Craig Ringer Thursday 07 of July 2011 01:05:48
> On 6/07/2011 11:00 PM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
> > I think IPC for fast shout down all backends and wait for report
> > processing is quite enaugh.
>
> How do you propose to make that reliable, though?
>
> --
> Craig Ringer
>
> POST Newspapers
>
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> pg_upgrade's pg_scandir_internal() makes use of the non-standard %m
> format:
>
> pg_log(PG_FATAL, "could not open directory \"%s\": %m\n", dirname);
>
> Is this an oversight, or is there an undocumented assumption that this
> code will only be used on platforms wher
pg_upgrade's pg_scandir_internal() makes use of the non-standard %m
format:
pg_log(PG_FATAL, "could not open directory \"%s\": %m\n", dirname);
Is this an oversight, or is there an undocumented assumption that this
code will only be used on platforms where %m works?
(Which platforms don't ha
Hackers,
Commitfest 2 continues to progress ... slowly. At this point, we have
no hope of wrapping it up early; my best hope is to at least finish on time.
Statistics:
* 1/2 of patches are still pending development: 12 waiting on author,
and 18 waiting for review. In addition, 7 patches are wait
On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 15:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I ran into problems with that before... I think with the I/O functions.
> > I don't think that's a problem here, but I thought I'd ask.
>
> I think it'd probably be all right to do that. The places where you
> might find shortcuts being taken
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 08:35:55PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > While a mere "LOCK bar.x" is sufficient to get a clean cutover with respect
> > to
> > parsing, it fails to invalidate plans. To really cover all bases, you need
> > some no-op ac
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
>> On Jun12, 2011, at 23:39 , Robert Haas wrote:
>>> So, the majority (60%) of the excess spinning appears to be due to
>>> SInvalReadLock. A good chunk are due to ProcArrayLock (25%).
>>
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 06 14:02:13 -0400 2011:
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> wrote:
>> > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 06 12:40:39 -0400 2011:
>> >
>> >> This patch removes an i
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> Maybe this is a stupid idea, but what about changing the logic so
>> that, if we get back InvalidOid, we AcceptInvalidationMessages() and
>> retry if the counter has advanced? ISTM that might cover the example
>> you mentioned in your last post
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 10:25:12PM +0200, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> *** a/src/backend/commands/view.c
> --- b/src/backend/commands/view.c
> --- 227,257
> atcmd->def = (Node *) lfirst(c);
> atcmds = lappend(atcmds, atcmd);
>
On 6/07/2011 11:00 PM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
I think IPC for fast shout down all backends and wait for report
processing is quite enaugh.
How do you propose to make that reliable, though?
--
Craig Ringer
POST Newspapers
276 Onslow Rd, Shenton Park
Ph: 08 9381 3088 Fax: 08 9388 2258
ABN:
On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 16:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> When we did the migration to git, we decided to leave the old
> postgresql git repository around "for a while", for people who had
> clones around it. This is the repository that was live updated from
> cvs while we were using cvs, and doe
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:06:40PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:44:35PM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
> >> So I was the victim assigned to review this patch.
> >
> > Thanks for doing so.
>
> This discussion seems to have
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 06 14:02:13 -0400 2011:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 06 12:40:39 -0400 2011:
> >
> >> This patch removes an impressive amount of boilerplate code and
> >> replaces it with
On 07/06/2011 04:41 PM, Brar Piening wrote:
I certainly could. But as those files are Andrew's work which isn't
really related to VS2010 build and could as well be commited
seperately I don't want to take credit for it.
I'll remove my versions from the patch (v9 probably) if those files
get c
Original Message
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Review of VS 2010 support patches
From: Craig Ringer
To: Brar Piening
Date: 06.07.2011 14:56
It turns out that VS2010v8.patch is also attached to the same message.
Not that you'd know it from the ... interesting ... way the web ui
pre
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 19:25 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I'm really hurting
>> for is some code review.
>
> I'm trying to get my head into this patch. I have a couple questions:
>
> Does this happen to be based on some academic research? I don't
Jeff Davis writes:
> On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 12:51 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
>>> To get into some more details: how exactly would this constructor be
>>> generated on the fly? Clearly we want only one underlying C function
>>> that accepts somet
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:44:35PM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
>> So I was the victim assigned to review this patch.
>
> Thanks for doing so.
This discussion seems to have died off. Let's see if we can drive
this forward to some conclusion.
I t
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 04:31:53PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> When we did the migration to git, we decided to leave the old
> postgresql git repository around "for a while", for people who had
> clones around it. This is the repository that was live updated from
> cvs while we were using cvs,
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 09:55:01AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On first blush, that looks a whole lot cleaner. ?I'll try to find some
> > time for a more detailed review soon.
>
> This seems not to compile for me:
>
> gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissin
On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 19:25 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I'm really hurting
> for is some code review.
I'm trying to get my head into this patch. I have a couple questions:
Does this happen to be based on some academic research? I don't
necessarily expect it to be; just thought I'd ask.
