I am sory
too much patches
Regards
Pavel
2014-09-04 7:35 GMT+02:00 Jeevan Chalke jeevan.cha...@enterprisedb.com:
Hi Pavel,
You have attached wrong patch.
Thanks
--
Jeevan B Chalke
Principal Software Engineer, Product Development
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Enterprise PostgreSQL
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:25 PM, Bruce Momjian [via PostgreSQL]
ml-node+s1045698n5817646...@n5.nabble.com wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 12:03:36PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Tom Lane [hidden email]
http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=5817646i=0 wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2014-08-27 19:23:04 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
A long time ago, Itagaki Takahiro wrote a patch sort the buffers and write
them out in order
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:36 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
It's imo quite clearly better to keep it allocated. For one after
postmaster started the checkpointer successfully you don't need to be
worried about later failures to allocate memory if you allocate it once
(unless
Hi
here is a second variant with support --help=variables
Regards
Pavel
2014-09-04 4:25 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
* How about making it --help=variables instead of --help-variables?
-1,
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
* It's ugly that the caller does the malloc and memcpy, and the
certificate_name_entry_validate_match function then modifies its name
argument. Move the malloc+memcpy inside the function.
For the case of CN the
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
SELECT[1] - select exactly one row, anything else raises error
SELECT[0:1] - select zero or one rows, anything else raises error
SELECT[1:] - select one or more rows
plain SELECT is equivalent to SELECT[0:]
same
2014-09-04 9:37 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
SELECT[1] - select exactly one row, anything else raises error
SELECT[0:1] - select zero or one rows, anything else raises error
SELECT[1:] - select
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
we have totally different opinion what is good
Can you elaborate on that?
Your ASSERT CHECK ROWCOUNT = 1; is lengthly, which is why I don't like it.
Imagine if having to type
my $var === 'foo';
On 09/04/2014 10:33 AM, Alexey Klyukin wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
* It's ugly that the caller does the malloc and memcpy, and the
certificate_name_entry_validate_match function then modifies its name
argument. Move the
On 9/4/14 2:10 AM, Hannu Krosing wrote:
On 09/04/2014 12:17 AM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
I'm not sure how much I like that syntax in cases like:
WITH t AS (
-- multi-line query here
)
SELECT[0:] foo, bar
INTO _bat, _man
FROM foo
JOIN ..
JOIN ..
WHERE ..
-- etc.
It
2014-09-04 10:06 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
we have totally different opinion what is good
Can you elaborate on that?
I would to elaborate on enhancing plpgsql - but my primary target is
On 9/4/14 10:42 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-04 10:06 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
*) but there are probably equally who prefer to handle business logics
outside the database
It is maybe main difference between me and you. Usually I don't write CRUD
applications, and I am not
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
I am strong in opinion so PLpgSQL is targeted primary for implementation
business logic in server side. CRUD is only one from possible use cases -
and without any special importance to others.
Just curious, what
2014-09-04 10:53 GMT+02:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
On 9/4/14 10:42 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-04 10:06 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
*) but there are probably equally who prefer to handle business logics
outside the database
It is maybe main difference between me
2014-09-04 10:57 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
I am strong in opinion so PLpgSQL is targeted primary for implementation
business logic in server side. CRUD is only one from possible use cases
-
and
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
it is different semantic - returns composite or set of composites --- it is
not row or rows
The point was, RETURNS returns 1 while RETURNS SETOF returns 0 .. n.
Actually BL is usually processed oriented, so PL
2014-09-04 11:22 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
it is different semantic - returns composite or set of composites ---
it is
not row or rows
The point was, RETURNS returns 1 while RETURNS SETOF
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
+while (tmp_num_to_free 0)
I am not sure it's a good idea for this value to be fixed at loop
start and then just decremented.
It is
Everyone,
I've started a wiki page with the list of the things I could think of at
this very moment. I probably got the most annoying ones in there, but I
also might have forgotten about some things. I invite discussion of
every suggestion on -HACKERS.
