[HACKERS] open items list cleanup

2015-06-26 Thread Robert Haas
I spent much of today going through here: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.5_Open_Items Here's what I did: * Committed patches for four of the items, hopefully resolving those items. * Moved three items from open to either resolved or a new section don't need fixing. * Added

Re: [HACKERS] open items list cleanup

2015-06-26 Thread Noah Misch
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 04:23:28PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.5_Open_Items Here's what I did: * Split up the remaining open items into sections. * Added a comment with current status to many, but not all, of the items. (I would have done them

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-10-01 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 09/30/2014 09:10 PM, Gregory Smith wrote: On 9/29/14, 2:30 PM, Andres Freund wrote: Can we explain those reasons in the form of documentation? Yes. Try and benchmark it. It'll be hardware and workload dependant. I missed this whole thing, and eventually I have to circle back to it. I

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-30 Thread Josh Berkus
On 09/30/2014 04:56 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: There seems to be no decisive consensus here. I'm going to put my foot on the ground and go remove it, as I'm leaning towards that option, and we need to get the release out. But if someone objects loudly enough to actually write the

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-30 Thread Gregory Smith
On 9/29/14, 2:30 PM, Andres Freund wrote: Can we explain those reasons in the form of documentation? Yes. Try and benchmark it. It'll be hardware and workload dependant. I missed this whole thing, and eventually I have to circle back to it. I could do it this week. Could you (or someone

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-29 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes: So, can we get Beta3 out now? If nobody else steps up and says they want to do some performance testing, I'll push the latest lengths+offsets patch tomorrow. Are any of the other open

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-29 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2014-09-29 11:50:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: The items I see are: - Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!! The text seems to indicate that there's some disagreement on this point. I don't

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-29 Thread Andres Freund
On 2014-09-29 11:50:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: The items I see are: - Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!! The text seems to indicate that there's some disagreement on this point. I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not to keep the GUC, but if we're going to

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-29 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Andres Freund wrote: On 2014-09-29 11:50:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: - pg_dump fails with --if-exists and blobs This looks like a 9.4 regression. Alvaro, IIRC you were looking at this one? I am. -- Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development,

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-29 Thread Pavel Stehule
Dne 29.9.2014 18:00 Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net napsal(a): On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2014-09-29 11:50:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: The items I see are: - Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!! The text

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-29 Thread Andres Freund
On 2014-09-29 11:28:07 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: On 09/29/2014 08:53 AM, Andres Freund wrote: - Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!! The text seems to indicate that there's some disagreement on this point. I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not to keep

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-29 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: The items I see are: - Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!! The text seems to indicate that there's some disagreement on this point. I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not to keep the GUC, but if we're going to remove

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-29 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes: On 2014-09-29 14:44:42 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Personally I think a hardwired #define should be plenty. What's the argument that users will need to tune this at runtime? That right now it can make quite noticeable differences in scalability. And

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-29 Thread Andres Freund
On 2014-09-29 16:35:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes: On 2014-09-29 16:16:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: I wonder why it's a fixed constant at all, and not something like wal_buffers / 8. Because that'd be horrible performancewise on a system with many

Re: [HACKERS] open items for 9.4

2014-09-29 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: The items I see are: - Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!! The text seems to indicate that there's some disagreement on this point. I don't have a strong

[HACKERS] Open items related to SR

2010-05-26 Thread Fujii Masao
Hi, Many open items related to SR are listed on the wiki again. http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items I clarify the status of those items. Smart shutdown gets stuck - patch to fix from Fuji Masao Robert is reviewing and testing the patch I submitted. I believe that the

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.3

2007-12-05 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote: In an attempt to move us toward 8.3 RC1 I have put all open item emails into the patches queue: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches FWIW it seems the only remaining issue is the ltree bug #3720:

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.3

2007-12-05 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: In an attempt to move us toward 8.3 RC1 I have put all open item emails into the patches queue: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches FWIW it seems the only remaining issue is the ltree bug #3720:

[HACKERS] Open items for 8.3

2007-11-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
In an attempt to move us toward 8.3 RC1 I have put all open item emails into the patches queue: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com +

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.3

2007-11-05 Thread Joshua D. Drake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 12:47:10 -0500 (EST) Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In an attempt to move us toward 8.3 RC1 I have put all open item emails into the patches queue: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches It would be

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.3

2007-11-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joshua D. Drake wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 12:47:10 -0500 (EST) Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In an attempt to move us toward 8.3 RC1 I have put all open item emails into the patches queue:

