On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Lamar Owen wrote:
Ok, thanks to our snowstorm :-0 I have been working on the beta 6 RPM situation
on my _slow_ notebook today (power outages for ten minutes at a time happening
at hour or so intervals due to 45mph+ winds and a foot of snow).
Well, I have preliminary
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
Lamar Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm hoping it was a problem on my machine -- educate me on
what caused the error
Well, that's exactly what I'd like to know. The direct cause of the
error is that DROP TABLE is finding that some other backend has
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I have created an FTP file containing all ourstanding patches. It is
at:
ftp://candle.pha.pa.us/pub/postgresql/patches.mbox
I will keep this updated so people know their patches are in the queue
and have not been forgotten. I may also use
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
With RC1 nearing, when should I run pgindent? This is usually the time
I do it.
Does the silence mean I should pick a date to run this?
Since I'm going to end up re-rolling RC1, do a run tonight on her, so that
any problems that arise from
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
OK, I am going to have dinner and then get started on the pgindent run.
I have also noticed we have some comments like:
/*
* one word
*
*/
that look funny in a few places. I propose:
/* one
okay, this was the only one I was waiting to hear on ... the fix committed
this afternoon for the regression test, did/does it fix the problem? are
we safe on a proper RC1 now?
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
Zeugswetter Andreas SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Recent changes in pg_crc.c
okay, baring you bein able to recreate the bug between now and, say,
13:00AST tomorrow, I'll wrap up RC1 and get her out the door ...
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom, since you appear to be able to recreate the bug, can you comment
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With RC1 nearing, when should I run pgindent? This is usually the time
I do it.
Does the silence mean I should pick a date to run this?
If you're going to do it before the release, I think you
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hey, I am open to whatever people want to do. Just remember that we
accumulate lots of patches/development during the slow time before
development, and those patches become harder to apply. Peter E has
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
If people can get their patches in all at one time, that would work.
The only problem there is that people who supply patches against 7.1
will not match the 7.2 tree, and we get those patches from people for
months.
and those patches
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
and most times, those have to be merged into the source tree due to
extensive changes anyway ... maybe we should just get rid of the use of
pgindent altogether? its not something that I've ever seen required on
other projects I've worked on ...
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
and most times, those have to be merged into the source tree due to
extensive changes anyway ... maybe we should just get rid of the use of
pgindent altogether? its not something that I've ever seen required on
other projects I've worked
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
Solaris x867.0 2000-04-12, Marc Fournier
scrappy, do you still have this machine?
Doing tests on Solaris x86/7 right now, will report as soon as they are
done ...
Solaris 2.5.1-2.7 Sparc 7.0 2000-04-12, Peter Eisentraut
I'll bet that
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
Solaris x86/7 results, for example, in geometry.out, show a difference of:
3,-3.06204718156754e-11 (expected)
3,-3.06204718035418e-11 (results)
acceptable diviation?
That sort of deviation is well within bounds, particularly for geometry
== shutting down postmaster ==
==
All 76 tests passed.
==
rm regress.o
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nope, still working through some things ... the select_implicit test
failed completely:
dragon:/home/centre/marc/src/postgresql-7.1RC1/src/test/regress more
results/select_implicit.out
psql
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Patrick Welche wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 12:49:39PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
These are parallel tests right? What's the failure diffs?
same as last time:
dragon:/home/centre/marc/src/postgresql-7.1RC1/src/test
I recently got sent a survey to fill out that is meant to compare various
Object databases ... there are ~20 sections to this thing, asking
questions ranging from General Architecture to interactions with External
DBMSs ... and *alot* of questions that I've no experience in, and,
therefore, no
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Gordon A. Runkle wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], "The
Hermit Hacker" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, its been a hard, arduous journey for this one, with several delays
caused by the massive amount of changes that have gone into v7.1 ...
but, to
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Matthias Juchem wrote:
Hi there.
I was just looking for the CVS tags for downloading the beta6 and the
RC1 of 7.1 but there are only the following tags:
REL_7_1_BETA2
REL_7_1_BETA3
REL_7_1
Aren't there tags for the versions I am looking for?
Nope ... doing the
gone
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Thomas Swan wrote:
At 3/27/2001 03:21 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A Majordomo message could not be delivered to the following addresses:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
450 4.7.1 [EMAIL PROTECTED]...
