Re: [HACKERS] why was libpq.so's version number bumped?

2003-01-03 Thread Florian Weimer
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Christopher Kings-Lynne said: There have been HEAPS of security fixes between 7.2 and 7.3. That's only the case if your definition of a security fix is pretty fast and loose -- as yours seems to be. Hmm? On 7.2, an unpriviliged database user can read

Re: [HACKERS] why was libpq.so's version number bumped?

2003-01-03 Thread Florian Weimer
Palle Girgensohn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One of the reasons I ask is, if it is a good reason, like say security, maybe I can persuade the FreeBSD port responsible guys to bring the port into the upcoming FreeBSD 5.0 release. 7.3 is not completely compatible with 7.2 at the SQL level, and

Re: [HACKERS] python interface

2003-01-03 Thread D'Arcy J.M. Cain
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 14:10, Bruce Momjian wrote: I think the python interface in /interfaces/python should be moved to gborg. It already has its own web site: http://www.druid.net/pygresql/ I would love to add PyGreSQL to gborg but no matter how often I log in it tells me that

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread mlw
Tom Lane wrote: Well, this is exactly the issue: someone would have to put substantial amounts of time into update mechanisms and/or maintenance of obsolete versions, as opposed to features, performance improvements, or bug fixes. Personally, I feel that if we weren't working as hard as we

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 13:45, mlw wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Personally, I feel that if we weren't working as hard as we could on features/performance/bugfixes, the upgrade issue would be moot because there wouldn't *be* any reason to upgrade. What about the standard Microsoft reason for

[HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Hi all, I am sure, many of you would like to delete this message before reading, hold on. :-) There is much talk about threading on this list and the idea is always deferred for want of robust thread models across all supported platforms and feasibility of gains v/s efforts required. I think

[HACKERS] complie error on windows

2003-01-03 Thread Claiborne, Aldemaco Earl (Al)
Hi, I am trying to install postgresql-7.3 on windows and I keep getting the following error despite having downloaded a compiler. Can anyone tell me what I am not doing right? I am a newbie to postgres and development. My ultimate goal is to create a data driven application utilizing the J2EE

Re: [HACKERS] complie error on windows

2003-01-03 Thread Greg Copeland
If you run, gcc, at the prompt (preferably the one you're trying to run configure from), do you get something like, gcc: No input files or do you get, gcc: command not found? If you get the later (or something like it), you need to include it in your path, just as it's telling you to do. If you

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Password Cracker

2003-01-03 Thread Robert Treat
On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 19:33, Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Also, does anyone know why the development docs are 7.3.1? Because it was pointed to that branch during the 7.3 beta cycle. It needs to be repointed to CVS tip. I dunno how to do so, however. Is

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Password Cracker

2003-01-03 Thread Dave Page
-Original Message- From: Robert Treat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 January 2003 15:36 To: Tom Lane Cc: Bruce Momjian; Justin Clift; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dave Page Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Password Cracker On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 19:33, Tom Lane wrote: Bruce

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Password Cracker

2003-01-03 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane writes: separate out the parts that are only interesting to a programmer using libpq from the parts that are interesting to a user of a libpq-based program (for example, all the info about environment variables, conninfo string syntax, and .pgpass). The sections on environment

Re: [HACKERS] complie error on windows

2003-01-03 Thread Serguei Mokhov
- Original Message - From: Greg Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: January 03, 2003 10:49 AM If you run, gcc, at the prompt (preferably the one you're trying to run configure from), do you get something like, gcc: No input files or do you get, gcc: command not found? If you get the

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Lamar Owen
On Thursday 02 January 2003 19:26, Tom Lane wrote: Lamar Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So I figured I'd roll a 7.1.3 RPMset for him to install onto Red Hat 8. It was very bad. It simply would not build -- I guess it's the gcc 3 stuff. If you don't know *exactly* why it doesn't build, I

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread mlw
Please no threading threads!!! Has anyone calculated the interval and period of PostgreSQL needs threads posts? The *ONLY* advantage threading has over multiple processes is the time and resources used in creating new processes. That being said, I admit that creating a threaded program is

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread mlw
Hannu Krosing wrote: I don't think the main issues are with file _formats_ but rather with system file structures - AFAIK it is a fundamental design decision (arguably a design flaw ;( ) that we use system tables straight from page cache via C structure pointers, even though there seems to be

