Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

2004-03-25 Thread Neil Conway
On 25-Mar-04, at 12:25 AM, Dustin Sallings wrote: It's definitely not a magic tool that makes bad code good and conflicting patches happy. It solves other problems, though. I don't think anything mentioned in this thread so far would be an enormous improvement over what we have now. However, I

Re: [HACKERS] pg_advisor schema proof of concept

2004-03-25 Thread Andreas Pflug
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: (6) possible inclusion in postgresql? - among other contributions? what about contrib/advisor? - added to template1 on default installation? maybe not for a first release? or yes? it is easier to communicate about I think we're going to want a gborg

Re: [HACKERS] Avoid MVCC using exclusive lock possible?

2004-03-25 Thread Yves Darmaillac
Andrew Sullivan a écrit : On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 10:43:34AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: general I think our VACUUM-based approach is superior to the Oracle-style UNDO approach, because it pushes the maintenance overhead out of foreground transaction processing and into a schedulable background

Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

2004-03-25 Thread Jan Wieck
Dustin Sallings wrote: On Mar 24, 2004, at 20:29, Tom Lane wrote: Not here. You want me to trust some bit of code (with absolutely zero understanding of the source text it's hacking on) to figure out how to resolve conflicting patches? That sounds like a recipe for big-time unhappiness. The

Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

2004-03-25 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Neil Conway said: I don't think anything mentioned in this thread so far would be an enormous improvement over what we have now. However, I am still open to trying Arch or SVN: in the long run, I think the productivity gain from even an incremental improvement in the development toolset is

Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

2004-03-25 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 08:05:05AM -0500, Jan Wieck wrote: The difference here is that instead of submitting a patch for review, which is then frozen, the branch owner can (and that means some will, no matter what your intentions are) keep modifying the branch during the review process,

[HACKERS] operator for user-defined types

2004-03-25 Thread Teodor Sigaev
I got several suggestions to include ordering operator for tsvector to aim grouping, union and except etc. I wrote silly comparing function (byte to byte with some optimizations), but I wondered that for using operator in order clause its need to declate B-tree opclass for type: regression=#

Re: [HACKERS] Log rotation

2004-03-25 Thread Robert Treat
On Wednesday 24 March 2004 12:31, Bruce Momjian wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: This thread seems to have died without a conclusion. AFAICS, we have 5 options: . the apache program - see below pro: robust, portable, extremely well tested, no effort to import con: possible license

Re: [HACKERS] Email addresses on developer bios site

2004-03-25 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: On this page: http://developer.postgresql.org/bios.php Is there any chance we could get our email addresses obfuscated to prevent spam? Just an FYI, but just by posting, you do realize that your email address is propogated to every Usenet

Re: [HACKERS] operator for user-defined types

2004-03-25 Thread Tom Lane
Teodor Sigaev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So, I must declare b-tree opclass for tsvector. Why? My supposition is to guarantee that operator is really 'less-than' one. Is it? Exactly. We used to assume that any operator named '' would be suitable for sorting, but it's a lot safer to assume that

Re: [HACKERS] pg_advisor schema proof of concept

2004-03-25 Thread Josh Berkus
Fabien, Christopher: It would be nice for pgAdmin PhpPgAdmin to have GUI interfaces to pg_advisor, though. Also, I would argue for this to be a GBorg/pgFoundry project rather than part of the core. It's the sort of thing that could easily be database-version agnostic, and that SQL jockeys

Re: [HACKERS] pg_advisor schema proof of concept

2004-03-25 Thread Fabien COELHO
Also, if they have a partial index on the FK, it's not good enough! In CVS, IS NOT NULL partial indexes should be used, but in general all others still won't... Whoa, there, partner! Keep in mind that there are *often* reasons for using a partial index on an FK, or even no index at

Re: [HACKERS] Email addresses on developer bios site

2004-03-25 Thread Devrim GUNDUZ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: On this page: http://developer.postgresql.org/bios.php Is there any chance we could get our email addresses obfuscated to prevent spam? Ok, done. Regards, - -- Devrim GUNDUZ

Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

2004-03-25 Thread Magnus Naeslund(t)
Dustin Sallings wrote: You can use distributed revision control systems as centralized systems, but not vice-versa. Not true, the other way around exists, that is what svk does. As far as understanding the simplicity of arch (if you wanted to understand the problems it solves and

Re: [HACKERS] Nested transaction proposal - take N (N 2)