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Robert E. Bruccoleri wrote:
Dear Marc,
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Robert E. Bruccoleri wrote:
I contributed the first working s_lock.c code for the SGI's over three
years ago (using the test_and_set library calls). It's been working
for me ever since in a heavy
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Mathijs Brands wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 03:17:06PM +, Thomas Lockhart allegedly wrote:
And here are the up-to-date platforms; thanks for the reports:
SNIP
Solaris 2.7 Sparc 7.1 2001-03-22, Marc Fournier
Marc, was this done without unix sockets?
nope,
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The Hermit Hacker writes:
Just a heads up for anyone that might have something outstanding ... I'm
going to package her early evening (~18:30AST) and announce it to both
pgsql-hackers and pgsql-announce when done ...
Once RC2 goes out, its
will still get into v7.1 *nod*
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Michael Meskes wrote:
Will current CVS commits make it into 7.1? Or do I have to use a different
branch. I just committed a minor patch to keep the parsers in sync and also
committed a bug fix last week. Both should be in 7.1.
Michael
--
I packaged up an RC2 over the weekend, and pretty much as soon as I had it
packaged and in place, before I could announce it, there were several
patches thrown in ... so, I left it there, let anyone who happened to see
it pick it up, but didn't announce it ...
Everything has been quiet, as far
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Everything has been quiet, as far as patches are concerned, for the past
24+hrs ... I'd like to roll (and actually announce) an solid RC3 tonight,
with announce first thing tomorrow morning, unless anyone has
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Mikheev, Vadim wrote:
Everything has been quiet, as far as patches are concerned,
for the past 24+hrs ... I'd like to roll (and actually announce)
an solid RC3 tonight, with announce first thing tomorrow morning,
unless anyone has anythign they aer sitting on?
We
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
I've got patches for the regression tests to work around the "time with
time zone" DST problem. Will apply to the tree asap, and will post a
message when that is done.
Sounds cool ... I'll scheduale an RC3 then, around that bug being fixed
...
Okay, unless I hear different from anyone out there, I'm goin to roll RC3
when I get to work tomorrow, and announce it before I leave (to give it
some time to propogate to the mirrors) ...
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas? Did I miss
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
The docs are ready for shipment.
Even better ...
Okay, let's let this sit as RC3 for the next week...
I'll go ahead and start generating hardcopy, though I understand that it
is no longer allowed into the shipping tarball :(
At 2Meg, is there
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
The docs are ready for shipment.
Even better ...
Okay, let's let this sit as RC3 for the next week...
I'll go ahead and start generating hardcopy, though I understand that it
is no
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
At 2Meg, is there a reason why we include any of the docs as part of the
standard tar ball? It shouldn't be required to compile, so should be able
to be left out of the main tar ball and downloaded seperately as required
.. thereby shrinking the
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
That strikes me as an awfully web-centric view of things. Not everyone
has an always-on high-speed Internet link.
If you want to make the docs and TODO.detail be a separate chunk of the
split distribution, that's fine with me. But I don't
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Lamar Owen wrote:
The Hermit Hacker wrote:
Okay, unless someone can come up with a really good argument *for* why
docs has to be included as part of the main tar file, I'm going to change
the distributin generating script so that it generates a .src.tar.gz file
Oh, I definitely like this ... and get rid of the *large* file, which will
save all the mirrors a good deal of space over time ...
On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Since people suddenly seem to be suffering from bandwidth concerns I have
devised a new distribution split to address
as soon as Peter commits the changes, I'll do up an RC4 with the new
format so that everyone can test it ...
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Lamar Owen wrote:
The Hermit Hacker wrote:
Oh, I definitely like this ... and get rid of the *large* file, which will
save all the mirrors a good deal of space
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The Hermit Hacker writes:
Okay, unless someone can come up with a really good argument *for* why
docs has to be included as part of the main tar file,
Because people want to read the documentation.
get postgresql.src.tar.gz
get
Hi Peter ...
The problem this cycle has been that as soon as a package is ready
for announce, ppl have been cropping up with bugs that need to be fixed,
so we don't bother announcing it ... except to -hackers ...
We are currently at Release Candidate 3, with an RC4 most likely
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Lamar Owen wrote:
One quick note -- since 'R' 'b', the RC RPM's must be forced to
install with --oldpackage, as RPM does a simple strcmp of version
numbers -- 7.1RC3 7.1beta1, for instance. Just force it with
--oldpackage if you have a 7.1beta RPM already installed.
On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Oliver Elphick wrote:
The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Lamar Owen wrote:
One quick note -- since 'R' 'b', the RC RPM's must be forced to
install with --oldpackage, as RPM does a simple strcmp of version
numbers -- 7.1RC3 7.1beta1
On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I wrote:
Since people suddenly seem to be suffering from bandwidth concerns I have
devised a new distribution split to address this issue. I propose the
following four sub-tarballs:
* postgresql-XXX.base.tar.gz3.3 MB
*
On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Oliver Elphick wrote:
The Hermit Hacker wrote:or development:
That means the final release of 7.1 will be called 7.2. Bugfix releases
will then be 7.2.x. Meanwhile new development versions will be 7.3.x
which will finally be released as 7.4, and so
this only represents since 8:30am this morning ...
/source/v7.0.3/postgresql-7.0.3.support.tar.gz = 9
/source/v7.0.3/postgresql-7.0.3.test.tar.gz = 3
/source/v7.0.3/postgresql-7.0.3.docs.tar.gz = 10
/source/v7.0.3/postgresql-7.0.3.tar.gz = 22
/source/v7.0.3/postgresql-7.0.3.base.tar.gz = 9
on
On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Henshall, Stuart - WCP wrote:
When I downlaod a full tarball I want it all, I'm greedy like that.
;)
If it is to be split up as standard I believe problems will arise with
different versions being used together (by me most likley...). Also IMHO it
will not
After v7.1 is released ... ?
On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Excessively long values are currently silently truncated when they are
inserted into char or varchar fields. This makes the entire notion of
specifying a length limit for these types kind of useless, IMO. Needless
Theoretically, should one be able to do:
pg_dumpall db.out
remove 7.0.3 bin, lib, data, etc
install 7.1 bin, lib, etc
initdb 7.1
psql template1 db.out
Basically, has anyone actually tried *that* yet and can report on whether
or not it works?
I'm just about to try it here, on 2gig of data,
v7.0.3 database:
trends_acctng=# \d
List of relations
Name | Type | Owner
-+---+---
accounts| table | pgsql
admin | table | pgsql
calls | table | pgsql
comments| table | pgsql
cookies | table | pgsql
credit_card | table | pgsql
| pgsql
ticket_times | table| pgsql
(34 rows)
neat ...
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Joel Burton wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
all I did was use pg_dumpall from v7.0.3 to dump to a text file, and
"psql template1 dumpfile" to load it bac
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The Hermit Hacker writes:
okay, not sure how we should document this, but apparently pg_dumpall
doesn't work as the man page at:
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.0/user/app-pgdumpall.htm
appears to suggest:
Now, I swore I
Well folks, I just fixed the CVS tags (renamed REL7_1 to REL7_1_BETA and
moved REL7_1 to today) and packaged up the release ... this is it, any new
fixes go into v7.1.1 ... :)
I'm preparing a formal PR/Announce, and will send that out later on this
evening, but want to give some of the mirror
On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Here is what we've always sent to to date ... anyone have any good ones
to add?
Addresses : [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
email added, thanks ...
On 13 Apr 2001, Matthew Rice wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Here is what we've always sent to to date ... anyone have any good ones
to add?
I think that this is still the moderator's address for comp.os.linux.announce:
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Freshmeat updated, Linuxtoday bookmarked ... thanks ;)
On 13 Apr 2001, Trond Eivind [iso-8859-1] Glomsrød wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 13 Apr 2001, Trond Eivind [iso-8859-1] Glomsrød wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Here is what we've
Just as an FYI for those considering the shift ... I just upgraded all of
my databases over to v7.1 from v7.0.3 and it was smooth as silk. The only
problems were having to compile and load a few modules from contrib that
some of my clients were using ...
Took about an hour and a half to do 100
If someone wants to come up with an idea for name, i think that the whole
Win camp could be seperated also ...
pgsql-windows and pgsql-rpm ?
as far as newsgroups are concerned, they would both fall under ports:
comp.databases.postgresql.ports.linux.rpm
comp.databases.postgresql.ports.windows
77 databases in data/base directory ... all number'd ...
select * from pg_database;
doesn't give me the reference to which directory is which database ... so
what table do we need to join on to get this information?
thanks ...
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If someone wants to come up with an idea for name, i think that the whole
Win camp could be seperated also ...
pgsql-windows and pgsql-rpm ?
A windows list seems like a good idea. But I'm not sure
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
Do we need to start thinking about an RPM mailing list? Seems there is
lots of traffic.
The traffic naturally peaks around release time, and this time
especially because yours truly messed up the whole build system that
d'oh, should have extended my query ...
select oid,* from pg_database;
gives the directory name ...
thanks :)
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
77 databases in data/base directory ... all number'd ...
select * from pg_database;
doesn't give me the reference to which
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The Hermit Hacker writes:
I like Lamar's suggestion of pgsql-cygwin though ... sound reasonable?
We have pgsql-ports, which isn't seeing too much traffic as it is. Seems
like the cygwin people hang out there anyway.
Ya, well, there is alot
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I like Lamar's suggestion of pgsql-cygwin though ... sound reasonable?
Yes, that's probably better than pgsql-windows ...
Done ...
---(end of broadcast
there is little, to nothing, factual about that whole article ...
"Great Bridge essentially gives away its open-source database application
at little cost..."
- thannk god I can get it completely for free, eh?
"Great Bridge executives say their licensing costs for the software..."
sent
it to the editor of that rag.
Vince.
On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
there is little, to nothing, factual about that whole article ...
"Great Bridge essentially gives away its open-source database application
at little cost..."
- thannk god
On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
Do we need to start thinking about an RPM mailing list? Seems there is
lots of traffic.
The delete key is your friend. So is procmail, if you just can't stand
to see the letters "R", "P", and "M" too close together ;)
I'm not a big fan of the
So, to sum up ... the article did a good job of representing Great Bridge,
did a great injustice (a slap in the face, so to say) to the PostgreSQL
community as a whole, so Great Bridge has no intention of correcting the
situation?
Just to clarify your position, of course ...
On Sun, 15 Apr
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Nathan Myers wrote:
This is probably a good time to point out that this is the _worst_
_possible_ response to erroneous reportage. The perception by readers
will not be that the reporter failed, but that PostgreSQL advocates
are rabid weasels who don't appreciate
the thing that pissed me off the most, and set me off, was the totally
blatant errors ... we've had other articles written, with a GB slant to
them, that didn't get my feathers in a ruffle ... the fact that they
*talked* with GB, got quotes from them and some of their partners, and
*still* got
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
David George [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I just built the postgresql 7.1 final and the configure script is still
checking for sfio. Not a major big deal, but I need to remove the sfio
check from configure.in, run autoconf, and then configure to fix it.
I can't seem to get at the original anymore, but we talked to Dr.
Soparkar, and is posted a 'followup' of the article to:
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-04-16-009-21-PS-EL-HE-0038
Since I can't seem to get to the original on dqindia.com, I can't comment
on what's changed ...
I tried to do a 'kill pid' like I would have in v7.0.3, doesn't affect
it ... so, how to get rid of idle process that have been sitting around
for a long time, without having to shutdown the database itself?
pgsql 64484 0.0 1.0 15352 10172 p4- ISat08PM 0:00.15 postmaster: hordemgr
Okay, I *swear* I tried both 'kill pid' and 'kill -TERM pid' this
morning before I sent this out .. just tried it again and it worked :(
*shrug*
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I tried to do a 'kill pid' like I would have in v7.0.3, doesn't
try now?
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
What did you do to the CVS server? It takes hours to update a single
file, half a day to run cvs diff. This has been like that for about 48
hours.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
Anyone thought of implementing this, similar to how sendmail does it? If
load n, refuse connections?
Basically, if great to set max clients to 256, but if load hits 50 as a
result, the database is near to useless ... if you set it to 256, and 254
idle connections are going, load won't rise
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
sendmail does it now, and, apparently relatively portable across OSs ...
sendmail expects to be root. It's unlikely (and very undesirable) that
postgres will be installed with adequate privileges to read /dev
other then a potential buffer overrun, what would be the problem with:
open(kmem)
read values
close(kmem)
?
I would think it would be less taxing to the system then doing a system()
call, but still effectively as safe, no?
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL
On 23 Apr 2001, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Linux and BSD it seems to be more common to put /dev/kmem into a
specialized group kmem, so running postgres as setgid kmem is not so
immediately dangerous. Still, do you think it's a good idea to let an
Got a query that looks like:
SELECT card_info.main_cat, category_details.sub_cat_flag,count(*)
FROM send0,card_info,category_details
WHERE send0.card_id=card_info.card_id
AND category_details.mcategory='e-cards'
[], int nelem);
DESCRIPTION
How hard would it be to knock up code that, by default, ignores loadavg,
but if, say, set in postgresql.conf:
loadavg = 4
it will just refuse connections?
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Tom Lane writes:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
At 10:59 PM 23-04-2001 -0700, Nathan Myers wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 12:39:29PM +0800, Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
Why not be more deterministic about refusing connections and stick
to reducing max clients? If not it seems like a case where you're
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Nathan Myers wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:28:17PM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
I have a Dual-866, 1gig of RAM and strip'd file systems ... this past
week, I've hit many times where CPU usage is 100%, RAM is 500Meg free and
disks are pretty much sitting idle
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Tom Lane writes:
A conncurrent-xacts limit isn't perfect of course, but I think it'd
be pretty good, and certainly better than anything based on the
available load-average numbers.
The concurrent transaction limit would allow you to control
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The idea behind the load average based approach is
to make the postmaster respect the situation of the overall system.
That'd be great if we could do it, but as I pointed out, the available
stats do not allow
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Autoconf has a 'LOADAVG' check already, so what is so problematic about
using that to enabled/disable that feature?
Because it's tied to a GNU getloadavg.c
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
I'm still concerned about portability issues, and about whether load
average is really the right number to be looking at, however.
Its worked for Sendmail for how many years now, and the code is there to
use, with all portability issues resolved for every
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Autoconf has a 'LOADAVG' check already, so what is so
Morning all ...
I'm going to do a broader announcement in a couple of days, but
Oleg and his gang have just finished setting up their Mailing List
Searching software ...
If you go to fts.postgresql.org, it is like night-day as far as
the old searching is concerned ...
Actually, default appears to be the last month worth of messages ... check
your date range :)
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
Morning all ...
I'm going to do a broader announcement in a couple of days, but
Oleg and his
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Vince, can you fix the search links to point to this, as far as
the mailing list searches are concerned? docs are still in udmsearch for
now ...
*Major* thanks to Oleg and his group for making this available
to the community ... now
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Vince, can you fix the search links to point to this, as far as
the mailing list searches are concerned? docs are still in udmsearch for
now ...
*Major* thanks to Oleg and
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
We have discussed splitting the tree on May 1 to start 7.2 development.
If no one objects, we will stay with that schedule.
Please see other thread where we are actually discussing this ... if you
have anything to add to that thread please do so ...
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Mikheev, Vadim wrote:
Row reuse without vacuum
Yes, it will help to remove uncommitted rows.
Same question as I asked Bruce ... how? :) I wasn't trying to be
fascisious(sp?) when I asked, I didn't realize the two were connected and
am curious as to how :)
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
How?
I guess other hosts could read the WAL to find out what changed.
I wonder if that would get around one of the issues I had brought up a
ways back concerning replication and stuff like sequences ...
Row reuse without vacuum
How?
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Mikheev, Vadim wrote:
Row reuse without vacuum
Yes, it will help to remove uncommitted rows.
Same question as I asked Bruce ... how? :) I wasn't trying to be
fascisious(sp?) when I asked, I didn't realize the two were
connected and am curious as to
As Tom's mentioned the other day, we're looking at doing up v7.1.1 on
Tuesday, and starting in on v7.2 ...
Does anyone have any outstanding fixes for v7.1.x that they want to see in
*before* we do this release? Any points unresolved that anyone knows
about that we need to look at?
Marc G.
doesn't this defeat the reasons for going to numerics? is there a reason
why its such a difficult thing to do a SELECT oid on pg_database and
pg_class to get this information? that's what I've been doing when I need
to know *shrug*
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
First off I just
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
doesn't this defeat the reasons for going to numerics? is there a reason
why its such a difficult thing to do a SELECT oid on pg_database and
pg_class to get this information? that's what I've been doing when I need
to know *shrug*
Yes, but
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I don't know the answers to these questions, which is why I'm asking them
... if this is something safe to do, and doesn't break us again, then
sounds like a good idea to me too ...
I was suggesting the symlinks purely for admin convenience. The
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I can even think of a situation, as unlikely as it can be, where this
could happen ... run out of inodes on the file system ... last inode used
by the table, no inode to stick the symlink onto ...
If you run out of inodes, you are going to have
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Yes, I like that idea, but the problem is that it is hard to update just
one table in the file. You sort of have to update the entire file each
time a table changes. That is why I liked symlinks because they are
per-table, but you are right
1 - 100 of 403 matches
Mail list logo
