On 03/07/2013 12:42 PM, Ray Stell wrote:
What Tom said works for me. Here is a page that gives an example and I think
it demonstrates that the root CA does not allow everybody in the gate, the
chain has to be in place:
Original Message-
From: gsst...@gmail.com [mailto:gsst...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Greg Stark
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2013 4:59 PM
To: Dann Corbit
Cc: Bruce Momjian; Peter Geoghegan; Robert Haas; Tom Lane; PG Hackers
Subject: Re: Why do we still perform a check for pre-sorted input within
On Friday, March 08, 2013 11:21 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 12.02.2013 11:03, Amit Kapila wrote:
+ /*
+ * equivalent_tlists
+ *returns whether two traget lists are equivalent
+ *
+ * We consider two target lists equivalent if both have
+ * only Var entries and resjunk of each
While hacking on the writable-foreign-tables patch, my attention was
drawn to what seems to be a pre-existing bug. Consider the section
of ExecDelete() that computes the results for DELETE RETURNING:
/* Process RETURNING if present */
if (resultRelInfo-ri_projectReturning)
{
On 8 March 2013 03:31, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I also see the checksum patch is taking a beating. I wanted to step
back and ask what percentage of known corruptions cases will this
checksum patch detect? What percentage of these corruptions would
filesystem checksums have
On 3/1/13 1:40 AM, Jonathan Rogers wrote:
I've been thinking about both of these issues and decided to try a
different approach. This patch adds GUC options for two external
commands
This is a reasonable approach for a proof of concept patch. I like the
idea you're playing with here, as a
On 9 March 2013 01:01, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Thom.
I don't mind being an admin again.
Can you gather together all of the projects suggested on this thread and
use them to create updated text for the GSOC page? If you don't have
web repo access, I can create a patch, but if
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 1:37 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
+ para
+ Concurrent indexes based on a literalPRIMARY KEY/ or an
literal
+ EXCLUSION/ constraint need to be dropped with
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 1:46 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Why do you want to temporarily mark it as valid? I don't see any
requirement that it is set to that during validate_index() (which imo is
badly named, but...).
I'd just set it to valid in the same transaction that does
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Dann Corbit dcor...@connx.com wrote:
There is no such thing as a quicksort that never goes quadratic. It was
formally proven
The median of medians selection of the pivot gives you O(n*log(n)).
--
greg
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 3:48 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for updating the patch!
- SELECT reltoastidxid
- FROM info_rels i
JOIN pg_catalog.pg_class c
-
-Original Message-
From: gsst...@gmail.com [mailto:gsst...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Greg Stark
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 11:39 AM
To: Dann Corbit
Cc: Bruce Momjian; Peter Geoghegan; Robert Haas; Tom Lane; PG Hackers
Subject: Re: Why do we still perform a check for pre-sorted input
A Machine-Checked Proof of the Average-Case Complexity of Quicksort in Coq
By Eelis van der Weegen and James McKinna
Institute for Computing and Information Sciences
Radboud University Nijmegen
Heijendaalseweg 135, 6525 AJ Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Contains a formal proof, validated by machine
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Dann Corbit dcor...@connx.com wrote:
Median of medians selection of the pivot gives you O(n*log(n)).
No. It does make O(n*n) far less probable, but it does not eliminate it.
If it were possible, then introspective sort would be totally without purpose.
No
Yes, you are right. I knew of a median of medians technique for pivot
selection and I mistook that for the median of medians median selection
algorithm (which it definitely isn't).
I was not aware of a true linear time selection of the median algorithm {which
is what median of medians
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 10:22 PM, Dann Corbit dcor...@connx.com wrote:
Yes, you are right. I knew of a median of medians technique for pivot
selection and I mistook that for the median of medians median selection
algorithm (which it definitely isn't).
I was not aware of a true linear time
-Original Message-
From: gsst...@gmail.com [mailto:gsst...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Greg Stark
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 5:16 PM
To: Dann Corbit
Cc: Bruce Momjian; Peter Geoghegan; Robert Haas; Tom Lane; PG Hackers
Subject: Re: Why do we still perform a check for pre-sorted input
Greg Smith wrote:
I think I can see how to construct such an example for the btrfs
version, but having you show that explicitly (preferably with a whole
sample session executing it) will also help reviewers. Remember: if
you want to get your submission off to a good start, the reviewer
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 4:50 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 3:48 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks for updating the patch!
- SELECT
reltoastidxid
-
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 2:42 AM, Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com wrote:
Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
I found one typo in the document of MV. Please see the attached
patch.
Pushed. Thanks!
Thanks!
I found that pg_dump always fails against 9.2 or before server because
of the MV
20 matches
Mail list logo
