Re: [HACKERS] Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE

2006-01-09 Thread Greg Stark
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well my theory was sort of half right. It has nothing to do with fooling Linux > into thinking it's a sequential read. Apparently this filesystem was created > with 32k blocks. I don't remember if that was intentional or if ext2/3 did it > automatically ba

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As long as the locale is consistent I think we're OK (is that right, Tom?) Right. > Would that mean not using any of initdb's locale settings? Yeah, you'd want to not use the --locale switch for initdb, and also not to change the system-wide locale se

Re: [HACKERS] cleaning up plperl warnings

2006-01-09 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Bruce Momjian wrote: Why do we need these defines at all? We don't use either of these types anywhere in the plperl code. Is the community perl different in what it does here from what the ActiveState perl? No idea, but if you don't need them, remove them so they work on your setup,

Re: [HACKERS] Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working on mips[el]?

2006-01-09 Thread Jim Buttafuoco
Martin, I have installed the Sarge binutils on my "testing/Etch" system and all of the Postgresql regression test pass. I don't know where to go from here, any suggestions? Jim -- Original Message --- From: Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Jim Buttafuoco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [HACKERS] Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE

2006-01-09 Thread Greg Stark
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > These numbers don't make much sense to me. It seems like 5% is about as > > > slow > > > as reading the whole file which is even worse than I expected. I thought > > > I was > > > being a bit pessimistic to think reading 5% would be as slow as readin

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Bruce Momjian wrote: I can put it in the Win32 section of the TODO list. If we have something not working on Win32, I would like to document it. Is it: plperl changes the locale in Win32? As long as the locale is consistent I think we're OK (is that right, Tom?) Would that mea

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
I can put it in the Win32 section of the TODO list. If we have something not working on Win32, I would like to document it. Is it: plperl changes the locale in Win32? --- Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > It has probably

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Andrew Dunstan
It has probably been sufficiently mitigated on *nix. On Windows, the choice seems to be between living with the risk and trying my "put the locales back where they were" patch, which as Tom and Greg point out might have other consequences. Take your pick. cheers andrew Bruce Momjian wrote:

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian writes: > Is there a TODO here, even if the Perl folks are supposed to fix it? When and if they fix it, it'd be useful for us to document the gotcha someplace (not sure where, though). Maybe we should even go so far as to refuse to work with older libperls on Windows.

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Is there a TODO here, even if the Perl folks are supposed to fix it? --- Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > >>I'm just about out of ideas and right out of time to spend on this. > >> > >> > > > >We could

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: I'm just about out of ideas and right out of time to spend on this. We could just file a Perl bug report and wait for them to fix it. done cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched ou

Re: [HACKERS] cleaning up plperl warnings

2006-01-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Now, in src/include/port/win32.h we have this: > > /* > * Supplement to . > * > * Perl already has conflicting defines for uid_t and gid_t. > */ > #ifndef PLPERL_HAVE_UID_GID > typedef int uid_t; > typedef int gid_t; > #else > /* These are redefined by perl. */ > #defin

Re: [HACKERS] lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hmm, okay. There's the additional complication that we need to handle > record types (see RecordCacheArray in typcache.c). Since I don't think > we need reference counting for those, Yeah, you do. See record_out for instance, and reflect on the fact that

Re: [HACKERS] lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful

2006-01-09 Thread Neil Conway
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 14:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Nah, I don't think this works. The problem is that after an inval, > you may have to provide an updated TupleDesc to new callers while > old callers still have open reference counts to the old TupleDesc. Good point. > However, you might be abl

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> We could just file a Perl bug report and wait for them to fix it. > What's the data risk? Given that it took us this long to identify the problem, I'm guessing that it doesn't affect too many people

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I don't know. Reading that code just makes my head spin ... > > Yeah, too many ifdefs :-(. But I suppose that the initial > "#ifdef LOCALE_ENVIRON_REQUIRED" block is not compiled on sane > platform

[HACKERS] Fw: Returned mail: see transcript for details

2006-01-09 Thread Jim Buttafuoco
Tom, My email to you was blocked. Jim -- Forwarded Message --- From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 20:16:27 -0500 Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details - The following addresses had permanent fatal erro

Re: [HACKERS] lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> I have not been able to think of an efficient way to make it work while >> still handing back a simple TupleDesc pointer --- seems like we'd have >> to contort the API somehow so that the "release" funct

