[HACKERS] Resurrecting per-page cleaner for btree

2006-07-12 Thread ITAGAKI Takahiro
Hi Hackers, Can we resurrect the patch proposed by Junji TERAMOTO? It removes unnecessary items before btree pages split. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-01/msg00301.php There was a problem in the patch when we restarted scans from deleted tuples. But now we scan pages

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Kaare Rasmussen
There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points to it (README.procedural_languages, if nothing else) ... I thought that the general consensus was that only plpgsql ought to be in core, the rest should be

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Dave Cramer
Absolutely PL/J should be considered in the same light as PL/Java. Consider this a request for PL/J to be included in the core. Dave On 11-Jul-06, at 12:50 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: David, It's good to integrate things with the core as needed. What plans do we have to integrate PL/J? None,

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Marc G. Fournier wrote: There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points to it (README.procedural_languages, if nothing else) ... This was a bad idea last time it was proposed and is still a bad idea for

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Kaare Rasmussen wrote: There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points to it (README.procedural_languages, if nothing else) ... I thought that the general consensus was that only plpgsql ought to be in

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Hi Dave, Sorry I missed you at the Summit. I would've liked to discuss PL/J versus PL/Java with you. What is the status of PL/J? I haven't seen much activity there over the last 10 months. Does it run on Windows yet? Are you planning a first release anytime soon? Do you have any active

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Dienstag, 11. Juli 2006 17:40 schrieb Alvaro Herrera: We've discussed this before, regarding PL/php IIRC. The conclusions the last time around, as far as I remember, was that we wanted the PLs to be in the same CVS repo, but able to be compiled separately from the whole source tree. That

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] kerberos related warning

2006-07-12 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Mittwoch, 12. Juli 2006 04:38 schrieb Joe Conway: gcc -O -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing -g -pthread -D_REENTRANT -D_THREAD_SAFE -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS -fpic -DFRONTEND -I. -I../../../src/include

[HACKERS] pg_dump and inherits issue

2006-07-12 Thread Jim Buttafuoco
I have an issue with pg_dump and inherits with pg 8.1.3 and 8.1.4 if I run the following SQL create table t (a text check (a = '*')); create table s () inherits (t); alter table s drop constraint t_a_check; alter table s add constraint a_check check (a='s'); I get the following Table

[HACKERS] Updateable views for 8.2 or 8.3?

2006-07-12 Thread Jaime Casanova
Hi, is anybody working on the Bernd Helmle's updateable views patch? or know what the status of this is? -- regards, Jaime Casanova Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs and the universe trying to produce bigger and

Re: [HACKERS] Implied Functional Index use

2006-07-12 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Dienstag, 11. Juli 2006 23:31 schrieb Tom Lane: We could invent some more-complex concept involving well, this is equality, but there are some functions for which f(x) might differ from f(y) anyway and then mark the presumably-few functions that could produce divergent results --- examples

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Hannu Krosing
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-07-12 kell 09:49, kirjutas Kaare Rasmussen: There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points to it (README.procedural_languages, if nothing else) ... I thought that the general

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] kerberos related warning

2006-07-12 Thread Joe Conway
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Mittwoch, 12. Juli 2006 04:38 schrieb Joe Conway: gcc -O -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing -g -pthread -D_REENTRANT -D_THREAD_SAFE -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS -fpic -DFRONTEND -I.

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Hannu Krosing wrote: Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-07-12 kell 09:49, kirjutas Kaare Rasmussen: There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points to it (README.procedural_languages, if nothing else) ... I

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread David Fetter
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 07:29:52AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: On Wednesday 12 July 2006 04:15, Dave Cramer wrote: Absolutely PL/J should be considered in the same light as PL/Java. Consider this a request for PL/J to be included in the core. Frankly I don't care which one is used, as

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On Wednesday 12 July 2006 04:15, Dave Cramer wrote: Absolutely PL/J should be considered in the same light as PL/Java. Consider this a request for PL/J to be included in the core. Frankly I don't care which one is used, as long as the one (and ONLY one) that is included is the most mature and

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Jonah H. Harris
On 7/12/06, David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are they mutually exclusive? I can imagine, at least for development purposes, that someone might want to install both. I believe both can be installed and running at the same time. I don't really think anyone would want to run both, but

Re: [HACKERS] lastval exposes information that currval does not

2006-07-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Updated text: For schemas, allows access to objects contained in the specified schema (assuming that the objects' own privilege requirements are also met). Essentially this allows the grantee to quotelook up/ objects within the schema. Without this permission, it is

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Andrew Dunstan wrote: There is in effect no API at all, other than what is available to all backend modules. If someone wants to create an API which will be both sufficiently stable and sufficiently complete to meet the needs of the various PLs (especially, as Hannu rightly observes, any new

[HACKERS] Online index builds

2006-07-12 Thread Greg Stark
I just sent in the patch for online index builds to -patches. . The work to combine the two phases into a single non-transactional command is done. I'm not sure how long to wait between lock checks or how verbose to be about why it's taking so long. I do think we have to print something or

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Jonah H. Harris
On 7/12/06, Thomas Hallgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it didn't seem anywhere close production readiness. Perhaps it's no surprise that I disagree when you say PL/J could be considered in the same light as PL/Java. Having used both systems, I have to agree with Thomas; PL/Java is far ahead of

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread elein
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 10:14:53AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Hannu Krosing wrote: Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-07-12 kell 09:49, kirjutas Kaare Rasmussen: There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points

Re: [HACKERS] Updateable views for 8.2 or 8.3?