2014-09-04 13:37 GMT+02:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
Everyone,
I've started a wiki page with the list of the things I could think of at
this very moment. I probably got the most annoying ones in there, but I
also might have forgotten about some things. I invite discussion of every
On 9/4/14 1:47 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-04 13:37 GMT+02:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
I've started a wiki page with the list of the things I could think of at
this very moment. I probably got the most annoying ones in there, but I
also might have forgotten about some things. I
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Performance Data:
---
Configuration and Db Details
IBM POWER-7 16 cores, 64 hardware threads
RAM = 64GB
Database Locale =C
checkpoint_segments=256
checkpoint_timeout=15min
2014-09-04 13:54 GMT+02:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
On 9/4/14 1:47 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-04 13:37 GMT+02:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
I've started a wiki page with the list of the things I could think of at
this very moment. I probably got the most annoying ones in
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:06 AM, Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com wrote:
Your ASSERT CHECK ROWCOUNT = 1; is lengthly, which is why I don't like it.
Imagine if having to type
my $var === 'foo';
instead of
my $var = 'foo';
on every single line of could where you want to
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Its not difficult to handle such cases, but it can have downside also
for the cases where demand from backends is not high.
Consider in above case if instead of 500 more allocations, it just
does 5 more allocations,
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If you want to do that, it's fine with me. What I would do is:
- Back-patch the addition of the sparcv8+ stuff all the way. If
anyone's
On September 4, 2014 2:18:37 PM CEST, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Andres Freund
and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If you want to do that, it's fine with me. What I would do is:
On 9/4/14 2:04 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
for example best practices for PL/SQL by Steven Feuerstein
I'll spend some time with that book to have a better idea on where
you're coming from.
Also, *please* don't try and extrapolate what I do based on the code
examples on the wiki page; they're
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 5:16 AM, Shigeru Hanada shigeru.han...@gmail.com wrote:
In 2011 I proposed join push-down support for foreign tables, which
would improve performance of queries which contain join between
foreign tables in one server, but it has not finished before time-up.
This
On 4 sep 2014, at 11:42, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-09-04 11:22 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
The point was, RETURNS returns 1 while RETURNS SETOF returns 0 .. n.
no RETURNS return VALUE (it is not a row) .. and in combination with
SELECT - value will be a
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Mark ma...@alienmuppet.co.uk wrote:
I'd like to use the xslt_process function but it is in part of the
documentation that is deprecated. I don't want to use something that is
going to disappear and if there is a better alternative I'd like to use it,
however I
2014-09-04 14:37 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
On 4 sep 2014, at 11:42, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-09-04 11:22 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
The point was, RETURNS returns 1 while RETURNS SETOF returns 0 .. n.
no RETURNS return VALUE (it is
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I'm slightly worried about the added overhead due to the latch code. In
my implementation I only use latches after a nonblocking read, but
still. Every WaitLatchOrSocket() does a drainSelfPipe(). I wonder if
that can
On 09/04/2014 03:49 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I'm slightly worried about the added overhead due to the latch code. In
my implementation I only use latches after a nonblocking read, but
still. Every WaitLatchOrSocket() does
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Xiaoyulei xiaoyu...@huawei.com wrote:
benchmarSQL has about half reads. So I think it should be effective.
I don't think BufFreelistLock take much time, it just get a buffer from list.
It should be very fast.
You're wrong. That list is usually empty right
On 09/01/2014 04:04 AM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
+ Make UPDATE/INSERT/DELETE throw error if they didnt' modify exactly 1
row, as that's the most common use-case, and provide alternative syntax
to modify multiple or zero rows.
What? No. The whole point of SQL is that it's set-based and can modify
On 09/04/2014 01:14 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-03 23:19 GMT+02:00 Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com
A more SQL-ish way of doing the same could probably be called COMMAND
CONSTRAINTS
and look something like this
SELECT
...
CHECK (ROWCOUNT BETWEEN 0 AND 1);
It is
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
Attached patch adds the missing tab-completion for the relation
options like autovacuum_multixact_freeze_max_age.
That's a nice catch. Multixact parameters are present since 9.3.
user_catalog_table since 9.4.
Regards,
--
2014-09-04 15:24 GMT+02:00 Jan Wieck j...@wi3ck.info:
On 09/04/2014 01:14 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-03 23:19 GMT+02:00 Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com
A more SQL-ish way of doing the same could probably be called COMMAND
CONSTRAINTS
and look something like this
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
Hmm. Perhaps we should call drainSelfPipe() only after poll/select returns
saying that there is something in the self-pipe. That would be a win
assuming it's more common for the self-pipe to be empty.
