Re: [HACKERS] Indicate disabled triggers in \d

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Brendan Jurd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > My first impulse was to just append a " (disabled)" after each > disabled trigger, but perhaps that is not visually obvious enough, > especially if the table has many triggers on it. Agreed, but maybe put it up at the front? Triggers: y AFTER DELET

[HACKERS] Indicate disabled triggers in \d

2006-11-05 Thread Brendan Jurd
Hello hackers, I noticed that the table description given by \d in psql does not indicate whether a trigger is enabled or disabled. In my opinion, if a trigger is disabled, that fact is essential information that a person looking at the output of \d would want to know. I would like to add this

Re: [HACKERS] adminpack and pg_catalog

2006-11-05 Thread Neil Conway
On Fri, 2006-10-20 at 22:59 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Nothing except initdb should add objects in pg_catalog. AFAICS, > adminpack doesn't have any special requirements, so it should behave > like all other contrib modules. Where are we on this? When this topic was last discussed, the thr

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] ldap: fix resource leak

2006-11-05 Thread Neil Conway
On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 19:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Come to think of it: either elog(ERROR) or a failure return from > CheckLDAPAuth is going to lead directly to backend exit, so the > whole thing is pretty much a cosmetic issue anyway. Thanks for the feedback. Patch applied, with an additional

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] ldap: fix resource leak

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > ... Not sure that > this is actually a net win though, as a PANIC might well be considered a > worse problem than a one-time leak of some LDAP state. Come to think of it: either elog(ERROR) or a failure return from CheckLDAPAuth is going to lead directly to backend exit, so the whole

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] ldap: fix resource leak

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 23:34 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Perhaps use a PG_TRY construct? > At least for the existing code, this doesn't work well: the function > exits early via ereport(LOG) and then "return STATUS_ERROR;", so AFAICS > there isn't an easy way

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] ldap: fix resource leak

2006-11-05 Thread Neil Conway
On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 23:34 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Perhaps use a PG_TRY construct? At least for the existing code, this doesn't work well: the function exits early via ereport(LOG) and then "return STATUS_ERROR;", so AFAICS there isn't an easy way to simplify the existing error handling logic vi

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Writing WAL for relcache invalidation:pg_internal.init

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 12:05 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> I think we're probably better off to just forcibly remove the init file >> during post-recovery cleanup. The easiest place to do this might be >> BuildFlatFiles, which has to scan pg_database anyway .

Re: [HACKERS] NULL in arrays

2006-11-05 Thread Guillaume Lelarge
Martijn van Oosterhout a écrit : > On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 08:23:59PM +0100, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: >> Setting a NULL value seems to work. >> >> amarok=# SELECT ARRAY['a',"NULL",'c']; >> ERROR: column "NULL" does not exist >> LINE 1: SELECT ARRAY['a',"NULL",'c']; >> ^ >>

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Writing WAL for relcache invalidation:pg_internal.init

2006-11-05 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 12:05 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I think we're probably better off to just forcibly remove the init file > during post-recovery cleanup. The easiest place to do this might be > BuildFlatFiles, which has to scan pg_database anyway ... Patch enclosed. Clean apply to HEAD, make

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: vacuum and autovacuum parameters tocontrol freezing

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 14:47 -0500, Gregory Stark wrote: >> That way it's unambiguous which is which. Ie, that it's minimum and maximum >> age and not minimum and maximum transaction id which would be the other way >> around. > Sounds logical. Hadn't seen

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: vacuum and autovacuum parameters tocontrol freezing

2006-11-05 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 14:47 -0500, Gregory Stark wrote: > "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > vacuum_freeze_min The latest TransactionId that will be "frozen" during > > a VACUUM is calculated by CurrentTransactionId - vacuum_freeze_min. > > > > vacuum_freeze_max > > The maximum age,

Re: [HACKERS] NULL in arrays

2006-11-05 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 08:23:59PM +0100, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > Setting a NULL value seems to work. > > amarok=# SELECT ARRAY['a',"NULL",'c']; > ERROR: column "NULL" does not exist > LINE 1: SELECT ARRAY['a',"NULL",'c']; > ^ > > Using double quotes throws an error.

Re: [HACKERS] NULL in arrays

2006-11-05 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Guillaume Lelarge wrote: Hi all, I tried to work with NULL items in an array but there are two things I don't understand. (I just did a cvs update, make, make install... so sources are current.) On http://momjian.us/main/writings/pgsql/sgml/arrays.html, you can read : To set an element of a

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: vacuum and autovacuum parameters to control freezing

2006-11-05 Thread Gregory Stark
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > vacuum_freeze_min The latest TransactionId that will be "frozen" during > a VACUUM is calculated by CurrentTransactionId - vacuum_freeze_min. > > vacuum_freeze_max > The maximum age, calculated as distance from CurrentTransactionId, that > will be al

[HACKERS] NULL in arrays

2006-11-05 Thread Guillaume Lelarge
Hi all, I tried to work with NULL items in an array but there are two things I don't understand. (I just did a cvs update, make, make install... so sources are current.) On http://momjian.us/main/writings/pgsql/sgml/arrays.html, you can read : To set an element of an array constant to NULL, wri

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: vacuum and autovacuum parameters to control freezing

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 12:01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> After re-reading the above, it strikes me that maybe names based around >> "freeze_min" and "freeze_max" would be useful? > Works for me. They are clearly related, yet different and allow a > straight

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: vacuum and autovacuum parameters to control freezing

2006-11-05 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 12:01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > After re-reading the above, it strikes me that maybe names based around > "freeze_min" and "freeze_max" would be useful? Works for me. They are clearly related, yet different and allow a straightforward explanation of their need and use. e.g.