2006-07-12 Thread Joe Conway
Jaime Casanova wrote: is anybody working on the Bernd Helmle's updateable views patch? or know what the status of this is? I was just wondering about this also. If no one else is working on it, I'd like to try to push it through to completion for 8.2 myself. Can anyone summarize what the

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Joshua D. Drake
I concur with this. The needs for a module like PL/Java is very different then the needs of PL/Perl so let's get some more PL's in before we do a refactoring effort to create common API's. Personally, I'm not sure what would be included. The call handler API's together with the SPI API's are

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Joshua D. Drake wrote: Well I know it isn't an API per say, but one interesting tid bit as an example is that PLphp does not need the PostgreSQL source to compile. It only needs pgxs and the relevant headers etc... Perhaps that is one way to go... All PLs use pgxs? PL/Java does. No

Re: [HACKERS] lastval exposes information that currval does not

2006-07-12 Thread Phil Frost
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:37:37AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: Updated text: For schemas, allows access to objects contained in the specified schema (assuming that the objects' own privilege requirements are also met). Essentially this allows the grantee to quotelook

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and inherits issue

2006-07-12 Thread Greg Stark
Jim Buttafuoco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The check constraints on table s are not like the original, I have an extra t_a_check constraint. Is this correct? I wouldn't say it's correct but it is known. I think the plan is to have such constraints be marked so you *can't* drop them as long as

Re: [HACKERS] Online index builds

2006-07-12 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 12:09 -0400, Greg Stark wrote: no regression tests yet. We'll need some performance tests that show that lock-hold time is *actually* reduced, given the shenanigans needed to get there. We may need to have usage recommendations in the docs. -- Simon Riggs

Re: [HACKERS] Implied Functional Index use

2006-07-12 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 17:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ... - add a new boolean to pg_operator to allow us to define which operators offer true equality ... This would be useful for other purposes too, as we keep coming up against what's the equality

Re: [HACKERS] lastval exposes information that currval does not

2006-07-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Phil Frost wrote: On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:37:37AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: Updated text: For schemas, allows access to objects contained in the specified schema (assuming that the objects' own privilege requirements are also met). Essentially this allows

Re: [HACKERS] pre_load_libraries

2006-07-12 Thread Marc Munro
On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 02:18 -0300, I wrote: I am trying to create an initialisation function that is called using the preload_libraries option. The purpose of this is to set up shared memory for Veil, independant of postgres' own shared memory. Simple init functions work fine, but as soon

Re: [HACKERS] postgresql.conf basic analysis tool

2006-07-12 Thread Qingqing Zhou
Andrew Hammond [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote Also, are there any other (simple for now) things I should look at in the process? The shared memory estimiation logic is in ipc/ipci.c/CreateSharedMemoryAndSemaphores(). If you want to get an accurate number, you need to consider: (1) different

Re: [HACKERS] Updateable views for 8.2 or 8.3?

2006-07-12 Thread Jaime Casanova
On 7/12/06, Joe Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jaime Casanova wrote: is anybody working on the Bernd Helmle's updateable views patch? or know what the status of this is? I was just wondering about this also. If no one else is working on it, I'd like to try to push it through to completion

[HACKERS] speed checks ...

2006-07-12 Thread Marc G. Fournier
ignore ... Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN . [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.orgICQ . 7615664 ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] pgsql-patches considered harmful

2006-07-12 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Magnus Hagander wrote: There are list servers out there capable of simply ripping any attachments to a message (possibly over a certain size) and stick it on a website, replacing it with a link in the email. Is majordomo one of them? Majordomo2 has a 'hook' for it, but,

Re: [HACKERS] Implied Functional Index use

2006-07-12 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Normally, I would not suggest that we do things only for certain data types only. In this case however, it seems that the reason it would work only for INTEGER and TEXT data types is that they are simple atomic datatypes that have the required properties.

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Tom Lane
Jonah H. Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 7/12/06, David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are they mutually exclusive? I can imagine, at least for development purposes, that someone might want to install both. I believe both can be installed and running at the same time. I don't really

Re: [HACKERS] Online index builds

2006-07-12 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 12:09 -0400, Greg Stark wrote: no regression tests yet. We'll need some performance tests that show that lock-hold time is *actually* reduced, given the shenanigans needed to get there. Reducing lock hold time is not the point ...

