Le mardi 02 janvier 2007 à 18:08 -0700, Jonah H. Harris a écrit :
On 12/30/06, Mark Cave-Ayland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In short, if people don't mind waiting for my free cycles to come along
then I will continue to chip away at it; otherwise if it's considered an
essential for 8.3 with
On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 09:45 +0100, Hubert FONGARNAND wrote:
Why not looking at http://gppl.moonbone.ru/ evgen potemkin. has ever
made a patch for WITH and CONNECT BY?
I'm ready to test these features... (RECURSIVE) when they'll land in
CVS...
Hi Hubert,
IIRC there were two issues -
Am Mittwoch, 27. Dezember 2006 02:56 schrieb Euler Taveira de Oliveira:
This simple patch lets someone specifies the xlog directory at initdb
time. It uses symlinks to do it, and create and/or set permissions at
the directory as appropriate.
On the name of the option, it's not actually a data
I believe there's something similar for OS X as well. The question
is:
would it be better to do that, or to just delay calling fsync until
the
OS has had a chance to write things out.
A delay is not going to help unless you can suppress additional writes
to the file, which I don't think
Yes, and I can't think of a single reason why we'd let people
specify
anything in millibytes, or kilobits.
How about a configuration option related to connection throughput,
which is
typically measured in bits?
We'd use kbit. I don't see us using kb in that case (or was it kB
:-).
I notice that quite a few pg_ctl options have no long form equivalents,
namely these: NopPwW
Also, none of the long forms seems to be documented at all.
Should this be cleared up (maybe a nice first project for lurking new
contributors)?\
If we don't want long forms for some reason, then
* Stephen Frost:
Ah, this does sound rather ugly and not something we'd want. The
particular library doesn't make a whole heck of alot of difference to me
provided it has the general functionality necessary and a compatible
license (where 'compatible' in this case really means 'Debian feels
* Florian Weimer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
* Stephen Frost:
Ah, this does sound rather ugly and not something we'd want. The
particular library doesn't make a whole heck of alot of difference to me
provided it has the general functionality necessary and a compatible
license (where
On Tue, 2007-01-02 at 18:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In response to Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please change things to save the stat() syscall when the feature is not
in use.
Do you have a suggestion on how to do that and still have the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Lane wrote:
No, it's not a violation of ACID. In this case what you are doing is
altering a table's schema without a sufficiently strong lock on the
table, and that's a no-no, whether you would like it to be or not.
So as a general rule,
Hi,
I've just run into a race condition with creating a database and
connecting to it immediately afterwards. I'm getting a database %s not
found error just after the first flatfiles check in InitPostgres().
What that FindMyDatabase() there does, besides checking if the database
exists, is
Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So as a general rule, the system tables should be considered a special
case as far as transactional activity? To be more precise, you are saying
that a system table must be locked in access exclusive mode before any
change is made to guarantee no
Markus Schiltknecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've just run into a race condition with creating a database and
connecting to it immediately afterwards. I'm getting a database %s not
found error just after the first flatfiles check in InitPostgres().
In what PG version?
What that
Hello Tom,
Tom Lane wrote:
In what PG version?
Postgres-R 8.3devel ;-)
Because the postmaster doesn't have direct database access. If it did,
any corruption of shared memory would risk crashing the postmaster
along with the backends.
Understood, thanks.
Most probably I better go another
Markus Schiltknecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Most probably I better go another way, than fiddling with postgres
startup internals. Is there a way to be sure the flatfile has been
written to disk after a CREATE DATABASE? I would like to ensure I can
connect to a newly created database.
It
Tom Lane wrote:
It should happen automatically at commit of the CREATE DATABASE ... and
you'd not be able to see the pg_database row before that anyway. So I'm
not clear on what you're worried about.
Okay, thanks. I'll have to investigate on why exactly I still get the
error, then. That's
Hello,
I am working on support scrollable cursors in plpgpsm. Scrollable cursors
are in ToDo for plpgsql too. I need new function
SPI_cursor_fetch_with_direction(Portal portal, int direction, long count)
where is possible set direction of fetch statement.
any comments?
Regards
Pavel
Hope you had a nice holiday.
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So the only reason we needed the cross-data-type operators was to get better
estimates? I thought without them you couldn't get an index-based plan at
all.
Oh, hm, there is that ---
On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 18:30 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I am working on support scrollable cursors in plpgpsm. Scrollable cursors
are in ToDo for plpgsql too. I need new function
SPI_cursor_fetch_with_direction(Portal portal, int direction, long count)
where is possible set direction of
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Merge Join (cost=10149.78..10448.70 rows=13161 width=36)
Merge Cond: (a.a = inner.?column2?)
- Index Scan using aa on a (cost=0.00..62.45 rows=1230 width=32)
- Sort (cost=10149.78..10155.13 rows=2140 width=4)
Sort
Merge Joins require us to potentially Mark and Restore positions in the
tuples arriving from executor sub-nodes.
This currently means that if the tuples arrive from a Sort node, as they
often do in an MJ, the sort node will be instructed to prepare a random
access version of the sort result. That
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Merge Join (cost=10149.78..10448.70 rows=13161 width=36)
Merge Cond: (a.a = inner.?column2?)
- Index Scan using aa on a (cost=0.00..62.45 rows=1230 width=32)
- Sort
I am working on support scrollable cursors in plpgpsm. Scrollable
cursors
are in ToDo for plpgsql too. I need new function
SPI_cursor_fetch_with_direction(Portal portal, int direction, long
count)
where is possible set direction of fetch statement.
Sounds good.
Please ensure the
Hi,
I have some questions on execution plans.
When are the following plans used ?
nodeFunctionscan.c nodeTidscan.c
In particular, is the plan nodeBitmapHeapscan.c always used along with
the nodeBitmapIndexscan.c ?