Re: [HACKERS] lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful

2006-01-09 Thread Neil Conway
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I have not been able to think of an efficient way to make it work while > still handing back a simple TupleDesc pointer --- seems like we'd have > to contort the API somehow so that the "release" function can find the > reference count. Any thou

Re: [HACKERS] catalog corruption bug

2006-01-09 Thread Jeremy Drake
On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: > Does your application drop these temp tables explicitly, or leave them > to be dropped automatically during commit? It might be interesting to > see whether changing that makes any difference. I drop them explicitly at the end of the function. > I'm also cu

Re: [HACKERS] PLs and domain constraints

2006-01-09 Thread Neil Conway
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 20:23 +0100, Thomas Hallgren wrote: > Should I consider this as something to add to the PL/Java TODO list? Probably, yes (if/when I fix the in-tree PLs I was planning to take a look at all the externally-maintained ones, although you're welcome to do it instead). Before doma

Re: [HACKERS] PLs and domain constraints

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> For #2, I'm not sure where the right place to check domain constraints >>> is. > Should I consider this as something to add to the PL/Java TODO list? Yup, probably. regards, tom la

Re: [HACKERS] PLs and domain constraints

2006-01-09 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Tom Lane wrote: Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: For #2, I'm not sure where the right place to check domain constraints is. I was thinking about adding the check to the fmgr function call logic[1], but the domain checking code needs an ExprContext in which to evaluate the constraint, wh

Re: [HACKERS] catalog corruption bug

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Jeremy Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I ran without that function you made, and it got the error, but not a > crash. I stuck an Assert(false) right before the ereport for that > particular error, and I did end up with a core there, but I don't see > anything out of the ordinary (what little I

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] plpgsql: check domain constraints

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > GetDomainConstraints() looks fairly expensive, so it would be nice to do > some caching. What would the best way to implement this be? I had > thought that perhaps the typcache would work, but there seems to be no > method to flush stale typcache data. Perh

Re: [HACKERS] catalog corruption bug

2006-01-09 Thread Jeremy Drake
On Sun, 8 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: > Yeah, that's not very surprising. Running the forced-cache-resets > function will definitely expose that catcache bug pretty quickly. > You'd need to apply the patches I put in yesterday to have a system > that has any chance of withstanding that treatment fo

Re: [HACKERS] lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 20:04 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> On reflection I think that lookup_rowtype_tupdesc is simply misdesigned. >> We can't have it handing back a pointer to a data structure of unspecified >> lifetime. One possibility is to give it an API c

Re: [HACKERS] lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful

2006-01-09 Thread Neil Conway
On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 20:04 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > On reflection I think that lookup_rowtype_tupdesc is simply misdesigned. > We can't have it handing back a pointer to a data structure of unspecified > lifetime. One possibility is to give it an API comparable to the > syscache lookup functions,

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I don't know. Reading that code just makes my head spin ... Yeah, too many ifdefs :-(. But I suppose that the initial "#ifdef LOCALE_ENVIRON_REQUIRED" block is not compiled on sane platforms, meaning that the first code in the routine is the unconditio

Re: [HACKERS] Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working

2006-01-09 Thread Jim Buttafuoco
I see that also, What I am testing now, it downgrading gcc to the sarge versions. If it works on testing then I know it's a gcc issue. Jim -- Original Message --- From: Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: pgsql-hackers , [EMAIL PRO

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > AFAICT, perl doesn't keep any state about locale settings, it just > > reacts to whatever the current settings are, I think, but I could be wrong. > > If that's the case, why would it be bothering

Re: [HACKERS] Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE

2006-01-09 Thread Greg Stark
> > These numbers don't make much sense to me. It seems like 5% is about as slow > > as reading the whole file which is even worse than I expected. I thought I > > was > > being a bit pessimistic to think reading 5% would be as slow as reading 20% > > of > > the table. I have a theory. My test

Re: [HACKERS] Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working

2006-01-09 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 03:03:28PM +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > > > >well that is good news, can you tell me what version of linux you are > >using and what gcc version also. I will let > >Martin know. > > > lionfish is a stock Debian/Sarge box (a cobalt cube) with gcc 3.3.5. Martin is

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > AFAICT, perl doesn't keep any state about locale settings, it just > reacts to whatever the current settings are, I think, but I could be wrong. If that's the case, why would it be bothering to issue setlocale during startup at all? If you look in loc

