The server is already turned off and in our nyc office (I'm based in the
ldn one). But I'm pretty sure its a LSI MegaRAID SAS 9285.
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 7/10/13 12:53 PM, Benedikt Grundmann wrote:
The server will probably be most
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com writes:
AGG_PLAIN sometimes does sorts, but it thinks they are free. Also, under
explain analyze it does not explicitly report whether the sort was
external
or not, nor report the disk or
(2013/07/19 0:41), Greg Smith wrote:
On 7/18/13 11:04 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On a system where fsync is sometimes very very slow, that
might result in the checkpoint overrunning its time budget - but SO
WHAT?
Checkpoints provide a boundary on recovery time. That is their only purpose.
You
Hi,
I was going through the archives and there was a discussion about
using ini file to setup
replication.(http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4c9876b4.9020...@enterprisedb.com).
I think if we work on this proposal and separate out the replication
setup from postgresql.conf file then we can
Please find updated hyperlinks:
Below I have explained how to to use ini file for failback safe stadby setup:
While discussing feature of fail-back safe standby
(CAF8Q-Gy7xa60HwXc0MKajjkWFEbFDWTG=ggyu1kmt+s2xcq...@mail.gmail.com)
On 2013-07-19 14:54:16 +0530, Samrat Revagade wrote:
I was going through the archives and there was a discussion about
using ini file to setup
replication.(http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4c9876b4.9020...@enterprisedb.com).
I think if we work on this proposal and separate out the
On 18 July 2013 22:27, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Dean,
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
Thanks! This is really looking quite good, but it's a bit late and I'm
going on vacation tomorrow, so I didn't quite want to commit it yet. :)
Apologies on this taking a bit
I have couple of questions.
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I've been studying the bug reported at
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20130617235236.GA1636@jeremyevans.local
that the planner can do the wrong thing with queries like
SELECT * FROM
i
On 19 July 2013 04:09, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 7/18/13 11:03 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
Wasn't there a wiki page about this
feature which might also help? Bigger question- is it correct for the
latest version of the patch?
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/RLS has
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The changes here make it impossible to write a bgworker which properly
works in 9.3 and 9.4. Was that intended? If so, the commit message
should mention the compatibility break...
Yeah, sorry, I probably should have
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com wrote:
I'm of the opinion that we ought to extract the parts of the patch
that hold the VM pin for longer, review those separately, and if
they're good and desirable, apply them.
I'm confused. My patch holds a VM page pinned for
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The changes here make it impossible to write a bgworker which properly
works in 9.3 and 9.4. Was that intended? If so, the commit message
Hi,
On 2013-07-19 08:23:25 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The changes here make it impossible to write a bgworker which properly
works in 9.3 and 9.4. Was that intended? If so, the commit message
should mention the
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
To me, the major advantage of removing SnapshotNow is to force all
third-party code to reevaluate. But that could be just as well
achieved by renaming it to, say, SnapshotImmediate. If
On 2013-07-19 08:57:01 +0900, Inoue, Hiroshi wrote:
I had the idea they were used for a client-side implementation of WHERE
CURRENT OF. Perhaps that's dead code and could be removed entirely?
It's been reported that ODBC still uses them.
Though PostgreSQL's TID is similar to Orale's
*for example: for failback safe standby.*
I think that introducing another configuration format is a pretty bad
idea. While something new might not turn out to be as bad, we've seen
how annoying a separate configuration format turned out for
recovery.conf.
Its not totally different way of
On 2013-07-19 01:27:41 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
To me, the major advantage of removing SnapshotNow is to force all
third-party code to reevaluate. But that could be just as well
achieved by renaming it to, say, SnapshotImmediate. If there are
Hi.I'm a little confused. 1.I have source code 9.2.4. version
fromhttp://www.postgresql.org/ftp/source/ 2.I want to add new alghoritm to
index nested loops join, merge join and hash join. I have Executor catalog in
src catalag containing nodeHash.c, nodeHasjoin.c, nodeMergejoin and
On 7/19/13 3:53 AM, KONDO Mitsumasa wrote:
Recently, a user who think system availability is important uses
synchronous replication cluster.
If your argument for why it's OK to ignore bounding crash recovery on
the master is that it's possible to failover to a standby, I don't think
that is
(2013/07/19 22:03), Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-07-19 08:57:01 +0900, Inoue, Hiroshi wrote:
I had the idea they were used for a client-side implementation of WHERE
CURRENT OF. Perhaps that's dead code and could be removed entirely?
It's been reported that ODBC still uses them.
Though
Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com writes:
I took a look at this patch too. I didn't read all the code in detail,
but there was one area I wondered about --- is it still necessary to
add the new field rowsec_relid to RangeTblEntry?
As far as I can see, it is only used in the new function
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 2:53 PM, David Christensen da...@endpoint.com wrote:
Hey folks, this corrects typos going back to
75c6519ff68dbb97f73b13e9976fb8075bbde7b8 where EUC_JIS_2004 and
SHIFT_JIS_2004 were first added.
These typos are present in all supported major versions of PostgreSQL,
On 07/18/2013 09:20 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The new jsonfuncs.c has some confusing typedef scheme. For example, it
has a bunch of definitions like this:
typedef struct getState
{
...
} getState, *GetState;
So GetState is a pointer to getState. I have never seen that kind of
Ashutosh Bapat ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com writes:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
For there to *be* a unique appropriate outer join, we need to require
that a LATERAL-using qual clause that's under an outer join contain
lateral references only to the
On 07/18/2013 11:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:27:21AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
It's always annoyed me that pgindent insists on adjusting vertical
whitespace around #else and related commands. This has, for example,
rendered
Greetings,
We've run into a curious case and I'd like to solicit feedback
regarding a possible change to the access rights required to acquire
locks on a relation. Specifically, we have a process which normally
INSERTs into a table and another process which Exclusive locks that
same
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:56 PM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
Please find attached a PoC patch to implement $subject.
So far, with a lot of help from Andrew Gierth, I've roughed out an
implementation which allows you to ALTER FOREIGN TABLE so it inherits
a local table.
TBD: CREATE
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2013-07-20 00:49:11 +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Using SnapshotSelf instead of SnapshotNow for currtid_ () wouldn't
matter.
I think it actually might. You could get into dicey situations if you
use currtid_ in a query performing updates or
I've even proposed that in the past in
20130225211533.gd3...@awork2.anarazel.de . I plan to propose an updated
version of that patch (not allowing numeric 2nd level ids) for the next
CF.
So you can just do stuff like:
server.foo.grand_unified_config = value.
Sounds good to me. I can
(2013/07/18 21:46), Robert Haas wrote:
There seems to be a consensus that we should try to get rid of
SnapshotNow entirely now that we have MVCC catalog scans, so I'm
attaching two patches that together come close to achieving that goal:
...
With that done, the only remaining uses of
On 2013-07-20 00:49:11 +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
(2013/07/18 21:46), Robert Haas wrote:
There seems to be a consensus that we should try to get rid of
SnapshotNow entirely now that we have MVCC catalog scans, so I'm
attaching two patches that together come close to achieving that goal:
Robert Haas escribió:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Why not tell people to use SnapshotDirty if they need a
not-guaranteed-consistent result? At least then it's pretty obvious
that you're getting some randomness in with your news.
On further
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
if (lockmode == AccessShareLock)
aclresult = pg_class_aclcheck(reloid, GetUserId(),
ACL_SELECT);
+ else if (lockmode == RowExclusiveLock)
+ aclresult = pg_class_aclcheck(reloid, GetUserId(),
+
On 07/15/2013 10:19 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
On Thu, 2013-07-11 at 10:51 -0400, Nicholas White wrote:
I've attached a revised version that fixes the issues above:
I'll get to this soon, sorry for the delay.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
So ... are you doing a final review of this for the CF,
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Rod Taylor rod.tay...@gmail.com wrote:
A poorly coded trigger on the referencing table has the ability to break
foreign keys, and as a result create a database which cannot be dumped and
reloaded.
The BEFORE DELETE trigger accidentally does RETURN NEW, which
On 07/18/2013 10:39 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
To scan the index, we first obtain the TID of index tuple for page 0. If
this returns a valid TID, we read that tuple to determine the min/max bounds
for this page range. If it returns invalid, then the range is unsummarized,
and the scan must
Robert Haas escribió:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think seeing otherwise invisible rows is useful in pgrowlocks. It
helps observe the effects on tuples written by concurrent transactions
during experimentation. But then, maybe this
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Robert Haas escribió:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Why not tell people to use SnapshotDirty if they need a
not-guaranteed-consistent result? At least then it's pretty
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Robert Haas escribió:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think seeing otherwise invisible rows is useful in pgrowlocks. It
helps observe the effects on tuples
A poorly coded trigger on the referencing table has the ability to break
foreign keys, and as a result create a database which cannot be dumped and
reloaded.
The BEFORE DELETE trigger accidentally does RETURN NEW, which suppresses
the DELETE action by the foreign key trigger. This allows the
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
if (lockmode == AccessShareLock)
aclresult = pg_class_aclcheck(reloid, GetUserId(),
ACL_SELECT);
+ else if (lockmode ==
Robert Haas escribió:
4. If we use GetActiveSnapshot, all the comments about about a fresh
MVCC snapshot still apply. However, the snapshot in question could be
even more stale, especially in repeatable read or serializable mode.
However, this might be thought a more consistent behavior than
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com writes:
AGG_PLAIN sometimes does sorts, but it thinks they are free. Also, under
explain analyze it does not explicitly report whether the sort was external
or not, nor report the disk or
Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
DISTINCT (and also ORDER BY) properties of aggregates are implemented
at runtime; the planner doesn't really do anything about them, except
suppress the choice it might otherwise make of
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:41:14AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:56 PM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
Please find attached a PoC patch to implement $subject.
So far, with a lot of help from Andrew Gierth, I've roughed out an
implementation which allows you to
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Rod Taylor rod.tay...@gmail.com wrote:
A poorly coded trigger on the referencing table has the ability to break
foreign keys, and as a result create a database which cannot be dumped and
reloaded.
This is a known
One more change was required to add both the users in each node's db as
super users and replication started!!
Thanks.
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
Hi!
On 2013-07-19 07:31:07 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
If this behavior is confirmed, I think
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Rod Taylor rod.tay...@gmail.com wrote:
A poorly coded trigger on the referencing table has the ability to break
foreign keys, and as a result create a
*I am not the best specialist about logical replication, but as it
looks to be a requirement to have 2 nodes with different system
identifiers, you shouldn't link 1 node to another node whose data
folder has been created from the base backup of the former (for
example create the 2nd node based on
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:47 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Some of the rest of us would like to hear those reasons, because my
immediate reaction is that the patch must be broken by design. WITH
ORDINALITY should not be needing to mess with the fundamental evaluation
semantics of
some Salesforce folks that would be me! It looks like I didn't quite
communicate to Tom just what I was looking for as I do indeed want to have
a variable number of any types, as:
CREATE AGGREGATE FOO ( ANYELEMENT, more types, VARIADIC any) (
...
STYPE = ANYARRAY
...)
so the corresponding
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Rod Taylor rod.tay...@gmail.com wrote:
A poorly coded trigger on the
Hello,
What is the purpose of the [ AND ... ] at the end of the WHEN clause?
Is that for later releases, when presumably additional filter_variables
will be introduced? Right now, if I add AND tag IN ... I get an
ERROR: filter variable tag specified more than once
Joe
--
Sent via
New version:
- fix returning after values if there are not before
- add more regression tests
I'd like to hear/read any feedback ;)
Regards,
Karol
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/update.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/update.sgml
index 90b9208..eba35f0 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/update.sgml
+++
This function appears to believe that it can PG_CATCH any random error
and then just carry on, without doing a subtransaction cleanup. This
is as wrong as can be. It might be all right if we had sufficiently
narrow constraints on what could happen inside the PG_TRY block, but in
point of fact
Markus Wanner mar...@bluegap.ch writes:
- per-installation (not even per-cluster) DSO availability
If you install PostGIS 1.5 on a system, then it's just impossible to
bring another cluster (of the same PostgreSQL major version), let
On Debian, that should be well possible.
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 02:47:06PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
So I'm inclined to propose that SPI itself should offer some mechanism
for cleaning up tuple tables at subtransaction abort. We could just
have it automatically throw away tuple tables made in the
(2013/07/20 1:11), Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2013-07-20 00:49:11 +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Using SnapshotSelf instead of SnapshotNow for currtid_ () wouldn't
matter.
I think it actually might. You could get into dicey situations if you
use currtid_
Joe Abbate j...@freedomcircle.com writes:
What is the purpose of the [ AND ... ] at the end of the WHEN clause?
Is that for later releases, when presumably additional filter_variables
will be introduced? Right now, if I add AND tag IN ... I get an
Yes. I had other filter variables in some
Andres Freund escribió:
On 2013-07-19 08:23:25 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
And I'd also propose getting rid
of bgw_sighup and bgw_sigterm in both branches, while we're at it.
AFAICT, they don't add any functionality, and they're basically
unusable for dynamically started background
60 matches
Mail list logo