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.3

2007-11-05 Thread Gregory Stark
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 12:47:10 -0500 (EST) Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In an attempt to move us toward 8.3 RC1 I have put all open item emails into the patches queue: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches It would be

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.3

2007-11-05 Thread Joshua D. Drake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:57:39 + Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 12:47:10 -0500 (EST) Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In an attempt to move us toward 8.3 RC1 I

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.3

2007-11-05 Thread Jeremy Drake
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Gregory Stark wrote: How many developers have even jumped through the hoops to get wiki accounts? According to http://developer.postgresql.org/index.php?title=Special:Listusersgroup=pgdevlimit=500 there are currently 51 members of the group pgdev on the wiki. -- Spare no

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.3

2007-11-05 Thread Magnus Hagander
How many developers have even jumped through the hoops to get wiki accounts? According to http://developer.postgresql.org/index.php?title=Special:Listusersgroup=pgdevlimit=500 there are currently 51 members of the group pgdev on the wiki. Well, a lot of those people aren't actually

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-06 Thread Bernd Helmle
--On Montag, September 04, 2006 23:58:35 -0400 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Updatable views are likewise dead --- we don't have a credible patch or any short-term path to get one. I hope to see both of these items land early in the 8.3 devel cycle, but for 8.2, nyet. Yeah, i don't had

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-06 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 05:58 schrieb Tom Lane: A couple of recently discussed FE/BE protocol issues are: not storing a plan at all for unnamed-statement cases, and thus allowing bind parameters to be treated as constants; allowing parameter types to go unresolved rather than throwing

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-06 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 03:07 schrieb Bruce Momjian: Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This host seems to be offline. What about using the wiki? -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-06 Thread Devrim GUNDUZ
Hello, On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 13:04 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This host seems to be offline. It is suffering from a DNS problem. What about using the wiki? Wiki has the same problem, too. Regards, -- The PostgreSQL Company

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-06 Thread Magnus Hagander
Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This host seems to be offline. What about using the wiki? The problem is with the postgresql.org DNS servers. Something weird is afoot around the hub.org nameservers, from what I can tell. Servers

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-06 Thread Christopher Browne
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Magnus Hagander) wrote: Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This host seems to be offline. What about using the wiki? The problem is with the postgresql.org DNS servers.

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-06 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 05:58 schrieb Tom Lane: A couple of recently discussed FE/BE protocol issues are: not storing a plan at all for unnamed-statement cases, and thus allowing bind parameters to be treated as constants; allowing parameter

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 03:07 schrieb Bruce Momjian: Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This host seems to be offline. What about using the wiki? The host is fine. postgresql.org DNS is broken.

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-06 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Bruce Momjian wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Had a bitmap-index patch arrived in my inbox this morning, as had been promised to me for three weekends running, I might have been willing to drop all else and review it. But, no patch. This item is dead for 8.2. Do not even think of suggesting otherwise.

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-06 Thread Michael Paesold
Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 05:58 schrieb Tom Lane: A couple of recently discussed FE/BE protocol issues are: not storing a plan at all for unnamed-statement cases, and thus allowing bind parameters to be treated as constants;

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A quickie: this item Store only active XIDs in subtransaction cache was already done: I think Bruce is referring to the idea that you and I each arrived at recently, ie removing subcommitted subxact XIDs from the PGPROC cache if

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Bruce Momjian wrote: Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This list will be continually updated until we release 8.2. Emacs code example not submitted Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This one is

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Joachim Wieland
On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 11:58:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: timezone changes: appendix B is out of date, and do we need a list at all rather than telling people to look at the config file + system view? Since I did the initial patch I also volunteer to submit documentation for it. As far as the

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems Had a bitmap-index patch arrived in my inbox this morning, as had been promised to me for three weekends running, I might have been willing to

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This list will be continually updated until we release 8.2. Emacs code examplenot submitted Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Tom Lane
We made pretty good progress today on the open-items list: ISBN/EAN: I've reviewed this and fixed a couple small issues, it's ready to commit as soon as the author indicates his assent to license statement. I'll remove isbn_issn at the same time. Altering view ownership doesn't work: fixed

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joachim Wieland wrote: On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 11:58:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: timezone changes: appendix B is out of date, and do we need a list at all rather than telling people to look at the config file + system view? Since I did the initial patch I also volunteer to submit