Re: [HACKERS] python interface

2003-01-03 Thread Tom Lane
D'Arcy J.M. Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would love to add PyGreSQL to gborg but no matter how often I log in it tells me that I need to be logged in to create a new project. Weird. Maybe you're blocking cookies, or something like that? regards, tom lane

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't think the main issues are with file _formats_ but rather with system file structures - AFAIK it is a fundamental design decision (arguably a design flaw ;( ) that we use system tables straight from page cache via C structure pointers, The system

Re: [HACKERS] python interface

2003-01-03 Thread D'Arcy J.M. Cain
On Friday 03 January 2003 15:24, Tom Lane wrote: D'Arcy J.M. Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would love to add PyGreSQL to gborg but no matter how often I log in it tells me that I need to be logged in to create a new project. Weird. Maybe you're blocking cookies, or something like that?

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread Dann Corbit
-Original Message- From: mlw [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 12:47 PM To: Shridhar Daithankar Cc: PGHackers Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Threads Please no threading threads!!! Has anyone calculated the interval and period of PostgreSQL needs threads

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread Greg Copeland
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 14:47, mlw wrote: Please no threading threads!!! Ya, I'm very pro threads but I've long since been sold on no threads for PostgreSQL. AIO on the other hand... ;) Your summary so accurately addresses the issue it should be a whole FAQ entry on threads and PostgreSQL. :)

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread Greg Copeland
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 14:52, Dann Corbit wrote: -Original Message- (1) One thread screws up, the whole process dies. In a multiple process application this is not too much of an issue. If you use C++ you can try/catch and nothing bad happens to anything but the naughty

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am sure, many of you would like to delete this message before reading, hold on. :-) I'm afraid most posters did not read the message. Those who replied Why bother? did not address your challenge: I think threads are useful in difference situations namely parallelising blocking

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread mlw
Greg Copeland wrote: On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 14:47, mlw wrote: Please no threading threads!!! Ya, I'm very pro threads but I've long since been sold on no threads for PostgreSQL. AIO on the other hand... ;) Your summary so accurately addresses the issue it should be a whole FAQ entry

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread Serguei Mokhov
- Original Message - From: Greg Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: January 03, 2003 4:45 PM (1) One thread screws up, the whole process dies. In a multiple process application this is not too much of an issue. If you use C++ you can try/catch and nothing bad happens to

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Lamar Owen
On Friday 03 January 2003 15:16, Lamar Owen wrote: On Thursday 02 January 2003 19:26, Tom Lane wrote: Lamar Owen Wrote THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN WITH MySQL. Oh? Do they have a crystal ball that lets them predict incompatible future platform changes? No, they just allow for the old format,

Re: [HACKERS] why was libpq.so's version number bumped?

2003-01-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Florian Weimer wrote: Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Christopher Kings-Lynne said: There have been HEAPS of security fixes between 7.2 and 7.3. That's only the case if your definition of a security fix is pretty fast and loose -- as yours seems to be. Hmm? On 7.2, an

Re: [HACKERS] why was libpq.so's version number bumped?

2003-01-03 Thread Florian Weimer
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hmm? On 7.2, an unpriviliged database user can read the more or less the whole memory image of the server process. On 7.3, this has been fixed. Huh. Never heard that before. It's the cash_out(2) crash, but with some other conversion function:

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: The system tables are not the problem. pg_upgrade has shown how we can have cross-version upgrades no matter how much the system catalogs change (a good thing too, because we cannot freeze the system catalog layout without bringing development to a standstill). A schema-only

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump.options.diff -- Take III

2003-01-03 Thread Serguei Mokhov
hmmm... hate to resend it, but i have never seen this passing through... re-attempt - Original Message - From: Serguei Mokhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: January 02, 2003 6:37 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump.options.diff -- Take III - Original Message - From: Tom Lane [EMAIL

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Serguei Mokhov
- Original Message - From: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: January 03, 2003 6:31 PM Tom Lane wrote: The system tables are not the problem. pg_upgrade has shown how we can have cross-version upgrades no matter how much the system catalogs change (a good thing too, because we

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Password Cracker

2003-01-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Tom Lane writes: separate out the parts that are only interesting to a programmer using libpq from the parts that are interesting to a user of a libpq-based program (for example, all the info about environment variables, conninfo string syntax, and .pgpass).

