Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD
This amounts to an assumption that you have infinite work_mem, in which case you hardly need an external sort at all. If your work_mem is in fact finite, then at some point you need more than two passes. I'm not really interested in ripping out support for sort operations that

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Hannu Krosing
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-03-08 kell 20:08, kirjutas Jim C. Nasby: But it will take a whole lot of those rewinds to equal the amount of time required by an additional pass through the data. I guess that missing a sector read also implies a rewind, i.e. if you don't process the data read from

Re: [HACKERS] Coverity Open Source Defect Scan of PostgreSQL

2006-03-09 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 06:42:45PM -0500, Greg Stark wrote: Ben Chelf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: #ifdef STATIC_ANALYSIS #define ereport(elevel, rest) \ (errstart(elevel, __FILE__, __LINE__, PG_FUNCNAME_MACRO) ? \ (errfinish rest) : (void) 0), (elevel = ERROR ? exit(0) :

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Christof Petig copyright on include file,

2006-03-09 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 05:31:47PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: We should not have individual copyrights to individuals in our source tree. If Jan's is in there, it should be removed too (with his approval). The only copyright holder should be PostgreSQL Global Development Group. Err, to do

Re: [HACKERS] Coverity Open Source Defect Scan of PostgreSQL

2006-03-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 06:42:45PM -0500, Greg Stark wrote: Ben Chelf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: #ifdef STATIC_ANALYSIS #define ereport(elevel, rest) \ (errstart(elevel, __FILE__, __LINE__, PG_FUNCNAME_MACRO) ? \

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Christof Petig copyright on include file,

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes: On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 05:31:47PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: The only copyright holder should be PostgreSQL Global Development Group. Err, to do that someone would need to collect copyright assignments (ie signed documents) from every single

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Florian Weimer
* Greg Stark: That's one thing that gives me pause about the current approach of using more tapes. It seems like ideally the user would create a temporary work space on each spindle and the database would arrange to use no more than that number of tapes. Then each merge operation would

[HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Jonah H. Harris
This email is a preliminary design for the implementation of synonyms in PostgreSQL. Comments and suggestions are welcomed. BACKGROUND Synonyms are database objects which can be used in place of their referenced object in SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE SQL statements.

Re: [HACKERS] problem with large maintenance_work_mem settings and

2006-03-09 Thread Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Simon Riggs wrote: On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 10:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Stefan Kaltenbrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: CREATE INDEX on a 1,8B row table (5 int columns - index created on the first row about 300M distinct values): before: 11h 51min after: 3h 11min(!) Cool. Does it seem to

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Luke Lonergan
Jim, On 3/9/06 8:35 AM, Jim C. Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, the reality remains though; most folks are unlikely to setup enough dedicated temp areas so that we can do one tape per disk, so it would be really good to have a sort method that didn't rely on that. Agreed - however

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread William ZHANG
SYNONYMS are symbolinks in database? CREATE SYNONYMS bar FOR foo; DROP TABLE foo; Now bar point to an invalid object. Or should we let DROP TABLE foo CASCADE; to drop the SYNONYMS depended on the table? Also need to add \d support for psql. Regards, William ZHANG

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Jonah H. Harris
On 3/9/06, William ZHANG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Or should we letDROP TABLE foo CASCADE;to drop the SYNONYMS depended on the table? Yes, I don't see any reason not to allow a cascading table drop include synonyms that reference them. Also need to add \d support for psql. Yes. Thanks for adding

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Stephen Frost
* Jonah H. Harris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: In addition, SYNONYMS do participate in ACLs and support GRANT/REVOKE for table privileges. DROP TABLE and TRUNCATE cannot be used with synonyms. I assume you actually mean owner-level rights cannot be used with synonyms. - Permission on a synonym

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Stephen Frost
* Jonah H. Harris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On 3/9/06, William ZHANG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Or should we let DROP TABLE foo CASCADE; to drop the SYNONYMS depended on the table? Yes, I don't see any reason not to allow a cascading table drop include synonyms that reference them.