Re: [HACKERS] Stats collector performance improvement

2006-01-09 Thread Hannu Krosing
Ühel kenal päeval, P, 2006-01-08 kell 11:49, kirjutas Greg Stark: > Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Interestingly I use pg_stat_activity view to watch for stuck backends, > > "stuck" in the sense that they have not noticed when client want away > > and are now waitin the TCP timeou

Re: [HACKERS] ISO 8601 Intervals

2006-01-09 Thread Ron Mayer
One more link... this http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-12/msg00049.php was the final draft of the patch I submitted, with docs patches, that did not break backward computability (did not rip out the old syntax) and supported both input and output of ISO-8601 compliant intervals by

Re: [HACKERS] ISO 8601 Intervals

2006-01-09 Thread Ron Mayer
Larry Rosenman wrote: Michael Glaesemann wrote: On Jan 8, 2006, at 12:12 , Larry Rosenman wrote: I was thinking of handling the TODO for ISO8601 Interval output. Just to be clear, you're talking about the ISO8601 duration syntax (PnYnMnDTnHnMnS), correct? (The SQL standard made the unfortun

Re: [HACKERS] Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE

2006-01-09 Thread Greg Stark
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > - yes, I would expect the results you get. If you sample 5% of rows and > each block has on average at least 20 rows, then we should expect the > majority of blocks to be hit. These results are from my test program. 5% means 5% of 8k blocks from the test

Re: [HACKERS] Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working

2006-01-09 Thread Jim Buttafuoco
Stefan, My mail admin has removed the Austria block, I guess we were getting spammed by some one there. Can you send the output of dpkg --list, so I can compare what packages you are using to what I have. Thanks Jim -- Original Message --- From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL

Re: [HACKERS] Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working

2006-01-09 Thread Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Jim Buttafuoco wrote: Stefan, first i would ask you to fix your mailserver setup because my last Mail to you bounced with: 550 5.0.0 Sorry we don't accept mail from Austria which makes it rather difficult for me to reply to your personal mail well that is good news, can you tell me what

Re: [HACKERS] Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working

2006-01-09 Thread Jim Buttafuoco
Stefan, well that is good news, can you tell me what version of linux you are using and what gcc version also. I will let Martin know. Thanks Jim -- Original Message --- From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: pgsql-hackers Sent: Mon, 09 Jan 2

Re: [HACKERS] ISO 8601 Intervals

2006-01-09 Thread Larry Rosenman
Michael Glaesemann wrote: > On Jan 8, 2006, at 12:12 , Larry Rosenman wrote: > >>I was thinking of handling the TODO for ISO8601 Interval output. > > Just to be clear, you're talking about the ISO8601 duration syntax > (PnYnMnDTnHnMnS), correct? (The SQL standard made the unfortunate > choice

Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: [HACKERS] Possible savepoint bug)

2006-01-09 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Greg Stark wrote: Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: The attached patch against cvs tip does seem to work. Instead of playing with the environment, we simply allow perl to do its worst and then put things back the way we wanted them. How does that affect to the API call

Re: [HACKERS] ISO 8601 Intervals

2006-01-09 Thread Michael Glaesemann
On Jan 8, 2006, at 12:12 , Larry Rosenman wrote: I was thinking of handling the TODO for ISO8601 Interval output. Just to be clear, you're talking about the ISO8601 duration syntax (PnYnMnDTnHnMnS), correct? (The SQL standard made the unfortunate choice to call durations, i.e., lengths

Re: [HACKERS] Incremental Backup Script

2006-01-09 Thread Gregor Zeitlinger
> As per docs, if the databases are rarely updated it could take a long > time for the WAL segment to "roll over". Yes, therefore I want to copy the current WAL (as I said earlier). When restoring, I also want to make sure that I restore exactely to the point when I copied the current WA segment.

Re: [HACKERS] Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE

2006-01-09 Thread Lukas Smith
Simon Riggs wrote: - yes, the random sampling is random - please read the code and comments - yes, I would expect the results you get. If you sample 5% of rows and each block has on average at least 20 rows, then we should expect the majority of blocks to be hit. and it seems from the benchma

Re: [HACKERS] Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE

2006-01-09 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 16:13 -0500, Greg Stark wrote: > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Before we start debating merits of proposals based on random reads, can > > someone confirm that the sampling code actually does read randomly? I > > looked at it yesterday; there is a comment t