Couldn't
On 09/04/2014 09:31 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-04 15:24 GMT+02:00 Jan Wieck j...@wi3ck.info
I think I like the COMMAND CONSTRAINT the best so far.
I not, because when it will not be part of SQL, than parser in plpgsql
will be more complex. You have to inject SELECT, UPDATE, INSERT,
2014-09-04 15:38 GMT+02:00 Jan Wieck j...@wi3ck.info:
On 09/04/2014 09:31 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-04 15:24 GMT+02:00 Jan Wieck j...@wi3ck.info
I think I like the COMMAND CONSTRAINT the best so far.
I not, because when it will not be part of SQL, than parser in plpgsql
will
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
Good catch. So I will remove start_xact code later.
Attached patch removes start_xact from PSQLexec.
Nothing negative to say here :)
Patch simply
On 09/04/2014 04:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Hrm. So we'd have to block SIGUSR1, check the flag, then use
pselect() to temporarily unblock SIGUSR1 and wait, then on return
again unblock SIGUSR1? Doesn't seem very appealing. I think changing
the signal mask is fast on Linux, but quite slow on at
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 12:35 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 01:56:34AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 10:22:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Also, as best I can tell, .psql_history files from older libedit
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
On 09/04/2014 04:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Hrm. So we'd have to block SIGUSR1, check the flag, then use
pselect() to temporarily unblock SIGUSR1 and wait, then on return
again unblock SIGUSR1? Doesn't seem very
On 09/03/2014 04:19 PM, Hannu Krosing wrote:
1. Conditions for number of rows returned by SELECT or touched by
UPDATE or DELETE
Now that I think upon this... don't we already have it?
SELECT ... LIMIT 1
That already solves the purported problem of multiple results in SELECT
INTO as well.
On 9/4/14 4:09 PM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
On 09/03/2014 04:19 PM, Hannu Krosing wrote:
1. Conditions for number of rows returned by SELECT or touched by
UPDATE or DELETE
Now that I think upon this... don't we already have it?
SELECT ... LIMIT 1
No, that just hides any bugs. We want the
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Its not difficult to handle such cases, but it can have downside also
for the cases where demand from backends is not high.
Consider in above case if instead of 500 more
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:57 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't find that option to be terribly important then, but I don't
see how we can possibly get by without it now, unless our goal is to
make logical decoding as hard to use as we possibly can.
Yes. With 9.4 it is
On 09/04/2014 02:40 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-04 14:37 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com
mailto:j...@trustly.com:
On 4 sep 2014, at 11:42, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
mailto:pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-09-04 11:22 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
I tried your patches against libedit-28. Wherever a command contains a
newline, unpatched psql writes the three bytes \^A to the history file, and
patched psql writes the four bytes \012. Unpatched psql correctly reads
either form of the history file.
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 08:37:08AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
The main problem I see here is that accurate costing may require a
round-trip to the remote server. If there is only one path that is
probably OK; the cost of asking the question will usually be more than
paid for by hearing that
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Essentially, the implementation has all stages of query processing
During the execution of the parent ModifyTable, a special auxiliary
subquery (the
On 4 sep 2014, at 15:09, Shaun Thomas stho...@optionshouse.com wrote:
On 09/01/2014 04:04 AM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
+ Make UPDATE/INSERT/DELETE throw error if they didnt' modify exactly 1
row, as that's the most common use-case, and provide alternative syntax
to modify multiple or zero rows.
Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
+Background Reclaimer's Processing
+-
I suggest titling this section Background Reclaim.
I don't mind changing it, but currently used title is based on similar
On 4 sep 2014, at 15:32, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-09-04 15:24 GMT+02:00 Jan Wieck j...@wi3ck.info:
On 09/04/2014 01:14 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-03 23:19 GMT+02:00 Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com
A more SQL-ish way of doing the same could probably
On Thursday, September 4, 2014, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 08:37:08AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
The main problem I see here is that accurate costing may require a
round-trip to the remote server. If there is only one path that is
probably OK; the cost of
On 4 sep 2014, at 16:45, Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
When looking from the other end of the problem, we are
using SELECT/INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE *SET statements* in pl/pgsql
when we really want scalars.