Re: [HACKERS] problem with large maintenance_work_mem settings and

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Stefan Kaltenbrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: samples %symbol name 103520432 47.9018 inlineApplySortFunction 33382738 15.4471 comparetup_index 25296438 11.7054 tuplesort_heap_siftup 10089122 4.6685 btint4cmp 8395676 3.8849 LogicalTapeRead 2873556 1.3297

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Luke Lonergan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Consider that a popular commercial database, running on a 6-disk RAID5 with one filesystem, performs external sorting 4 times faster (1/4 of the time) than Postgres using a two pass sort. There is no special optimization of the I/O path involved, it's

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Hans-Jürgen Schönig
Jonah H. Harris wrote: This email is a preliminary design for the implementation of synonyms in PostgreSQL. Comments and suggestions are welcomed. BACKGROUND Synonyms are database objects which can be used in place of their referenced object in SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE SQL

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Stephen Frost
* Stephan Szabo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Stephen Frost wrote: Should a non-cascade drop fail or just implicitly drop the synonyms? I'm not sure which way I feel about this... Users with only 'select' permissions on a given object can't currently create objects which

Re: [HACKERS] problem with large maintenance_work_mem settings and

2006-03-09 Thread Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Tom Lane wrote: Stefan Kaltenbrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: samples %symbol name 103520432 47.9018 inlineApplySortFunction 33382738 15.4471 comparetup_index 25296438 11.7054 tuplesort_heap_siftup 10089122 4.6685 btint4cmp 8395676 3.8849 LogicalTapeRead 2873556 1.3297

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Anniversary Summit, Call for Contributions

2006-03-09 Thread Andrew Sullivan
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 08:56:23AM -, Dave Page wrote: Do you have someone with some local knowledge who can recommend some nearby hotels? Yes. If you go to http://conference.postgresql.org/Location/, I've put up some information about this. I'll be expanding those pages as things move

Re: [HACKERS] Coverity Open Source Defect Scan of PostgreSQL

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why? I don't think we are able to run 'embedded' now as it is, so its not like we're dealign with system with small disk spaces :) how much bigger would adding that exit() make the binary? It's not only the exit(), as the elevel parameter isn't

Re: [HACKERS] Coverity Open Source Defect Scan of PostgreSQL

2006-03-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why? I don't think we are able to run 'embedded' now as it is, so its not like we're dealign with system with small disk spaces :) how much bigger would adding that exit() make the binary? It's not only the exit(), as the

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Anniversary Summit, Call for Contributions

2006-03-09 Thread D'Arcy J.M. Cain
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 15:13:54 -0500 Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BTW, now that we seem to be really underway, I'll also likely be contacting known-to-be-local people and hitting them up for specific things we might need. The organisers group was (at my insistence, so you all can

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Anniversary Summit, Call for Contributions

2006-03-09 Thread D'Arcy J.M. Cain
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 16:18:43 -0500 D'Arcy J.M. Cain darcy@druid.net wrote: What type of things will you be needing? I can probably spare some time. Doh! Sorry about that. I did reply instead of reply all thinking it would only go to Andrew. I didn't meant to send to the list. -- D'Arcy

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Josh Berkus
Jonah, This email is a preliminary design for the implementation of synonyms in PostgreSQL.  Comments and suggestions are welcomed. 1) Is there a SQL standard for this? 2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a single-object (possibly updatable) view? -- --Josh

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Jonah H. Harris
On 3/9/06, Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com wrote: 1) Is there a SQL standard for this? Nope. 2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and asingle-object (possibly updatable) view? Not a whole lot actually. If we had updateable views, I'd suggest that people change their

Re: [HACKERS] Coverity Open Source Defect Scan of PostgreSQL

2006-03-09 Thread Stephen Frost
* Bruce Momjian (pgman@candle.pha.pa.us) wrote: It's been asserted that Coverity can be taught to understand about elog/ereport without this sort of hack, so I'd rather take that tack. Agreed. The idea of modifying our binary in any way to help a sanity tool not complain is totally

Re: [HACKERS] Coverity Open Source Defect Scan of PostgreSQL

2006-03-09 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Tom Lane wrote: Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why? I don't think we are able to run 'embedded' now as it is, so its not like we're dealign with system with small disk spaces :) how much bigger would adding that exit() make the binary? It's not only the

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Stephan Szabo
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Josh Berkus wrote: Jonah, This email is a preliminary design for the implementation of synonyms in PostgreSQL.  Comments and suggestions are welcomed. 1) Is there a SQL standard for this? 2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Jonah H. Harris
On 3/9/06, Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As I understood the synonym plan, aperson with select on the synonym but not on the referenced table wouldn'tbe able to select through the synonym, while if the view was created bysomeone with select a person with select on the view could select

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Josh Berkus wrote: 2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a single-object (possibly updatable) view? I think with the plan as described, the permissions handling is slightly different from how we handle

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread elein
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 04:42:43PM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote: On 3/9/06, Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com wrote: 1) Is there a SQL standard for this? Nope. 2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a single-object (possibly updatable) view?