2004-03-25 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
I haven't seen your patch yet, but the proposal looks good to me. On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Let the currently unused fourth state in pg_clog indicate a committed subtransaction. In pg_clog there are two bits per transaction, commit and abort, with the following

Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

2004-03-25 Thread Dustin Sallings
On Mar 25, 2004, at 5:05, Jan Wieck wrote: The difference here is that instead of submitting a patch for review, which is then frozen, the branch owner can (and that means some will, no matter what your intentions are) keep modifying the branch during the review process, other than just

Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

2004-03-25 Thread Dustin Sallings
On Mar 25, 2004, at 1:21, Neil Conway wrote: I think the lack of good Win32 support (unless rectified before the release of 7.5) is a pretty major problem with Arch -- that alone might be sufficient to prevent us from adopting it. I don't do Windows, but my understanding is that tla is as well

Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

2004-03-25 Thread Dustin Sallings
On Mar 25, 2004, at 9:22, Magnus Naeslund(t) wrote: You can use distributed revision control systems as centralized systems, but not vice-versa. Not true, the other way around exists, that is what svk does. From its description, svk sounds like a completely different system: ``svk is a

Re: [HACKERS] pg_advisor schema proof of concept

2004-03-25 Thread Robert Treat
On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 11:31, Fabien COELHO wrote: Also, if they have a partial index on the FK, it's not good enough! In CVS, IS NOT NULL partial indexes should be used, but in general all others still won't... Whoa, there, partner! Keep in mind that there are *often* reasons for

Re: [HACKERS] HEAD compile troubles

2004-03-25 Thread David Fetter
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 04:48:59PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: David Fetter wrote: Kind people, I just tried to compile HEAD on fedora, and it broke as per http://rafb.net/paste/results/W1942548.html Any ideas what i buggered up? Fixed. Not sure why I didn't see the problem

Re: [HACKERS] Log rotation

2004-03-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Treat wrote: On Wednesday 24 March 2004 12:31, Bruce Momjian wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: This thread seems to have died without a conclusion. AFAICS, we have 5 options: . the apache program - see below pro: robust, portable, extremely well tested, no effort to import

Re: [HACKERS] HEAD compile troubles

2004-03-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
David Fetter wrote: Kind people, I just tried to compile HEAD on fedora, and it broke as per http://rafb.net/paste/results/W1942548.html Any ideas what i buggered up? Fixed. Not sure why I didn't see the problem because I do compile with SSL. Anyway, patch attached and applied. --

Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

2004-03-25 Thread Neil Conway
On 25-Mar-04, at 3:03 PM, Dustin Sallings wrote: I don't do Windows, but my understanding is that tla is as well supported on Windows as postgres is. David Wheeler disagrees: A serious weakness of arch is that it doesn't work well on Windows-based systems, and it's not clear if that will ever

Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

2004-03-25 Thread Thomas Swan
quote who=Dustin Sallings On Mar 25, 2004, at 1:21, Neil Conway wrote: I think the lack of good Win32 support (unless rectified before the release of 7.5) is a pretty major problem with Arch -- that alone might be sufficient to prevent us from adopting it. I don't do Windows, but my

[HACKERS] Per database users/admins, handy for database virtual hosting...

2004-03-25 Thread Sean Chittenden
I've had to work through this and have with a series of messy tables and functions, but this screams a need for a more elegant solution. I've dug through the archives and didn't come up with a satisfying long term answer for virtual hosting beyond what I've already implemented. Per cluster

Re: [HACKERS] Email addresses on developer bios site

2004-03-25 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Is there any chance we could get our email addresses obfuscated to prevent spam? Just an FYI, but just by posting, you do realize that your email address is propogated to every Usenet server in the world, as well as several search engines like Google and Gname, right? I'm well aware of that, since

Re: [HACKERS] Nested transaction proposal - take N (N 2)

2004-03-25 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
a c 0 0 transaction in progress, the owning backend knows whether it is a main- or a sub-transaction, other backends don't care 1 0 aborted, nobody cares whether main- or sub-transaction 0 1 committed main-transaction or - with shortcut 2 - a sub-

Re: [HACKERS] Per database users/admins, handy for database virtual hosting...