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: We made pretty good progress today on the open-items list: ISBN/EAN: I've reviewed this and fixed a couple small issues, it's ready to commit as soon as the author indicates his assent to license statement. I'll remove isbn_issn at the same time. Altering view ownership

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Momjian) writes: Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This list will be continually updated until we release 8.2. I've got suggested patches for my item (e.g. - --with-openssl causing contrib stuff to break on AIX);

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
Chris Browne wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Momjian) writes: Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This list will be continually updated until we release 8.2. I've got suggested patches for my item (e.g. - --with-openssl causing

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Chris Browne wrote: I've got suggested patches for my item (e.g. - --with-openssl causing contrib stuff to break on AIX); a couple of instances of: SHLIB_LINK = $(libpq) $(LIBS) in contrib/dblink/Makefile and contrib/sslinfo seem to do the trick.

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-05 Thread Christopher Browne
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) would write: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Chris Browne wrote: I've got suggested patches for my item (e.g. - --with-openssl causing contrib stuff to break on AIX); a couple of instances of: SHLIB_LINK =

[HACKERS] Open items

2006-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
I should have a list of open items for 8.2 within 24 hours. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't

[HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This list will be continually updated until we release 8.2. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote: Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems This list will be continually updated until we release 8.2. Thanks for the effort. A quickie: this item Store only active XIDs in subtransaction cache was already done:

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-04 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Here are the open items for 8.2: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgopenitems Had a bitmap-index patch arrived in my inbox this morning, as had been promised to me for three weekends running, I might have been willing to drop all else and

Re: [HACKERS] Open items for 8.2

2006-09-04 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A quickie: this item Store only active XIDs in subtransaction cache was already done: I think Bruce is referring to the idea that you and I each arrived at recently, ie removing subcommitted subxact XIDs from the PGPROC cache if they hadn't stored any

[HACKERS] Open items

2005-10-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Here are the open items. The only big one left is the handling of a foreign key problem we have had for a while. We also have issues with MSVC builds crashing and pg_config --pgxs on Win32 but they are being actively discussed. I also have a dblink patch on hold. I think it is time to start

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-10-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Oh, let me add that this release has gone very smoothly. We are right on schedule in release timing. I sometimes think the beta period is not as productive as the development period, but going through it, I am always reminded how much more polished our final product is because of the hard work

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-10-14 Thread Dave Page
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian Sent: 14 October 2005 12:57 To: PostgreSQL-development Subject: [HACKERS] Open items Has the interactive documentation been scanned and merged into the SGML? Note that when

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-10-14 Thread Neil Conway
On Fri, 2005-14-10 at 13:08 +0100, Dave Page wrote: Note that when we moderate this we now hide away most of the comments that may suggest improvements for the docs and only leave the ones that are actually helpful in their own right visible. If someone wants access to these to review, please

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-10-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
pgindent run and committed. --- Bruce Momjian wrote: Here are the open items. The only big one left is the handling of a foreign key problem we have had for a while. We also have issues with MSVC builds crashing and

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-30 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 06:07:02PM -0400, Neil Conway wrote: On Wed, 2005-28-09 at 18:35 -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: The problem isn't whether or not they should be changed, the problem is that they were changed *during* beta AND *against* the direction that discussion on these changes

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-30 Thread Neil Conway
On Fri, 2005-30-09 at 17:47 -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote: What's wrong with adding pg_cancel_backend(...) RETURNS int as an alias for the one that returns boolean, and document that it's deprecated and will be removed in the future. You can't overload functions based on their return type alone.

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-30 Thread Bruce Momjian
Jim C. Nasby wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 06:07:02PM -0400, Neil Conway wrote: On Wed, 2005-28-09 at 18:35 -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: The problem isn't whether or not they should be changed, the problem is that they were changed *during* beta AND *against* the direction that

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-30 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 06:58:05PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: We don't have the ability to have to functions that take the same parameters and return different results because there is no facility to decide which function to call based on what return value is expected, because a simple query

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list

2005-09-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
We are basically on hold until we can resolve these items. We need a beta3, but some of these items might require an initdb (ALTER SCHEMA RENAME and ROLES), so until we resolve them, we can't go for beta3 and can't get to an RC candidate. I know Tom is busy right now, but I know we will get

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-28 Thread Dave Page
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marc G. Fournier Sent: 28 September 2005 00:50 To: Tom Lane Cc: Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL-development; Neil Conway Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1 IMHO, changes like

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-28 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes: fix ALTER SCHEMA RENAME for sequence dependency, or remove feature I've posted a proposed patch to fix this. The patch requires an initdb (to add new sequence functions), so if we do that