My understanding is that one main drivers of starting this thread
was
2014-09-04 17:16 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
On 4 sep 2014, at 16:45, Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
When looking from the other end of the problem, we are
using SELECT/INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE *SET statements* in pl/pgsql
when we really want scalars.
My
2014-09-04 17:10 GMT+02:00 Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com:
On 4 sep 2014, at 15:32, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-09-04 15:24 GMT+02:00 Jan Wieck j...@wi3ck.info:
On 09/04/2014 01:14 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-09-03 23:19 GMT+02:00 Hannu Krosing
On 4 sep 2014, at 17:18, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
You just need a ISAM API for Postgres, That is all.
Now you are being ironic, and I would prefer to keep the discussion on
a serious level. You know that's not applicable in my case, you know
what I do for work and what kind
On 09/04/2014 11:16 AM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
On 4 sep 2014, at 16:45, Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
When looking from the other end of the problem, we are
using SELECT/INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE *SET statements* in pl/pgsql
when we really want scalars.
My understanding is that one main
Hi hackers,
Since few months, we occasionally see .ready files appearing on some slave
instances from various context. The two I have in mind are under 9.2.x.
I tried to investigate a bit. These .ready files are created when a WAL file
from pg_xlog has no corresponding file in
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Joel Jacobson j...@trustly.com wrote:
On 4 sep 2014, at 17:18, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
You just need a ISAM API for Postgres, That is all.
Now you are being ironic, and I would prefer to keep the discussion on
a serious level. You know
On 09/04/2014 02:48 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
To take another example, I've been complaining about the fact
that PostgreSQL 8.3+ requires far more typecasts in stored procedures
than any other database I'm aware of for years, probably since before
I joined EnterpriseDB.
+10
This still drives me
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 08:41:43PM +0530, Atri Sharma wrote:
On Thursday, September 4, 2014, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 08:37:08AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
The main problem I see here is that accurate costing may require a
round-trip to
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 08:41:43PM +0530, Atri Sharma wrote:
On Thursday, September 4, 2014, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 08:37:08AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
The main
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
You just need a ISAM API for Postgres, That is all.
Joel sure hasn't *shown* us anything to suggest that wouldn't
answer his needs better than any PL, or explained why that wouldn't
be a better solution for him.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB:
On 9/4/14 5:54 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 09/04/2014 02:48 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
To take another example, I've been complaining about the fact
that PostgreSQL 8.3+ requires far more typecasts in stored procedures
than any other database I'm aware of for years, probably since before
I joined
On 09/04/2014 06:48 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On 09/03/2014 11:48 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
Anyway, to get back around to the topic of PL/SQL compatibility
specifically, if you care about that issue, pick one thing that exists
in PL/SQL but not in PL/pgsql and try to do something about it.
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 09:31:20PM +0530, Atri Sharma wrote:
I am thinking we would eventually have to cache the statistics, then get
some kind of invalidation message from the foreign server. I am also
thinking that cache would have to be global across all backends, I guess
Hi Craig
2014-09-04 17:54 GMT+02:00 Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com:
On 09/04/2014 02:48 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
To take another example, I've been complaining about the fact
that PostgreSQL 8.3+ requires far more typecasts in stored procedures
than any other database I'm aware of for
Marko, et al,
This is a review of the pgcrypto PGP signatures patch:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/53edbcf0.9070...@joh.to
There hasn't been any discussion, at least that I've been able to find.
Contents Purpose
==
This patch add functions to create, verify and extract
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 09:31:20PM +0530, Atri Sharma wrote:
I am thinking we would eventually have to cache the statistics, then
get
some kind of invalidation message from the foreign server. I am also
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
* Still doesn't address the open question of whether or not we should
optimistically always try memcmp() == 0 on tiebreak. I still lean
towards yes.
Let m be the cost of a memcmp() that fails near the end of the
strings;
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 5:44 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
My suggestion is to remove the special cases for Darwin and 32-bit
systems and see how it goes.
I guess it should still be a configure option, then.
2014-09-04 18:02 GMT+02:00 Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
You just need a ISAM API for Postgres, That is all.
