On Aug 2, 2006, at 12:47 , Joe Conway wrote:
regression=# create rule r2 as on update to src do insert into log
values(old.*, 'old'), (new.*, 'new');
ERROR: VALUES must not contain OLD or NEW references
Would it make sense to add a HINT as well, recommending the UNION
construct Tom
On 01/08/06, Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Would this do the trick?
I think Bruce changed the call convention for run_diff ... are you
looking at CVS tip? Otherwise it looks reasonable.
You're right. I had forgotten to do
moises wrote:
Hello,
I’m new in postgres SQL and I have some questions about the space where
postgres process run.
1-Can any body say me what libs use postgres for make system calls, for
example LIBC?
2-Can any body talk me if some postgres process can run in Linux kernel
space?
3-
Hi All,
On some windows 2003 machines the initDB process failed with the following error:
Running in debug mode.The files belonging to this database system will be owned by user "V_MYUSER".This user must also own the server process.
The database cluster will be initialized with locale
Is there any reason why all DROP statements except DROP CAST have two
rules, one with IF_P EXISTS and one without, while DROP CAST uses
opt_if_exists?
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes,
Michael Meskes wrote:
Is there any reason why all DROP statements except DROP CAST have two
rules, one with IF_P EXISTS and one without, while DROP CAST uses
opt_if_exists?
With all the others that was the only way to stop getting a grammar
conflict, IIRC.
cheers
andrew
Hi,
Bruce Momjian wrote:
The idea being to define issues like multi/single master, async vs,
sync, and mention the projects which are in each category.
You could even add shared-nothing vs. shared-disk nodes.
Generally I'd say it makes sense to 'educate' people, but does it really
make
Kenneth Marshall wrote:
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 12:14:49PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 01:46:01PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Jim Nasby wrote:
On Jul 25, 2006, at 3:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What would be the
Joe Conway wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Should we wait for someone to actually ask for this before adding it
to the TODO list?
Probably worth adding it to the TODO list so it doen't get lost.
Added:
o In rules, allow VALUES() to contain a mixture of 'old' and 'new'
Michael Glaesemann wrote:
On Aug 2, 2006, at 12:47 , Joe Conway wrote:
regression=# create rule r2 as on update to src do insert into log
values(old.*, 'old'), (new.*, 'new');
ERROR: VALUES must not contain OLD or NEW references
Would it make sense to add a HINT as well,
I'm in the process of committing the first version of the ecpg
regression test suite to CVS. This is not exactly finished work, but it
shows OK on all test on my machine and on Joachim's machine. The tests
need to be tweaked some before it's finished, but I'd like to hear about
what others are
Michael Fuhr wrote:
pg_dump in HEAD is dumping the entire contents of system catalogs.
New feature? :-(
Yes, I see it. My testing didn't show the problem, but I see it now.
I will find the cause. It is the new pg_dump flags added yesterday.
--
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael Glaesemann wrote:
Would it make sense to add a HINT as well, recommending the UNION
construct Tom mentioned earlier?
Agreed.
Done.
regards, tom lane
---(end of
Michael Meskes wrote:
I'm in the process of committing the first version of the ecpg
regression test suite to CVS. This is not exactly finished work, but it
shows OK on all test on my machine and on Joachim's machine. The tests
need to be tweaked some before it's finished, but I'd like to
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I don't think this sort of material belongs directly into the
PostgreSQL documentation.
Why not?
PostgreSQL documentation (or any product documentation) should be
factual: describe what the software does and give advice on its use.
This
Hi,
Andrew Hammond wrote:
I can see value in documenting what replication systems are known to
work (for some definition of work) with a given release in the
documentation for that release. Five years down the road when I'm
trying to implement replication for a client who's somehow locked
Tom Lane wrote:
Both of these pages say up front that they are considering read-only
data.
Can I assume read-mostly partitions could use the read-I/O
efficient indexes on update-intensive partitions of the same
table could use b-tree indexes?