2004-03-25 Thread Neil Conway
On 25-Mar-04, at 8:18 PM, Sean Chittenden wrote: I haven't read much in the last few months, but archives from 2002 suggested there wasn't much on the table in terms of making this happen beyond adding a function that runs as a DBA to create users (which I've done). Well, the db_user_namespace

Re: [HACKERS] Email addresses on developer bios site

2004-03-25 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Is there any chance we could get our email addresses obfuscated to prevent spam? Just an FYI, but just by posting, you do realize that your email address is propogated to every Usenet server in the world, as well as several search

Re: [HACKERS] Per database users/admins, handy for database virtual hosting...

2004-03-25 Thread Tom Lane
Sean Chittenden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's the feasibility of augmenting the system catalogs so that something similar to the following is possible: CREATE VIEW pg_catalog.pg_shadow AS SELECT usename, usesysid, usecreatedb, usesuper, usecatupd, passwd, valuntil,

Re: [HACKERS] Per database users/admins, handy for database virtual hosting...

2004-03-25 Thread Sean Chittenden
What's the feasibility of augmenting the system catalogs so that something similar to the following is possible: CREATE VIEW pg_catalog.pg_shadow AS SELECT usename, usesysid, usecreatedb, usesuper, usecatupd, passwd, valuntil, useconfig FROM

Re: [HACKERS] Per database users/admins, handy for database virtual hosting...

2004-03-25 Thread Tom Lane
Sean Chittenden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Come to think of it, the same risk of conflict applies for user *names*, and we can't easily make an end-run around that. That's why I used UNION ALL in my example. Reserved usernames that are in the cluster should be just as valid as usernames

[HACKERS] Returning number of rows - Copy In function

2004-03-25 Thread mike g
Hello, I was looking at putting the code for this in copy.c CopyReadLineFunction. If I do a printf at point A it compiles, installs, runs, doesn't display any data after running initdb and returns a result when a COPY FROM is executed in psql. If I do a printf at point B it compiles, installs,

Re: [HACKERS] Per database users/admins, handy for database virtual hosting...

2004-03-25 Thread Sean Chittenden
You can't think that allowing the same name to appear globally and locally is a good idea. Actually, I do think it is a good idea. If I say GRANT TO foo, who am I granting privileges to? SET username_precedence TO LOCAL,GLOBAL; -- I like GLOBAL more than CLUSTER GRANT TO foo; SET

Re: [HACKERS] Per database users/admins, handy for database virtual hosting...

2004-03-25 Thread Sean Chittenden
I haven't read much in the last few months, but archives from 2002 suggested there wasn't much on the table in terms of making this happen beyond adding a function that runs as a DBA to create users (which I've done). Well, the db_user_namespace GUC var has been implemented, but it is a hack.

Re: [HACKERS] pg_advisor schema proof of concept

2004-03-25 Thread Fabien COELHO
Dear Josh, That's why advices are graded from info to error in the current preliminary version. Advices that may or may not be good depending on undecidable elements have a lower grade. For instance, most attributes should be NOT NULL from a statistical point of view, but it is

Re: [HACKERS] pg_advisor schema proof of concept

2004-03-25 Thread Richard Huxton
On Thursday 25 March 2004 21:59, Robert Treat wrote: On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 11:31, Fabien COELHO wrote: Are you planning on making some type of differentiation on advise that is performance based rather than advise that is theory based? I see both cases being hinted at and it seems like a

Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-25 Thread markw
On 25 Mar, Manfred Spraul wrote: Tom Lane wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I could certainly do some testing if you want to see how DBT-2 does. Just tell me what to do. ;) Just do some runs that are identical except for the wal_sync_method setting. Note that this should not have any

Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-25 Thread Bruce Momjian
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've made a test run that compares fsync and fdatasync: The performance was identical: - with fdatasync: http://khack.osdl.org/stp/290607/ - with fsync: http://khack.osdl.org/stp/290483/ I don't understand why. Mark - is there a battery backed write

Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-25 Thread Josh Berkus
Bruce, We don't actually extend the WAL file during writes (preallocated), and the access/modification timestamp is only in seconds, so I wonder of the OS only updates the inode once a second. What else would change in the inode more frequently than once a second? What about really big

Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-25 Thread markw
On 22 Mar, Tom Lane wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I could certainly do some testing if you want to see how DBT-2 does. Just tell me what to do. ;) Just do some runs that are identical except for the wal_sync_method setting. Note that this should not have any impact on SELECT

Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-25 Thread Manfred Spraul
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Compare file sync methods with one 8k write: (o_dsync unavailable) open o_sync, write 6.270724 write, fdatasync13.275225 write, fsync, 13.359847 Odd. Which filesystem, which kernel? It seems fdatasync is broken and