Joel sure hasn't *shown* us anything to suggest that wouldn't
answer his needs better than any PL, or explained why that wouldn't
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 12:03:36PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Perhaps the text should be like this:
The result is 1 if the termination message was sent;
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:52:14PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 12:03:36PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Perhaps the text should be like
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:52:14PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 12:03:36PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:21
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Ants Aasma a...@cybertec.at wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:36 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
It's imo quite clearly better to keep it allocated. For one after
postmaster started the checkpointer successfully you don't need to be
worried about
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
When you suggest ISAM, that's like saying demolish your house and
build a new one when all I want is to make small but important
changes to what I already do as a professional on a daily basis.
Go right ahead: this is an
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Robert Haas [via PostgreSQL]
ml-node+s1045698n581780...@n5.nabble.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Bruce Momjian [hidden email]
http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=5817809i=0 wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:52:14PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 08:33:31PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I can't seem to find a way to get the timezone offset via C; see:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/635780/why-does-glibc-timezone-global-not-agree-with-system-time-on-dst
On Linux, do 'man timezone' for details.
The 9.3.5 release notes contain...
-
Fix pg_upgrade for cases where the new server creates a TOAST table but
the old version did not (Bruce Momjian)
This rare situation would manifest as relation OID mismatch errors.
...which I thought was this bug, hence my confusion. If anyone
Marko, et al,
This is a review of the pgcrypto PGP Armor Headers patch:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/53edcae8.20...@joh.to
Contents Purpose
==
This patch add functions to create and extract OpenPGP Armor Headers.
from OpenPGP messages.
Included in the patch are updated
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
* Still doesn't address the open question of whether or not we should
optimistically always try memcmp() == 0 on tiebreak. I still lean
towards yes.
On 09/04/2014 09:02 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
There are a few things I would like to see, like secure session
variables in PL/PgSQL. Mostly, though, I think talk of Oracle
compatibility seems to be something that comes up before the speaker
has really understood what that would mean, and the
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:37:27AM -0600, Noah Yetter wrote:
The 9.3.5 release notes contain...
• Fix pg_upgrade for cases where the new server creates a TOAST table but
the
old version did not (Bruce Momjian)
This rare situation would manifest as relation OID mismatch
2014-09-04 20:31 GMT+02:00 Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com:
On 09/04/2014 09:02 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
There are a few things I would like to see, like secure session
variables in PL/PgSQL. Mostly, though, I think talk of Oracle
compatibility seems to be something that comes up before the
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:03 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I think there shouldn't be any plan nodes in the system that don't get
displayed by explain. If you're using a plan node for something, and
think it shouldn't be displayed by explain, then either (1) you are
wrong or (2)
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Bruce Momjian [via PostgreSQL]
ml-node+s1045698n5817828...@n5.nabble.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:37:27AM -0600, Noah Yetter wrote:
The 9.3.5 release notes contain...
• Fix pg_upgrade for cases where the new server creates a TOAST table
but
Isn't that exactly what the release note says?
where the new server creates a TOAST table but the old version did not
vs.
where the new cluster needs a TOAST table that the old cluster didn't
At any rate, I've additionally observed that the relation which is blowing
up pg_upgrade is a VIEW in the
Hi
I did a review of last patch
1. There is no problem with patching
2. compilation and doc compilation without warnings and issues.
3. code is clean, respects Postgres coding rules and is well documented -
it is slightly modified Tom's version with float8 optimization
4. The name with_bucket is
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 01:14:01PM -0600, Noah Yetter wrote:
Isn't that exactly what the release note says?
where the new server creates a TOAST table but the old version did not
vs.
where the new cluster needs a TOAST table that the old cluster didn't
Sorry, yes, I got confused. We have
* Heikki Linnakangas (hlinnakan...@vmware.com) wrote:
5. Better syntax for REINDEX
6. pgcrypto: support PGP signatures
7. pgcrypto: PGP armour headers
[...]
I think the latter 3 patches are missing a reviewer because no-one
is interested in them. There was some discussion on the REINDEX
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
At any rate, I've additionally observed that the relation which is blowing up
pg_upgrade is a VIEW in the source cluster but gets created as a TABLE in the
upgraded cluster, which may better explain why it had no toast table
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
Second, if you did manage to develop something which was significantly
more compatible with Oracle than PostgreSQL or PL/pgsql is today,
you'd probably find that the community wouldn't accept it.
Agreed. Moving PostgreSQL forward is what the
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