All of my larger (90GB+) tables can have
Had a buildfarm failure on asp (AIX/gcc), because of an extra space in
the Makefile.regress for ecpg.
Attached is a patch to allow a clean compile.
-rocco
ecpg-test-Makefile.patch
Description: ecpg-test-Makefile.patch
---(end of
applied. thanks
andrew
Rocco Altier wrote:
Had a buildfarm failure on asp (AIX/gcc), because of an extra space in
the Makefile.regress for ecpg.
Attached is a patch to allow a clean compile.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if
Simon,
How close do your PITR patches take us to Oracle's Standby Databases?
I'm trying to decide whether it's a major features for PR purposes or
not.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6:
Fixed. Thanks for the report. Glad you thought it was a feature. ;-)
---
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Michael Fuhr wrote:
pg_dump in HEAD is dumping the entire contents of system catalogs.
New feature? :-(
Yes, I see
I am thinking we will portray 8.2 as a release focused on usability
improvements. We do have a few large features, like perhaps bit-mapped
indexes, but in general, the release has a lot of additions that make
things easier to use, rather than adding new features or performance.
--
Bruce
Bruce,
I am thinking we will portray 8.2 as a release focused on usability
improvements. We do have a few large features, like perhaps bit-mapped
indexes, but in general, the release has a lot of additions that make
things easier to use, rather than adding new features or performance.
This
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I am thinking we will portray 8.2 as a release focused on usability
improvements. We do have a few large features, like perhaps bit-mapped
indexes, but in general, the release has a lot of additions that make
things easier to use, rather than adding new features or
On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 13:05 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
How close do your PITR patches take us to Oracle's Standby Databases?
I'm trying to decide whether it's a major features for PR purposes or
not.
That was pretty much the sweet spot I was aiming at. Many databases
support such
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[I have an outstanding question on how to include LWlock support into
the archiver, required to flesh out the feature set, and of course
assuming these patches being accepted.]
The archiver is deliberately designed not to be connected to shared
memory. If
Sorry if this is the wrong place for this but as far as I can tell
there are only 2 features so far that I've seen discussed on hackers
that are looking really good to me. I'm sure all the little changes
will add up to a big win but these are the only two that would make
me feel an urgent
Tom Lane wrote:
I think we could safely list_free the input list in transformInsertRow
as your patch suggests, which would buy back the 144M part. But I don't
believe it's safe at all to free the raw_parser output --- the grammar
sometimes makes multiple links to the same subtree, eg in
Since I have a stuck backend without client again, I'll have to kill -SIGTERM a
backend. Fortunately, I do
have console access to that machine and it's not win32 but a decent OS. For
other cases I'd really really really
appreciate if that function would make it into 8.2.
utils/adt/misc.c
Andreas Pflug wrote:
Since I have a stuck backend without client again, I'll have to kill -SIGTERM a backend. Fortunately, I do
have console access to that machine and it's not win32 but a decent OS.
You do know that on Windows you can use pg_ctl to send a pseudo SIGTERM
to a backend,
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 18:04, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I am thinking we will portray 8.2 as a release focused on usability
improvements. We do have a few large features, like perhaps bit-mapped
indexes, but in general, the release has a lot of additions that make
things easier to use, rather
Robert Treat wrote:
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 18:04, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I am thinking we will portray 8.2 as a release focused on usability
improvements. We do have a few large features, like perhaps bit-mapped
indexes, but in general, the release has a lot of additions that make
things
I was trying postgres for about a year and the hard drive died.
Using some block copy and other tools I was able to retrieve some data
however it's missing directory names.
Eventually, I was able to connect to my db. However, when I make a
query. It comes back with following messages.
WARNING:
Robert Treat wrote:
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 18:04, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I am thinking we will portray 8.2 as a release focused on usability
improvements. We do have a few large features, like perhaps bit-mapped
indexes, but in general, the release has a lot of additions that make
34 matches
Mail list logo