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Bug in WAL backup documentation

2006-11-05 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 11:49 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I don't see why we should go out of our way to > provide a bad substitute for pwd. That argument is conclusive. Agreed. -- Simon Riggs EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---(end of broadcast

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: vacuum and autovacuum parameters to control freezing

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Perhaps you could edit the above if needed? > < Xids older than freeze_distance will be frozen whenever > next visited by VACUUM, but there is no forcing function > until they exceed freeze_limit >> In

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Bug in WAL backup documentation

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm pretty sure most people don't move live postmasters very frequently, > plus it isn't clear to me why we should support the people that want > that to do that, yet not the people who want the absolute-path option. As already discussed upthread, anyone

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Bug in WAL backup documentation

2006-11-05 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 11:10 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 13:29 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Looking back in the archives, I note that one of the arguments for > >> making the server use relative paths everywhere was so that it'd be > >>

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.2 (from CVS devel) first impressions

2006-11-05 Thread mark
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 11:01:40AM -0500, Neil Conway wrote: > On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 01:15 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Compiled fine. Still a few warnings (using Fedora Core 6 / AMD64). > Presumably those are just the standard warnings we can't easiy > eliminate. If not, can you post them p

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: vacuum and autovacuum parameters to control freezing

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think a global critical_age parameter is just fine. If you have one > huge table that takes a long time to vacuum, just adjust critical_age so > that there's enough time for the huge table vacuum to finish before > wrap-around. That means that

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: vacuum and autovacuum parameters to control freezing

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > now we have agreed to have only 4 eras, IIRC: > 1. In Progress Transactions 0 - OldestXmin > < limit is OldestXmin > 2. Completed, normal Xids, status in clog > < limit is Freeze distance? > 3. Frozen Xids, tuples fr

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Bug in WAL backup documentation

2006-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 13:29 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Looking back in the archives, I note that one of the arguments for >> making the server use relative paths everywhere was so that it'd be >> robust against things like DBAs moving directories that cont

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.2 (from CVS devel) first impressions

2006-11-05 Thread Neil Conway
On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 01:15 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Compiled fine. Still a few warnings (using Fedora Core 6 / AMD64). Presumably those are just the standard warnings we can't easiy eliminate. If not, can you post them please? -Neil ---(end of broadcast)--

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.2 (from CVS devel) first impressions

2006-11-05 Thread mark
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 09:11:07AM +, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 01:15 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > The new PG_MAGIC_MODULE requirement threw me for a loop. I expect it > > will catch others off guard as well. > Did you find the documentation adequate? Could you locate wh

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Bug in WAL backup documentation

2006-11-05 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 13:29 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 11:25:09AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> Since 8.1 has done this all along and no one's actually complained about > >>> it, I guess no one is using scripts that do "cd". I'm i

Re: [HACKERS] WITH SYSID dropped

2006-11-05 Thread Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Dr. Ernst Molitor wrote: > Dear PostgreSQL gurus, > > having read through the thread on the topic cited above, I still think > the change - however well-founded it may be - carries a problem: That of > an upgrade on installations that relied on the statement. > > Currently, I'm preparing to switc

[HACKERS] WITH SYSID dropped

2006-11-05 Thread Dr. Ernst Molitor
Dear PostgreSQL gurus, having read through the thread on the topic cited above, I still think the change - however well-founded it may be - carries a problem: That of an upgrade on installations that relied on the statement. Currently, I'm preparing to switch a PostgreSQL-8.0.3-installation to

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: vacuum and autovacuum parameters to control freezing

2006-11-05 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Tom Lane wrote: * It might seem that there's no point in per-table adjustment of critical_age, since only the system-wide maximum means anything for resource consumption. I'm not so sure though --- for a really large table, the time needed to finish vacuuming it could be significant, meaning it

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: vacuum and autovacuum parameters to control freezing

2006-11-05 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 12:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > It's usually going to be the case that the oldest datvacuumxid is > > template0's, meaning that it will never be possible to truncate clog > > until autovacuum decides that template0 is at risk of wraparound and > > goes and vacuums

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.2 (from CVS devel) first impressions

2006-11-05 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 01:15 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The new PG_MAGIC_MODULE requirement threw me for a loop. I expect it > will catch others off guard as well. Did you find the documentation adequate? Could you locate what you needed to know quickly and accurately? Do you think the chan