Please, let me know if there is a previous thread on this subject or any
On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 06:30:48PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hello,
I am working on support scrollable cursors in plpgpsm. Scrollable cursors
are in ToDo for plpgsql too. I need new function
SPI_cursor_fetch_with_direction(Portal portal, int direction, long count)
Is int a reasonable
On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 12:36:27PM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 06:30:48PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hello,
I am working on support scrollable cursors in plpgpsm. Scrollable cursors
are in ToDo for plpgsql too. I need new function
On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 19:44 +, alfranio correia junior wrote:
I have some questions on execution plans.
When are the following plans used ?
nodeFunctionscan.c
When there is a Set Returning Function emitting tuples.
nodeTidscan.c
When there is a query that accesses data using a
In response to Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 2007-01-02 at 18:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In response to Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please change things to save the stat() syscall when the feature is not
in use.
Do you have a
i
Is int a reasonable domain for directions? I'd think there would be
at most values.
Er, at most two.
enum is better, true
tree fields: FORWARD, BACKWARD, ABSOLUTE
Cheers,
D
Cheers,
D
where is possible set direction of fetch statement.
any comments?
Regards
Pavel
Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I need new function
SPI_cursor_fetch_with_direction(Portal portal, int direction, long count)
where is possible set direction of fetch statement.
Huh? SPI_cursor_fetch already lets you specify forward or backward.
regards,
On 1/3/07, Hubert FONGARNAND [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not looking at http://gppl.moonbone.ru/ evgen potemkin. has ever made a
patch for WITH and CONNECT BY?
Nope, no good. This is what I started with last time and the
refactoring attempt at WITH is just too massive. As for CONNECT BY,
On 1/3/07, Mark Cave-Ayland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IIRC there were two issues - firstly the license for the patch was GPL
as opposed to BSD used for PostgreSQL
Yes, however Evgen was kind enough to grant me a BSD license for it
should I get it committed into PostgreSQL. However, with the
On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 04:19:19PM -0700, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On 1/3/07, Hubert FONGARNAND [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not looking at http://gppl.moonbone.ru/ evgen potemkin. has
ever made a patch for WITH and CONNECT BY?
Nope, no good. This is what I started with last time and the
On 1/3/07, David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I recall, it was decided long ago, and the conclusions were:
* Only BSD-compatibly licensed code goes in PostgreSQL's code base,
* PostgreSQL will only support the SQL:2003 standard WITH (RECURSIVE)
syntax in the main line code.
Yes, see
On Dec 21, 2006, at 9:56 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Thu, 2006-12-21 at 09:36 -0500, Matthew O'Connor wrote:
Richard Huxton wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
- improve RI check perf by caching small, static tables in each
backend
- apply index filter conditions on index scan to avoid heap lookup
Hello all,
a friend of mine ran into a problem installing PostgreSQL 8.0.9 on a
Windows XP Pro machine. Before anyone is asking: it has to be a 8.0.x
version and we even tried to install 8.2 and it did not work.
Ok, the problem is: after installing all the files the installer wants
to init the
On Jan 1, 2007, at 2:24 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
The comment, This should be improved someday sure sounds like a
TODO to me.
I don't know if it should make it to the TODO doc, as that lists
high-level/abstract feature-request-like items.
Given that the TODO list is the official
On Dec 29, 2006, at 12:30 PM, Chris Browne wrote:
How you get the work to spread consistently across 6 hours is a
challenge; personally, my preference would generally be to try to get
the work done ASAP, so the goal seems a tad off to me...
Agreed. If we're going to monkey with automatically
You just proved the case for why the units shouldn't be case sensitive:
On Dec 30, 2006, at 6:36 PM, Andrew Hammond wrote:
I agree. But perhaps the solution instead of failing is to throw a
warning to the effect of Not to be pedantic, but you said mb and
millibits as a unit doesn't make sense
On Jan 2, 2007, at 2:01 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Err, I think you misunderstood what I said. My implementation
uses SAVEPOINTs already. The point is having some API where you
do not have to care of you are already in a
On 1/2/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Err, I think you misunderstood what I said. My implementation uses
SAVEPOINTs already. The point is having some API where you do not have
to care of you are already in a transaction or not.
It's not that
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On the name of the option, it's not actually a data directory, so I'd just
call it --xlogdir, parallel to --datadir.
Seems reasonable. Patch modified is attached.
--
Euler Taveira de Oliveira
http://www.timbira.com/
*** ./doc/src/sgml/ref/initdb.sgml.orig
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Should this be cleared up (maybe a nice first project for lurking new
contributors)?\
Maybe.
If we don't want long forms for some reason, then a comment in the code
saying why would make sense.
I don't see a strong reason for not to do it. But if you look closely
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.
---
I wish to estimate the total cost for a given path of a query. This
path is a tree consists of nestloop, hashjoin, mergejoin as internal
nodes with seqscan or idxscan at the leaves.
My approach is to cost the path bottom-up, and invoke the
cost_nestloop, cost_merge_join etc.
The problem is that
Jochem van Dieten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/28/06, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
| [TODO item] Allow data to be pulled directly from indexes
| Another idea is to maintain a bitmap of heap pages where all rows are
| visible to all backends, and allow index lookups to reference that bitmap
uwcssa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The problem is that each join method has some value that seems to
change value each time I cost the SAME path.
There's a bug in your code; but you've not provided nearly enough detail
to identify exactly what it is.
regards, tom lane
Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I need new function
SPI_cursor_fetch_with_direction(Portal portal, int direction, long
count)
where is possible set direction of fetch statement.
Huh? SPI_cursor_fetch already lets you specify forward or backward.
regards,
48 matches
Mail list logo
