On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Attached is a patch that removes the use of the flat auth file during
client authentication, instead using regular access to the pg_auth
catalogs. As previously discussed, this implies pushing the
authentication work down to
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 01:12:20PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
This is pretty cool, IMO. Admittedly, it does seem hard to bottle it,
but you managed it, so it's not completely impossible. What you could
for this kind of thing is a series of patches and driver scripts, so
you build PostgreSQL
On Sat, 2009-08-29 at 01:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Attached is a patch that removes the use of the flat auth file during
client authentication, instead using regular access to the pg_auth
catalogs. As previously discussed, this implies pushing the
authentication work down to InitPostgres.
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 14:44 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
I'd previously implemented this just by copying and pasting and making
some changes, perhaps not the most desirable way but I thought adding
another parameter to all existing invocations would be a bit
excessive.
That's the way I would
* Simon Riggs (si...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
I get the feeling that part of the inspiration for this is that Hot
Standby must maintain this file. If not, I'm curious as to the reasons
for doing this. No objections however, just curiosity.
The impetus for these changes was the performance
Greg Stark gsst...@mit.edu writes:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
... I didn't yet do anything
about the idea of falling back to connecting to postgres when the
specified target DB doesn't exist, but other than that small change
I think it's about ready to
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Specifically, should I remove the parts of the HS patch that refresh
those files?
Yes. This was the last part that I was afraid might have insurmountable
problems. There are some bits yet to do but they're in the nature of
crank-turning, I believe. I
new one at http://zlew.org/postgresql_static_check/scan-build-2009-08-29-3/
archive at :
http://zlew.org/postgresql_static_check/postgresql_static_check_29thAugust2009.tar.xz
as always, comments are welcomed. And constructive explanation of any
wrong-results will be relayed to clang-checker
We still have things like this showing division by zero:
Assert(activeTapes 0);
1913slotsPerTape = (state-memtupsize - state-mergefirstfree) /
activeTapes;
It looks like if you marked ExceptionalCondition() as never returning
then it should hide this.
--
greg
On 29 Aug 2009, at 17:35, Greg Stark wrote:
We still have things like this showing division by zero:
Assert(activeTapes 0);
1913 slotsPerTape = (state-memtupsize - state-mergefirstfree) /
activeTapes;
It looks like if you marked ExceptionalCondition() as never returning
then it should
Oh, I think I see what's happening. Our assertions can still be turned
off at run-time with the variable assert_enabled.
Hm, you would have to replace assert_enabled with a #define in
postgres.h and then do something about the guc.c code which assigns to
it.
On another note is there any way to
Robert Haas wrote:
Both committers and non-committers are currently suffering from the
fact that there is not a lot of time in the year which is set aside
for development, i.e. neither CommitFest-time nor beta-time. To fix
this problem, we can:
1. Make CommitFests shorter.
2. Make
Tom Lane wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
The final CommitFest began November 11, 2008. It closed March 25,
2009 (+ 144 days). Beta1 was released April 15, 2009 (+ 21 days).
I'm not entirely clear on what was
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Jan Urba?ski wrote:
Patch -p1 attached.
Applied, thanks
Backpatched to 8.4.X, which is the only backbranch where this fix is
needed.
--
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.ushttp://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+
On Sat, 2009-08-29 at 09:00 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Simon Riggs (si...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
I get the feeling that part of the inspiration for this is that Hot
Standby must maintain this file. If not, I'm curious as to the reasons
for doing this. No objections however, just
On Sat, 2009-08-29 at 11:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Specifically, should I remove the parts of the HS patch that refresh
those files?
Yes. This was the last part that I was afraid might have insurmountable
problems. There are some bits yet to do
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 4:02 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 14:44 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
I'd previously implemented this just by copying and pasting and making
some changes, perhaps not the most desirable way but I thought adding
another parameter to
Tom Lane escreveu:
Adriano Lange alange0...@gmail.com writes:
I need to control the size of a memory context on the fly and take
some actions when
the used memory exceeds a defined size.
The existing places that do that sort of thing do their own counting
of how much they've allocated.
I
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Simon Riggssi...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
WALInsertLock is heavily contended and likely always will be even if we
apply some of the planned fixes.
I've lost any earlier messages, could you resend the raw data on which
this is based?
Some callers of WALInsertLock
19 matches
Mail list logo
