makes reference
>> to attr_needed, which isn't computed for inheritance children.
>
> I wonder whether it isn't time to change that. It was coded like that
> originally only be
Hello,
> > BTW, why aren't you using the tlist passed to this function? I guess
> >> create_scan_plan() passes tlist after processing it, so that should be
> >> used rather than rel->reltargetlist.
> >>
> >
> > I think that that would be maybe OK, but I think that it would not be
> > efficient to
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-06-30 19:22:59 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2014-06-30 12:46:29 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> >, which if I understand you correctly are ARM without GCC
>> > atomics, Sparc, and MIPS.
>>
>> I've to revise my statement on MIPS, it
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
>>> Well it's super-exclusive-vacuum-lock avoidance techniques. Why
>>> shouldn't it make more sense to try to reduce the frequency and imp
Hello, The replies follow are mainly as a memo for myself so
please don't be bothered to answer until the time comes.
At Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:27:47 -0400, Robert Haas wrote
in
> You should probably add your patch here, so it doesn't get forgotten about:
>
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/act
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo