On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hackers et al... I was wondering if there are any outstanding issues
> that need to be resolved in terms of the clustered index/bitmap changes?
>
> >From the testing that I have done, plus a couple of others it is a net
> win (at least from DBA space).
I am currently finishing off an improved VACUUM implementation for
bitmaps. The rest of the patch is ready for review.
I will try and post a patch within 24 hours.
Gavin
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
> I'm seeing a segfault on a size TPC-H size 10 database. The patch and
> code are:
> - bitmap patch from 12 Mar
> - 8.3 dev from 27 Mar
Thanks Mark. I tracked this down. I'll post a new patch soon.
Gavin
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain an
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> bitmap=# SELECT count(*) FROM bitmaptest
> WHERE val1 in (1,7)
> AND val0 IN (4,3)
> ;
>
> ERROR: XX000: unknown stream type 2
> LOCATION: stream_add_node, tidbitmap.c:1033
Thanks. Turned out t
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> We put in a workaround a long time ago to make it possible to tell the
> difference between btree and hash special space, which are also the same
> size: there's an unused 16 bits in hash special space that we fill with
> a specific value. As of 8.2 this does
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 08:26:16PM +0100, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
> >>Isn't Gavin Sherry working on this? Haven't read anything from him
> >>lately...
> >
> >Me neither. Swallowed by Greenplum and France.
>
> Hm.. good for him, I guess!
Yes
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 05:56:14PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> This technique would be useful for any table with historical data keyed
> by date or timestamp. It would also be useful for data where a
> time-of-insert component is implicit, such as many major entity tables
> where the object ids are
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 11:47:31AM -0500, Chris Browne wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Riggs) writes:
> > I think we have an opportunity to bypass the legacy-of-thought that
> > Oracle has left us and implement something more usable.
>
> This seems like a *very* good thing to me, from a couple o
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 02:38:21PM -0500, Chris Browne wrote:
> Ron Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Or am I missing something?
>
> Well, this can head in two directions...
>
> 1. Suppose we're not using an "organize in CLUSTER order" approach.
>
> If the data is getting added in roughly "
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 08:17:41PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 20:03 +0100, Gavin Sherry wrote:
>
> > I think Simon's approach is
> > probably more complex from an implementation POV.
>
> Much of the implementation is exactly the same, and I&#
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 08:51:30PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > That's what I would have done if it was easier to do with constraint
> > exclusion
> > (did only date partitioning), as the reporting queries will always have
> > some
> > server (stats by services, each service being installed on
Hi Simon,
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 05:56:14PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Segment Exclusion
> -
>
> After we note that a segment is read-only we can scan the segment and
> record min/max values for all columns. These are then "implicit
> constraints", which can then be used for seg
Hi Simon,
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 03:08:08PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Do people really "like" running all that DDL? There is significant
> manpower cost in implementing and maintaining a partitioning scheme,
> plus significant costs in getting it wrong.
Well... that's impossible for me to say
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 07:25:00AM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 03:06 +0100, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > If the exclusion is executor driven, the planner cannot help but
> > create a seq scan plan. The planner will think you're returning 100X
> > r
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 04:51:04PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 03:06 +0100, Gavin Sherry wrote:
>
> > > If people with large tables like partitioning why is Oracle moving
> > > towards automated partitioning in 11g? Automated partitioning was one o
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 09:30:10PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > We cannot perform partition exclusion using this type of WHERE clause at
> > > planning time because the CURRENT DATE function is STABLE.
> >
> > We can do the exact same thing -- if it's a direction people want to
> > take. In fa
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 08:07:18AM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 02:28 +0100, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 09:30:10PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > > > We cannot perform partition exclusion using this type of WHERE clause
> &g
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 11:49:50AM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 10:25 +0100, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > >
> > > Of course. It's an identical situation for both. Regrettably, none of
> > > your comments about dynamic partitioning and plann
Hi all,
Many of you will have read the dynamic partitioning thread here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00028.php
I've proposed an alternative approach, which we've called declarative
partitioning which is grammar based. This grammar was developed by Jeff
Cohen at Greenp
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 07:46:36PM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Jan 11, 2008 6:19 PM, Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Many of you will have read the dynamic partitioning thread here:
> >
> > http://archives.postgresql
On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 05:47:30PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 01:59 +0100, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > The syntax is half the problem, performance is the other.
>
> The syntax looks great to me, but I think it is about 5% of the problem,
> maybe less. I don
On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 04:01:19PM +0530, NikhilS wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > We did look at allowing general functions for partitioning and this
> > was one concern. The other is that we want to enforce that a row
> > only gets inserted into a single partition, so we wanted a
> > declarative syntax where
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:36:17AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Markus Schiltknecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Jeff Cohen wrote:
> >> If you don't define a "default" partition to handle outliers, the
> >> insert should fail with an error.
>
> > IMO, you should always have a "default" partition,
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 10:45:28PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In the proposed solution, hash and list partitions work for all types
> > that support an equality operator, and range partitions work for all
> > types that support fully-ordered comparison.
There's an apparently arbitary limit of 10,000,000 bytes in twophase.c
on the size of a two phase commit file. I can't see why this limit
exists.
I hit this limit by creating a prepared transaction which included
dropping a schema with about 25,000 objects in it and then trying to
commit it. The r
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 10:34:23AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > There's an apparently arbitary limit of 10,000,000 bytes in twophase.c
> > on the size of a two phase commit file. I can't see why this limit
> > exists.
&
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > PrepareStmt: PREPARE name AS prepare_query types_prepare_clause
> > prepare_store
>
> > There is a reasonably clear problem here. prepare_query encompasses much
> > of
On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Gavin, I will do the legwork on this if you wish. I think we need to
No matter. I intended to submit a patch to fix this.
> use DefElem to store the COPY params, rather than using specific fields
> in CopyStmt.
DefElem would have required modific
On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Gavin, I see where you are going with the patch; creating a list in
> gram.y and stuffing CopyStmt directly there. However, I can't find any
> other instance of our stuffing things like that in gram.y. We do have
> cases using options like COPY in
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Curt Sampson wrote:
[snip]
> What I'm thinking would be really cool would be to have an "offline"
> way of creating tables using a stand-alone program that would write
> the files at, one hopes, near disk speed.
Personally, I think there is some merit in this. Postgres can
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Curt Sampson wrote:
> > Given the very low parsing and 'planning' overhead, the real cost would be
> > WAL (the bootstrapper could fail and render the database unusable) and the
> > subsequent updating of on-disk relations.
>
> MS SQL Server, when doing a BULK INSERT or BCP,
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> Could some ppl test out archives.postgresql.org and let me know if they
> notice any differences in speed?
Marc,
A dramatic increase in performance.
Gavin
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscri
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> The code that bothered me about the CREATE DATABASE param processing
> was:
>
> /* process additional options */
> foreach(l, $5)
> {
> List *optitem = (List *) lfirst(l);
>
> switch (lfirsti(optitem))
> {
>
On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > We have been very fortunate to have avoided such problems since we
> > started six years ago, and I hope it never happens.
>
> There sure are a lot of arguments in the hackers list tho :) I do wish
> people would be a little less 'ad homin
This small patch reloads dynamic libraries whose modification time is
greater than that at the time it was initially loaded. This means that
connections do not need to be reinitialised when a library is recompiled.
There is a problem with this, however: if dlopen()'ing the new patch
fails, the fu
On Sun, 5 May 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2002 10:01:57 EDT, the world broke into rejoicing as
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > It is sunday morning and I have been musing about some PostgreSQL issues. As
> > some of you are aware, my dot com, dot died, and I am working on
Neil,
I've also been thinking about this but haven't had time to collect my
thoughts.
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> Histogram refinement can take place in two possible ways: online
> (as queries are executed, the histograms are updated immediately),
> or offline (the necessary data
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:
>
> CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE
> ...
> ON COMMIT DROP;
>
> pseudo-compatible with the SQL-standard of:
>
> ON COMMIT { DELETE | PRESERVE } ROWS;
>
> so one day PostgreSQL's grammar would look like:
>
> ...
> ON COMMIT { DROP | { DELETE | PRESERVE } ROWS
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Whereabouts in the code is the '*' expanded into the list of valid columns
See the rule 'target_el' in gram.y. The SelectStmt node is processed
further down the parser in analyze.c: see transformStmt(),
transformSelectStmt() and
On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:
>
> >
> > CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE
> > ...
> > ON COMMIT DROP;
> >
> > pseudo-compatible with the SQL-standard of:
> >
> > ON COMMIT { DELETE | PRESERVE
Slight bug in the previous patch. Logically (and according to SQL99's
treatment of ON COMMIT), it can be specified only for CREATE TEMP
TABLE. The patch throws an error if only CREATE TABLE has been specified.
Gavin
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Gavi
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > > We do, but as soon as you break the view by dropping an underlying
> > > object it fails to reconstruct. So having the original view definition
> > > at hand could be useful for some ALTER VIEW RECOMPILE command.
> >
> > Note that the ass
Hi all,
It occured to me on the plane home that now that CLUSTER is fixed we may
be able to put pg_index.indisclustered to use. If CLUSTER was to set
indisclustered to true when it clusters a heap according to the given
index, we could speed up sequantial scans. There are two possible ways.
1) P
On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It occured to me on the plane home that now that CLUSTER is fixed we may
> > be able to put pg_index.indisclustered to use. If CLUSTER was to set
> > indisclustered to true when it clust
On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > It occured to me on the plane home that now that CLUSTER is fixed we may
> > be able to put pg_index.indisclustered to use. If CLUSTER was to set
> > indisclustered to true whe
Attached is a revised version of my previous
ON COMMIT DROP
patch. This patch implements:
ON COMMIT { DROP | PRESERVE ROWS | DELETE ROWS }
The latter two are SQL99.
Sample usage:
---
template1=# begin;
BEGIN
template1=# create temp table a (a int) on commit drop;
CREATE
template1=# create tem
On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > template1=# create temp table a (a int) on commit drop;
> > ERROR: You must be inside a transaction to use ON COMMIT
>
> Surely that's only for ON COMMIT DROP, if you intend to of
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Justin Clift wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >
>
> > Still, I believe this should require a 7.2.2 release. Imagine a university
> > database server for a course for example - the students would just crash it
> > all the time.
>
> Hey yep, good po
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Justin Clift wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Whilst looking around for some more PostgreSQL related stuff, this
> message turned up:
>
> http://mail.wirex.com/pipermail/sardonix/2002-February/51.html
>
> The interesting bit is in an email messages included about halfway
> do
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Justin Clift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Am I understanding this right:
> >> - A PostgreSQL 7.2.1 server can be crashed if it gets passed certain
> >> date values which would be accepted by standard "fr
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Yes, but if you just check that the date given by the user matches the
> >> regular expression "[0-9]+-[0-9]+-[0-9]+", it's still possible to
> >&
Hi all,
I'm thinking that temporary views should be pretty trivial to
implement.
* Allow temporary views
This should be as simple as modifying gram.y (to set
ViewStmt->view->istemp) and some logic in RemoveTempRelations() to remove
the view's rule
* Require view using temporary tables to be te
Tom,
I submitted a patch for this a few days ago. Did it not hit pgsql-patches?
Gavin
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Emmanuel Charpentier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What do you think ?
>
> I think Gavin Sherry is already working on this.
>
>
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > My feeling is that either the view is temporary, fully, or it isn't. I
> > don't see having it in the public namespace _and_ removing it on session
> > exit as defensible.
>
> I disagree ... (and who said this
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> You want to hear something funny? When I see the standards quoted, I
> jump to the end to find out what the person says it really means. I
> find reading those standards painful. I am glad others are reading
> them.
HAH!
I did a degree in the hi
layed until we have
SQL99 diagnostics/error codes?
Gavin
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Gavin, have you answered these issues brought up about the patch?
>
> ---
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> I think this belongs on gborg. Would you create a project there?
Bruce,
A number of people at OSCON did consider this to be a nice contrib
feature. Out of curiousity, what makes it more suitable for gborg?
Thanks,
Gavin
--
---
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > As for your question (and, perhaps, SQL99) I don't seen how it makes any
> > > sense to specify ON COMMIT outside of a transaction block.
> >
> > Surely it does.
&
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ... do we want to modify every 7.2 error message?
>
> Nyet ... but I don't think tacking an offset onto the end of
> "parse error at or near foo" messages is likely to ca
On Sun, 18 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In strings.sql:
>
> > -- illegal string continuation syntax
> > SELECT 'first line'
> > ' - next line' /* this comment is not allowed here */
> > ' - third line'
> > AS "Illegal comment within continu
On Sun, 18 Aug 2002, Joe Conway wrote:
> Philip Warner wrote:
> > So the obvious question is - in the opinion of people who know the code,
> > can a function-result-cache be implemented with a lifetime of a single
> > statement, without butchering the function manager?
> >
>
> I don't know if
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > Should someone from the core team perhaps get in contact with this guy
> > and ask if he could get in contact with the development team before
> > publicizing any further security holes? AFAIK that is standard
> > operating procedure in most
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> ...
> > So I think that fixing the opaque problems in 7.2.x is simply
> > impossible. Given that, the question is whether we should make a 7.2.2
> > release with fixes for the other security holes (lpad(), rpad(),
> > reverse(), and the datetime overr
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
>
> > ...
> > > So I think that fixing the opaque problems in 7.2.x is simply
> > > impossible. Given that, the question is whether we should make a 7.2.2
> > > release
On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> The issue is data-provoked crashes vs. query-invoked crashes. Marc's
> point, and I think it was clear enough, is that you can't just poke at
> the TCP port and hope to do anything bad, which was the thrust of the
> argument, I think.
Bruce,
I am
Hi all,
I've just been thinking that the documentation doesn't cover the maximum
input string lengths for various data types well. Case in point, the
date/time code: there was a fair amount of discussion about validation
input, including checking for 'unreasonable' string lengths. Unless you
went
s all there is, we can come up with a solution.
>
> -------
>
> Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > > Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > &
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > But we should have some default to print some of the query,
>
> Why? So far you've been told by two different people (make that three
> now) that such a behavior is useless, and no one's weighed in in its
> fav
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > But we should have some default to print some of the query,
> >
> > Why? So far you've been told by two different
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> having never had to do it before, do you know what the procedure is?
I thought the announcement was forwarded to Bugtraq by Lamar?
---
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 23:35:59 -0400
From: Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fwd:
On Sun, 5 May 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2002 10:01:57 EDT, the world broke into rejoicing as
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > It is sunday morning and I have been musing about some PostgreSQL issues. As
> > some of you are aware, my dot com, dot died, and I am working on
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > One of my users is generating a notice message --> NOTICE: Adding
> > missing FROM-clause entry for table "msg202" It might be helpful to
> > dump out the query on notice messages like this, and it looks like a
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> U...how do I make the regression database!? Do I have to do
> installcheck instead of check?
yes
Database is 'regression'
g
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe com
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > That's a pretty good idea. Now, what format will the argument take: text
> > (NOTICE, ERROR, DEBUG, etc) or integer? The increasing severity is clear
> > with numbers but the cor
On Sun, 1 Sep 2002, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
>
>
> When is the beta freeze?
Today.
Gavin
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
me
On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >> Oh, didn't you put in that patch to provide a GUC level control?
> >
> > > Yes, but what level do you set it at to turn it off?
> >
> > FATAL? PANIC?
>
> He doesn't support those levels:
>
> test=> set log_min_error_statement = fata
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Database: MySQL Honorable Mention: PostgresSQL
Nothing wrong with that. From your list it seemed that in the categories
where there were competing open source and open source/commercial backed
software then the latter seemed to win over.
Thi
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> database market now includes SapDB for crying out loud - how can MySQL (and
> even postgres really) compete with that? And what about Firebird? I think
And berkeley db. *Easily* the most widely used open source database and
the most profitab
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
>
>
> It's probably a pretty basic question explained in some document I haven't seen
> but...if I do something like a CreateTupleDescCopy() how do I know my memory
> context owns everything allocated without following the code all the way
> through u
Hi all,
Does anyone else have an opinion on this? If not, I will implement it per
Bruce's commentary.
Gavin
On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > Okay, my bad. From my reading of the email exchange, I thought people
> > wanted this on -- alway
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Does anyone else have an opinion on this? If not, I will implement it per
> > Bruce's commentary.
>
> > On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> I think the second
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Since the flawed code is now in beta, it will need to be fixed. Do people
> > like the above solution or should I just revert to having a seperate
> > function for each GUC variable af
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Wim wrote:
>
>
> Hello guys,
>
> I have still problems with dumping my database
Wim,
This kind of error is not generated as a result of on-disk data
corruption. It is probably a hardware error: memory, cache, or CPU. Can
you replace any of these components on the mac
> Change log_min_error_statement to be off by default (Gavin)
I will be happy to provide this simple fix once I can get some indication
of the preferred implication. The discussion left off with Bruce prefering
that the GUC code for the *_min_* variables be variable specific where as
Tom saw no n
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > > DELETE FROM users_sessions WHERE changed < ('now'::timestamp - '1440
> > > minutes'::interval) AND name = 'fhnid';
> >
> > What does EXPLAIN show as the plan for that query? I'm guessing an
> > indexscan, and that the error was caused by
On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> OK, I will save this for 7.4. Sorry, Gavin. I missed this one for 7.3.
Such is life.
Gavin
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Hi all,
It occurs to me that opening web page on www.postgresql.org, asking the
user to select the mirror, is rather unprofessional. I am sure this has
been discussed before but I thought I would bring it up again anyway.
So, why not just redirect people to one of the mirrors listed? This could
> > could be done based on IP (yes it is inaccurate but it is close enough
> > and has the same net effect: pushing people off the main web server) or
> > it could be done by simply redirecting to a random mirror.
>
> Have tried both in the past with disastrous results ...
What method will be em
> Only vacuum will reset the insert times to the lowest possible!
> What does the vacuum code do?? :-]
Please see the manual and the extensive discussions on this point in the
archives. This behaviour is well known -- though undesirable. It is an
effect of the multi-version concurrency control sy
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Jim Mercer wrote:
>
> the following was sent to the php developer's list, and they came back with:
>
> > > Isn't it generally better (where "better" means more secure,
> > > efficient, and easily maintained) to handle database access
> > > control using PostgreSQL's native
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Jim Mercer wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 11:15:35AM +1000, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Jim Mercer wrote:
> > > > I would think so, and IMHO, that's where pgsql access control
> > > > belongs, with pgsql.
> >
&g
> > Thanks to a user query (handle: lltd, IRC) I came across a bug in the
> > planner. The query was:
> >
> > ---
> > select o1.timestamp::date as date, count(*), (select sum(oi.price) from
> > "order" o2, "order_item" oi where oi.order_id = o2.id and
> > o2.timestamp::date = o1.timestamp::date
Hi all,
GCC has supported block re-ordering through __builtin_expect() for some
time. I could not see and cannot recall any discussion of this in the
archives. Has anyone played with GCC block re-ordering and PostgreSQL?
Gavin
---(end of broadcast)--
On 10 Oct 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> Well, I'd assume any C library / compiler of half-decent quality on
> any platform would provide assembly optimized versions of common
> stdlib functions like memset().
>
> While playing around with memset() on my machine (P4 running Linux,
> glibc 2.2.5, GCC
On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sat, 12 Oct 2002, Joe Conway wrote:
> >> Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> Hackers: we might reasonably fix this by doing a deep copy of the
> >>> relcache's trigge
Hi all,
I'm thinking that there is an improvement to vacuum which could be made
for 7.4. VACUUM FULLing large, heavily updated tables is a pain. There's
very little an application can do to minimise dead-tuples, particularly if
the table is randomly updated. Wouldn't it be beneficial if VACUUM co
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
>
> Is there any plans to make postgresql multithreading?
>
> Thanks in advance (and also for all who commented to my question
> regarding replication.)
>
> Anuradha
>
> NB: please don't open fire to declare war on whether multithreading i
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 01:25:23AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
> >
> > > ... what I want to know is whether multithreading is likely to get
> > > into in postgresql, say somewhere in 8.x, or even in 9.x?
> >
> > It
On 16 Oct 2002, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-10-16 at 05:22, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm thinking that there is an improvement to vacuum which could be made
> > for 7.4. VACUUM FULLing large, heavily updated tables is a pain. There's
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Right now we assume \XXX is octal. We could support \x as hex because
> > \x isn't any special backslash character. However, no one has ever
> > asked for this. Does anyone else think this would be benficial?
1 - 100 of 507 matches
Mail list logo