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Serguei Mokhov wrote: pg_upgrade does work, assuming there are no changes to the index or heap file formats. (However, I now need to update it for schemas.) However, the last time I worked on it for 7.2, no one was really interested in testing it, so it never got done. In fact, there

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Password Cracker

2003-01-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But it is a sect1 in libpq. It should be a sect1 somewhere that makes more sense. ... It doesn't belong in libpq, and it doesn't belong in the Programmer's Guide. How could it not belong in libpq? But you are right that the Programmer's Guide seems

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There isn't any fundamental reason why we cannot have a pg_upgrade utility; claiming that there is something wrong with how we handle catalog changes misses the point. pg_upgrade does work, assuming there are no changes to the index or heap file

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Password Cracker

2003-01-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But it is a sect1 in libpq. It should be a sect1 somewhere that makes more sense. ... It doesn't belong in libpq, and it doesn't belong in the Programmer's Guide. How could it not belong in libpq? But you are right that the

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread Tom Lane
Serguei Mokhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: (1) One thread screws up, the whole process dies. In a multiple process application this is not too much of an issue. (1) is an issue only for user-level threads. Uh, what other kind of thread have you got in mind here? I suppose the

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread Greg Copeland
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 19:34, Tom Lane wrote: Serguei Mokhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: (1) One thread screws up, the whole process dies. In a multiple process application this is not too much of an issue. (1) is an issue only for user-level threads. Umm. No. User or system level

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, taking up the pg_upgrade banner, I think there are two things missing from the current code: 1) schema awareness -- easily fixed with some code 2) need to creat clog files to match incremented xid I can do 1, and I think Tom can help me with 2. Then folks can test it and see how it works.

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There isn't any fundamental reason why we cannot have a pg_upgrade utility; claiming that there is something wrong with how we handle catalog changes misses the point. pg_upgrade does work, assuming there are no changes to the

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Lamar Owen
On Friday 03 January 2003 18:31, Bruce Momjian wrote: Tom Lane wrote: There isn't any fundamental reason why we cannot have a pg_upgrade utility; claiming that there is something wrong with how we handle catalog changes misses the point. The point is that *someone would have to do the

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: OK, taking up the pg_upgrade banner, I think there are two things missing from the current code: 1) schema awareness -- easily fixed with some code 2) need to creat clog files to match incremented xid I can do 1, and I think Tom can help me with 2.

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is pg_upgrade too hard to run? It is hard and dangerous to run (IMHO). One thing I would like to see that would make it much safer to run is to recast it to operate through standalone backends. That is, the idea is bring down old postmaster

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread mlw
Greg Copeland wrote: Of course that gives up the hope of faster connection startup that has always been touted as a major reason to want Postgres to be threaded... regards, tom lane Faster startup, should never be the primary reason as there are many ways to

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread Greg Copeland
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 21:39, mlw wrote: Connection time should *never* be in the critical path. There, I've said it!! People who complain about connection time are barking up the wrong tree. Regardless of the methodology, EVERY OS has issues with thread creation, process creation, the memory

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Oliver Elphick
On Sat, 2003-01-04 at 02:17, Tom Lane wrote: There isn't any simple way to lock *everyone* out of the DB and still allow pg_upgrade to connect via the postmaster, and even if there were, the DBA could too easily forget to do it. I tackled this issue in the Debian upgrade scripts. I close the

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Dan Langille
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: Is pg_upgrade too hard to run? Is no one really interested in it? All of my boxes are still on 7.2.3. Does that represent a viable test base? ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list

Re: [HACKERS] why was libpq.so's version number bumped?

2003-01-03 Thread Sean Chittenden
Between 7.2 and 7.3 there was an API change to the pgnotify(?) struct or something. When 7.3 was released, we forgot to bump the version number, so we're doing it now. It was something of an oversight, but it really needed to be done. There have been HEAPS of security fixes between 7.2

Re: [HACKERS] Threads

2003-01-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Also remember that in even well developed OS's like FreeBSD, all a process's threads will execute only on one CPU. This might change in FreeBSD 5.0, but still a threaded app (such as MySQL) cannot use mutliple CPUs on a FreeBSD system. Chris On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, mlw wrote: Please no threading

Re: [HACKERS] Upgrading rant.

2003-01-03 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
pg_upgrade does work, assuming there are no changes to the index or heap file formats. (However, I now need to update it for schemas.) However, the last time I worked on it for 7.2, no one was really interested in testing it, so it never got done. In fact, there was a bug in the handling