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-28 Thread Neil Conway
On Wed, 2005-28-09 at 18:35 -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: The problem isn't whether or not they should be changed, the problem is that they were changed *during* beta AND *against* the direction that discussion on these changes went I'm not sure what you mean: what is the direction that

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Marc G. Fournier wrote: On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes: fix ALTER SCHEMA RENAME for sequence dependency, or remove feature I've posted a proposed patch to fix this. The patch requires an initdb (to add new

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-28 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes: It was done quickly to complete it for beta2. Neil talked to Tom and me about it before he made the change. Obviously we all guessed wrong on this one. Personally I had forgotten that pg_cancel_backend was in the previous release and so there was a

[HACKERS] Open items list

2005-09-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Here is the open item list: PostgreSQL 8.1 Open Items = Current version at http://candle.pha.pa.us/cgi-bin/pgopenitems or from http://www.postgresql.org/developer/beta. Bugs fix pg_dump --clean

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-27 Thread Bruce Momjian
Magnus Hagander wrote: Changes --- Win32 signal handling patch (Magnus) Unless someone else steps up to doing this one, please remove it from the list. I will not have time to dig into this patch before 8.1. OK, what should the TODO item be? -- Bruce Momjian

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-27 Thread Magnus Hagander
Changes --- Win32 signal handling patch (Magnus) Unless someone else steps up to doing this one, please remove it from the list. I will not have time to dig into this patch before 8.1. OK, what should the TODO item be? A link to the mail should be there, I guess (it's

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-27 Thread Bruce Momjian
Magnus Hagander wrote: Changes --- Win32 signal handling patch (Magnus) Unless someone else steps up to doing this one, please remove it from the list. I will not have time to dig into this patch before 8.1. OK, what should the TODO item be? A link to the mail

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-27 Thread Bruce Momjian
The open items list has been reduced nicely: PostgreSQL 8.1 Open Items = Current version at http://candle.pha.pa.us/cgi-bin/pgopenitems or from http://www.postgresql.org/developer/beta. Changes --- fix

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-27 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian wrote: bump major library version number? Were there any incompatible interface changes? -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-27 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: bump major library version number? Were there any incompatible interface changes? No, I don't _think_ so, but we have been bitten by this before, not because of API change but because of use of libpgport functions called by libpq in one release

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-27 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes: fix ALTER SCHEMA RENAME for sequence dependency, or remove feature I've posted a proposed patch to fix this. The patch requires an initdb (to add new sequence functions), so if we do that we may as well also fix the 32/64bit risk mentioned here:

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-27 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes: fix ALTER SCHEMA RENAME for sequence dependency, or remove feature I've posted a proposed patch to fix this. The patch requires an initdb (to add new sequence functions), so if we do that we may as well also

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-27 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes: fix ALTER SCHEMA RENAME for sequence dependency, or remove feature I've posted a proposed patch to fix this. The patch requires an initdb (to add new sequence functions), so if we do that we may as well also fix the 32/64bit

[HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Here are the open items for 8.1: PostgreSQL 8.1 Open Items = Current version at http://candle.pha.pa.us/cgi-bin/pgopenitems or from http://www.postgresql.org/developer/beta. Changes --- Win32 signal

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
/contrib move to pgfoundry Is this actually happening? -- Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG -

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joshua D. Drake wrote: /contrib move to pgfoundry Is this actually happening? Josh has talked about it, but not sure where he is. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Bruce Momjian wrote: Joshua D. Drake wrote: /contrib move to pgfoundry Is this actually happening? Josh has talked about it, but not sure where he is. Well pgFoundry isn't ready to have a load of code that is that actively maintained put on it. It still needs to be moved to its new

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joshua D. Drake wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Joshua D. Drake wrote: /contrib move to pgfoundry Is this actually happening? Josh has talked about it, but not sure where he is. Well pgFoundry isn't ready to have a load of code that is that actively maintained put on it. It still

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-26 Thread Tom Lane
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: /contrib move to pgfoundry Well pgFoundry isn't ready to have a load of code that is that actively maintained put on it. It still needs to be moved to its new servers. The modules proposed to be moved out aren't actively maintained now; if they were

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: /contrib move to pgfoundry Well pgFoundry isn't ready to have a load of code that is that actively maintained put on it. It still needs to be moved to its new servers. The modules proposed to be moved out

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-26 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: The modules proposed to be moved out aren't actively maintained now; if they were we'd probably be keeping them in core. Speaking as a pgFoundry admin, I would say if they aren't actively maintained we don't want them either.