Here is m
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 06 12:40:39 -0400 2011:
>
>> This patch removes an impressive amount of boilerplate code and
>> replaces it with something much more compact. I like that. In the
>> interest of full disclosure
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 06 12:40:39 -0400 2011:
> This patch removes an impressive amount of boilerplate code and
> replaces it with something much more compact. I like that. In the
> interest of full disclosure, I suggested this approach to KaiGai at
> PGCon, so I'm bias
On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 12:51 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > To get into some more details: how exactly would this constructor be
> > generated on the fly? Clearly we want only one underlying C function
> > that accepts something like:
> > range_i
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Gurjeet Singh
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 9:48 PM, Josh Kupershmidt
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Gurjeet Singh
> >> wrote:
> >> > Attached an updated patch.
> >> >
> >> > If you
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> To get into some more details: how exactly would this constructor be
> generated on the fly? Clearly we want only one underlying C function
> that accepts something like:
> range_internal(lower, upper, flags, Oid rangetype)
> So how do we get t
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> The attached patch is rebased one to consolidate routines to remove objects
> using the revised get_object_address().
>
> The new RemoveObjects() replaces the following routines; having
> similar structure.
> - RemoveRelations
> - RemoveType
On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 09:10 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > There's some slight ugliness around the NULL/infinity business, but I
> > think that I could be convinced. I'd like to avoid confusion between
> > NULL and infinity if possible.
>
> I was thinking that if you passed 'i' for one of the bound
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> When we did the migration to git, we decided to leave the old
> postgresql git repository around "for a while", for people who had
> clones around it. This is the repository that was live updated from
> cvs while we were using cvs, and does
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 9:48 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Gurjeet Singh
>> wrote:
>> > Attached an updated patch.
>> >
>> > If you find it ready for committer, please mark it so in the commitfest
>> > app
On Wed, 06 Jul 2011 07:59:12 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 5/07/2011 9:05 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 15:02, Robert Haas
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Radosław Smogura
wrote:
I asked about crash reports becaus of at this time there was
thread about
crashing
When we did the migration to git, we decided to leave the old
postgresql git repository around "for a while", for people who had
clones around it. This is the repository that was live updated from
cvs while we were using cvs, and does *not* correspond to the current
git repository when it comes to
Hi,
On May 27, 2011, at 11:43 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> One of our customers is interested in being able to store original
> timezone along with a certain timestamp.
>
> It is currently possible to store a TZ in a separate column, but this is
> a bit wasteful and not very convenient anyway.
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
What I do wonder though is if the ; appending should real
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On first blush, that looks a whole lot cleaner. I'll try to find some
> time for a more detailed review soon.
This seems not to compile for me:
gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 13:06 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
>> > It would be something like: range_co(1,8)::int8range
>> >
>> > (just so we're comparing apples to apples)
>> >
>> > The intermediate
On 6/07/2011 2:15 AM, Brar Piening wrote:
I've replied on-list see:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-07/msg00066.php
Ah, sorry I missed that. I generally can't keep up with -hackers and
have to rely on being cc'd.
The patch (VS2010v7.patch) seems to mix significant changes
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
1. De-archive the file to RECOVERYXLOG
2. If RECOVERYXLOG is valid, remove a pre-existing one and rename
RECOVERYXLOG t
Yeah, I noticed that myself recently.
On 6 July 2011 12:48, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Nope. I think it's only in there because of lazyness, in general. %lu
> seems to be the correct choice.
Yes, it's the correct choice.
>> Thirdly, why are we not trying to print a textual message?
>
> I'd say t
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 17:29, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> About half of our code prints GetLastError() using %d after casting it
> to int (actually, about half of that half uses %i, another thing to sort
> out, perhaps), and the other half uses %lu without casting. I gather
> from online documentat
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> 1. De-archive the file to RECOVERYXLOG
>>> 2. If RECOVERYXLOG is valid, remove a pre-existing one and rename
>>> RECOVERYXLOG to the correct name
>>> 3. Replay the file with the correct
(2011/06/02 17:39), Pavel Stehule wrote:
> This patch enhances a GET DIAGNOSTICS statement functionality. It adds
> a possibility of access to exception's data. These data are stored on
> stack when exception's handler is activated - and these data are
> access-able everywhere inside handler. It ha
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>> What about outputing something like the following message in that case?
>>>
>>> if ("walsender receives SIGUSR2")
>>> ereport(LOG, "terminating walsender process due to
>>> administrator command");
>>
>> ...which doesn't explain the
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> 1. De-archive the file to RECOVERYXLOG
>> 2. If RECOVERYXLOG is valid, remove a pre-existing one and rename
>> RECOVERYXLOG to the correct name
>> 3. Replay the file with the correct name
>
> Yes please, that makes sense.
Will do.
>>> Thos
Hello.
Any news on these issues? Becuase beta3 is scheduled for July 11th...
You wrote:
MM> On Jun 6
MM> (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-06/msg00272.php),
MM> Pavel discovered an issue with PQsetvalue that could cause libpq to
MM> wander off into unallocated memory that was pr
Tom Lane wrote:
>>> In fdwhandler.sgml, chapter fdwhandler has only one subsection
>>> (fdw-routines).
>>>
>>> If there is only one subsection, no table of contents is generated
in
>>> the chapter.
[...]
> I don't know how to change the doc toolchain to do that either. But
> on reflection it seem
47 matches
Mail list logo
