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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
-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
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
- 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
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
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
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
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
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
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?
-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
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. :)
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
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
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,
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
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:
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
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
- 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
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).
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
46 matches
Mail list logo