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Dave Cramer
On 12-Jul-06, at 10:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Jonah H. Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 7/12/06, David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are they mutually exclusive? I can imagine, at least for development purposes, that someone might want to install both. I believe both can be installed

Re: [HACKERS] pre_load_libraries

2006-07-12 Thread Tom Lane
Marc Munro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ... A better solution from my point of view would be to simply move the call to process_preload_libraries to a point after shared memory has been set up. Is there some reason this could not be done? That would make it impossible for a preloaded library

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Dave Cramer wrote: I expect to see a new release shortly. Dave, I tried to obtain the source but whenever I try I get: [thhal]$ cvs -d :pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/projects/plj/scm login Logging in to :pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:2401/home/projects/plj/scm CVS password:

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Tom Lane wrote: ... equal claim to inclusion in core. Perhaps more, because it gives us an extra layer of insulation from JVM licensing questions. Tom, Why to you persist talking about licensing issues with PL/Java? There are none. PL/Java builds and runs just fine with gcj and the above

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Thomas Hallgren wrote: Tom Lane wrote: ... equal claim to inclusion in core. Perhaps more, because it gives us an extra layer of insulation from JVM licensing questions. Tom, Why to you persist talking about licensing issues with PL/Java? There are none. PL/Java builds and runs just fine

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Josh Berkus
Thomas, I'm starting to have second thoughts about this suggestion. I was enthusiastic about it at the summit, but I was unaware of the sheer size of PL/Java. 38,000 lines of code is 8% of the total size of Postgresql ... for *one* PL. Dave Cramer acquainted me with some of the

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Josh Berkus
Tom, Perhaps more, because it gives us an extra layer of insulation from JVM licensing questions. I really don't see licensing issues as being relevant. Your other concern certainly is, though. --Josh ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Josh Berkus wrote: Perhaps it's no surprise that I disagree when you say PL/J could be considered in the same light as PL/Java. Then again, I'm fairly biased ;-) This attitude does you no credit, Thomas. My diplomatic skills are somewhat limited :-) I might be blunt at times. I'm sure

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Thomas Hallgren wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Thomas Hallgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why to you persist talking about licensing issues with PL/Java? There are none. PL/Java builds and runs just fine with gcj and the above statement is completely false. Um ... if you use it with gcj,

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Tom Lane
Thomas Hallgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why to you persist talking about licensing issues with PL/Java? There are none. PL/Java builds and runs just fine with gcj and the above statement is completely false. Um ... if you use it with gcj, there may or may not be any licensing problems

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Tom Lane wrote: Thomas Hallgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why to you persist talking about licensing issues with PL/Java? There are none. PL/Java builds and runs just fine with gcj and the above statement is completely false. Um ... if you use it with gcj, there may or may not be any

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Joshua D. Drake wrote: What happens when the FSF inevitably removes the license clause and makes it pure GPL? I'm sorry but I don't follow. You're saying that it's inevitable that FSF will remove the 'libgcc' exception from libgcj? Why on earth would they do that? My guess is that it will go

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Josh Berkus wrote: Thomas, I'm starting to have second thoughts about this suggestion. I was enthusiastic about it at the summit, but I was unaware of the sheer size of PL/Java. 38,000 lines of code is 8% of the total size of Postgresql ... for *one* PL. Dave Cramer acquainted me with

Re: [HACKERS] Online index builds

2006-07-12 Thread Greg Stark
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 12:09 -0400, Greg Stark wrote: no regression tests yet. We'll need some performance tests that show that lock-hold time is *actually* reduced, given the shenanigans needed to get there. I'm not sure what you mean by lock-hold

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] [patch 0/9] annual pgcrypto update

2006-07-12 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 00:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: This has broken two out of the four buildfarm members that reported in the last half hour :-( I think kudu does not like // comments, not sure what kookaburra is on about. BTW, you've switched your animal names :) I fixed the C++-style

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Well, assume that FSF indeed did remove the exception. It would take me 30 minutes or so to create a substitute BSD licensed dummy JNI library with associated headers that would allow PL/Java to be built without any external modules at all. It's then completely up to the user what he/she

Re: [HACKERS] Three weeks left until feature freeze

2006-07-12 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Joshua D. Drake wrote: Well, assume that FSF indeed did remove the exception. It would take me 30 minutes or so to create a substitute BSD licensed dummy JNI library with associated headers that would allow PL/Java to be built without any external modules at all. It's then completely up to

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] [patch 0/9] annual pgcrypto update

2006-07-12 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 15:57 -0400, Marko Kreen wrote: Few cleanups and couple of new things [...] Applied, thanks for the patch. This has broken two out of the four buildfarm members that reported in the last half hour :-( I think kudu does not like //