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-26 Thread Magnus Hagander
Changes --- Win32 signal handling patch (Magnus) Unless someone else steps up to doing this one, please remove it from the list. I will not have time to dig into this patch before 8.1. //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions

Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1

2005-09-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Speaking as a pgFoundry admin, I would say if they aren't actively maintained we don't want them either. pgFoundry is not a dumping ground for modules that are dying. I didn't say they were dying --- the ones we thought were dead, we already dropped. I was responding

Re: [PATCHES] enable/disable trigger (Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] Open items)

2005-08-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Satoshi Nagayasu wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: I am not sure what to do with this patch. It is missing dump capability, there is no clause to disable all triggers on a table, and it uses a table owner check when a super user check is required (because of referential integrity).

Re: [PATCHES] enable/disable trigger (Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] Open items)

2005-08-15 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes: Oh, and one trick for disabling triggers in a single session is to do this: BEGIN WORK; ALTER TABLE xx DISABLE TRIGGER ALL ... ALTER TABLE xx ENABLE TRIGGER ALL COMMIT WORK; In this case, the triggers are disabled

Re: [PATCHES] enable/disable trigger (Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] Open items)

2005-08-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes: Oh, and one trick for disabling triggers in a single session is to do this: BEGIN WORK; ALTER TABLE xx DISABLE TRIGGER ALL ... ALTER TABLE xx ENABLE TRIGGER ALL COMMIT WORK; In this case, the

Re: [PATCHES] enable/disable trigger (Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] Open items)

2005-08-15 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes: Tom Lane wrote: ... but everybody else is locked out completely, because the ALTER takes an exclusive lock on the table. It's a bit misleading to describe that as a local change. The pre-8.1 method was to UPDATE pg_class.reltriggers = 0. Would

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-07-01 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 10:11:56AM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote: On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 23:02 +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote: The TODO item is about counting all temporary files, not sorts in particular. Or at least that's what I thought it meant. If the DBA have to improve the performance,

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-06-30 Thread Satoshi Nagayasu
Tom Lane wrote: My patch counts inittapes(), tuplesort_begin_heap() and tuplesort_begin_index(), and collect them, and sum them through the stat collector. Hm, that doesn't seem like quite the right level to be counting at. Shouldn't you be hacking fd.c to count operations on

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-06-30 Thread Tom Lane
Satoshi Nagayasu [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: Hm, that doesn't seem like quite the right level to be counting at. Shouldn't you be hacking fd.c to count operations on FD_XACT_TEMPORARY files? Why do you think so? I don't see tuplesort.c is good or not. But all code of sort

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-06-30 Thread Satoshi Nagayasu
The TODO item is about counting all temporary files, not sorts in particular. Or at least that's what I thought it meant. If the DBA have to improve the performance, DBA will need to know about: - Which SQL generate a disk sort? - Size of sorts. - Changing 'work_mem' value can reduce

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-06-30 Thread Rod Taylor
On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 23:02 +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote: The TODO item is about counting all temporary files, not sorts in particular. Or at least that's what I thought it meant. If the DBA have to improve the performance, DBA will need to know about: - Which SQL generate a disk

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-06-30 Thread Stephen Frost
* Rod Taylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 23:02 +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote: The TODO item is about counting all temporary files, not sorts in particular. Or at least that's what I thought it meant. If the DBA have to improve the performance, DBA will need to

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-06-30 Thread Tom Lane
Euler Taveira de Oliveira [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think that moving rtree_gist, reindexdb, and/or userlock into core would have to happen before feature freeze, [snip] Are you think in putting reindex at core? I was about to submit a replacement of it but if it goes to bin/scripts (for

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-06-30 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Hi Tom, I think that moving rtree_gist, reindexdb, and/or userlock into core would have to happen before feature freeze, [snip] Are you think in putting reindex at core? I was about to submit a replacement of it but if it goes to bin/scripts (for example) I can rearrange the patch. Could I?

Re: [HACKERS] Open items

2005-06-29 Thread Magnus Hagander
Changes --- integrated auto-vacuum (Alvaro) ICU locale patch? That would be Palle, and he's said he thinks he can have it in place in time. I'll have to update it for win32 build specifics after that, but that should be ok after the freeze, right? Please consider removing the question

  1   2   3   >