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Luke Lonergan
Tom, On 3/9/06 9:44 AM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think this argumentation hinges on some irrational aversion to the word tape. Given adequate work_mem, the CVS-tip behavior is exactly what you propose already (at least for the cases where we don't need random access to the sort

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Hannu Krosing
Ühel kenal päeval, N, 2006-03-09 kell 11:35, kirjutas Jonah H. Harris: This email is a preliminary design for the implementation of synonyms in PostgreSQL. Comments and suggestions are welcomed. BACKGROUND Synonyms are database objects which can be used in place of their referenced

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Luke Lonergan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would only suggest that we replace the existing algorithm with one that will work regardless of (reasonable) memory requirements. Perhaps we can agree that at least 1MB of RAM for external sorting will always be available and proceed from there? If

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from copyrights, and put in standard

2006-03-09 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote: Remove Jan Wieck's name from copyrights, and put in standard boilerplate, with approval of author. I really don't see why or how this is an improvement. But if no one else cares about it, so be it ... I wonder what would have happened if I had stuck my name in the

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Stephen Frost
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Luke Lonergan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would only suggest that we replace the existing algorithm with one that will work regardless of (reasonable) memory requirements. Perhaps we can agree that at least 1MB of RAM for external sorting will always

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Stephen Frost
* elein ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 04:42:43PM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote: Not a whole lot actually. If we had updateable views, I'd suggest that people change their create synonym syntax to create view. However, it would take substantially more work to

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Dann Corbit
-Original Message- From: Stephen Frost [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 3:49 PM To: Tom Lane Cc: Luke Lonergan; Jim C. Nasby; Greg Stark; Dann Corbit; Simon Riggs; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So, if we get a huge performance increase, what's wrong with: if [ sqrt(est(total)) =3D work_mem ]; then two-pass-sort(); else tape-sort(); fi ? Possibly nothing. However, from an algorithmic point of view the CVS-tip code *is* two-pass-sort,

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Luke Lonergan
Stephen, On 3/9/06 3:48 PM, Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, if we get a huge performance increase, what's wrong with: if [ sqrt(est(total)) = work_mem ]; then two-pass-sort(); else tape-sort(); fi I have something similar but less complex in mind. One of the observed

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Luke Lonergan
Tom, On 3/9/06 3:59 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Possibly nothing. However, from an algorithmic point of view the CVS-tip code *is* two-pass-sort, given adequate work_mem and no requirement for random access. Further, the available profile data doesn't show any indication that the

Re: [HACKERS] Merge algorithms for large numbers of tapes

2006-03-09 Thread Luke Lonergan
Dann, On 3/9/06 3:56 PM, Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two pass does not require sqrt(total) memory. This figure is clearly wrong. Clearly you haven't read the paper I posted previously in this thread from 1986 written by Jim Grey at Tandem. - Luke ---(end

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Stephan Szabo
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Tom Lane wrote: Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Josh Berkus wrote: 2) For my comprehension, what's the difference between a SYNONYM and a single-object (possibly updatable) view? I think with the plan as described, the permissions handling

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, the permissions handling would still be different between a view and a synonym AFAICS even if we dropped separate permissions on synonyms, so I don't think they're drop in replacements for each other even after updatable views. Agreed, but given

Re: [HACKERS] Coverity Open Source Defect Scan of PostgreSQL

2006-03-09 Thread Ben Chelf
On 3/8/06, Josh Berkus josh ( at ) agliodbs ( dot ) com wrote: Actually, I thougth that Neil/eDB did this with their copy. Is there any way to get a copy of that training configuration? Just to jump in on this thread, we can absolutely configure elog -- if you have the config already,

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Josh Berkus
Tom, (BTW, there was some work being done on updatable views, but I think it's stalled. I suspect the reason is that our current rule system is just too odd to support updatable views reasonably. I've been wondering if an implementation based on allowing triggers on views would be any more

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes: Eh? I thought that it was just syntatic sugar that was missing. I've built lots of updatable views manually; I don't see what's difficult about it. I think you'll find that corner cases like inserts involving nextval() don't work real well with a

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from copyrights, and put in standard

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I wonder what would have happened if I had stuck my name in the autovacuum.c, pg_shdepend.c or multixact.c files We would have asked you for permission to change it to the standard project copyright. The plpgsql and pltcl files date from a time when we

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from copyrights,

2006-03-09 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Seeing that now you're working for a company that depends on the ability to redistribute the PG code commercially, I would think you'd be all for making sure that the legalities are nicely lined up. Do you really want to dig through the source tree at every release to see whether you can

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from copyrights, and put in standard

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am not sure, but I think that Alvaro's point is the copyright doesn't matter in this instance. It is the license that does. Certainly, but if the file says Copyright PostgreSQL Global Development Group then it's reasonable to assume that the intended

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from copyrights, and put in standard

2006-03-09 Thread Robert Treat
On Thursday 09 March 2006 20:16, Tom Lane wrote: Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am not sure, but I think that Alvaro's point is the copyright doesn't matter in this instance. It is the license that does. Certainly, but if the file says Copyright PostgreSQL Global Development

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from copyrights,

2006-03-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Treat wrote: On Thursday 09 March 2006 20:16, Tom Lane wrote: Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am not sure, but I think that Alvaro's point is the copyright doesn't matter in this instance. It is the license that does. Certainly, but if the file says Copyright

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from

2006-03-09 Thread Marc G. Fournier
He does make a point ... if there is only one copyright holder, even if right now its a non-entity, if someone like Oracle came along, *created* a legal entity called 'The PostgreSQL Global Development Group', they could, in theory, change the License wihtout needing to get approval from

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from

2006-03-09 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Bruce Momjian wrote: With the BSD license, there really isn't any restriction to enforce, so the copyright owner is pretty meaningless. if nobody owns the code, then who has to be consulted to change the license? Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from

2006-03-09 Thread Peter Bierman
At 9:18 PM -0500 3/9/06, Bruce Momjian wrote: Robert Treat wrote: On Thursday 09 March 2006 20:16, Tom Lane wrote: Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am not sure, but I think that Alvaro's point is the copyright doesn't matter in this instance. It is the license that does.

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck`s name from copyrights,

2006-03-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: [ There is text before PGP section. ] -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I think everyone realizes at this point that the PGDG is not an official legal entity, but do we at least have a modern statement from Core as to what it is unofficially? In

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from

2006-03-09 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Bruce Momjian wrote: Marc G. Fournier wrote: On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Bruce Momjian wrote: With the BSD license, there really isn't any restriction to enforce, so the copyright owner is pretty meaningless. if nobody owns the code, then who has to be consulted to change the

[HACKERS] Updateable views was:(Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS)

2006-03-09 Thread Jaime Casanova
On 3/9/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes: Eh? I thought that it was just syntatic sugar that was missing. I've built lots of updatable views manually; I don't see what's difficult about it. I think you'll find that corner cases like inserts

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from

2006-03-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Marc G. Fournier wrote: On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Bruce Momjian wrote: Marc G. Fournier wrote: On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Bruce Momjian wrote: With the BSD license, there really isn't any restriction to enforce, so the copyright owner is pretty meaningless. if nobody owns the code, then who

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from

2006-03-09 Thread Joshua D. Drake
You can't. Berkeley keeps the license, and we add ourselves to it. If someone else comes along, they can copyright it and add restrictions to their version. 'k, but what is wrong with Portions copyright by ... added to the appropriate files? Why is that A Bad Thing? It becomes an issue

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from

2006-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 'k, but what is wrong with Portions copyright by ... added to the appropriate files? Why is that A Bad Thing? I wouldn't object to Portions copyright Joe Blow in addition to the PGDG copyright notice. The big problem with the way that the plpgsql

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove Jan Wieck's name from

2006-03-09 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Tom Lane wrote: Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 'k, but what is wrong with Portions copyright by ... added to the appropriate files? Why is that A Bad Thing? I wouldn't object to Portions copyright Joe Blow in addition to the PGDG copyright notice. The big

Re: [HACKERS] Where Can I Find The Code Segment For WAL Control?

2006-03-09 Thread 王宝兵
I am now trying to develop the PG to support real-time backup.My architecture is somehow similar to the Database Mirroring technology of SQL Server 2005.The server end of the system is consisted of two DB servers one is the Principal server,the other is the Mirror server.whenever the Principal