Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration

2003-02-14 Thread Daniel Kalchev
Jason Hihn said: Pardon my ignorance, but there's no way to auto-tune? Ship it with a thread that gathers statistics and periodically re-tunes the database parameters. Of course, be able to turn it off. People that actually take the time to run tune manually will turn it off as to not have

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration

2003-02-14 Thread Daniel Kalchev
Josh Berkus said: How about we take this discussion to the Performance List, where it belongs? I believe the design and addition of code that collects and outputs the usage patterns of the database (statistics) belongs here. If we take the approach to providing information to tune PostgreSQL

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Michael Paesold
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: could we just not lock (for more than just to ensure atomic writes) the page but instead increment a page version on each write to detect changes? Sounds like Index MVCC..., very nice. ;-) (Of course I have no clue about feasibility, just liked the idea)

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Tom Lane wrote: Kevin Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I agree with your assessment for the most part, except for PGDATA. There's no good reason I can think of for the postmaster to look at it. The other side of that coin is, what's the good reason to remove it? There's a long way

Re: [HACKERS] Offering tuned config files

2003-02-14 Thread Manfred Koizar
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 14:12:50 +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a stab at some extra conf files. Feel free to shoot them down. No intent to shoot anything down, just random thoughts: effective_cache_size = 2 (~ 160 MB) should be more adequate for a 256 MB machine

Re: [HACKERS] Offering tuned config files

2003-02-14 Thread Daniel Kalchev
Manfred Koizar said: effective_cache_size = 2 (~ 160 MB) should be more adequate for a 256 MB machine than the extremely conservative default of 1000. I admit that the effect of this change is hard to benchmark. A way too low (or too high) setting may lead the planner to wrong

Re: [MLIST] Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread David Walker
In reference to determining what port postgres or any program is listening on On my Redhat Linux machines netstat --inet -nlp when run as root produces a nice list of all programs listening on the network with IP and port number the process is listening on, the name of the process and the pid.

Re: [HACKERS] Offering tuned config files

2003-02-14 Thread Manfred Koizar
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 14:24:23 +0200, Daniel Kalchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The default [cache] on BSD systems is 10% of the total RAM, so on a 256MB machine this would be ~26MB or effective_cache_size = 32000. I was a bit too Linux-minded, where every peace of memory not needed for anything

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Bruce Momjian wrote: If you want ps to display the data dir, you should use -D. Remember, it is mostly important for multiple postmaster, so if you are doing that, just use -D, but don't prevent single-postmaster folks from using PGDATA. Perhaps the best compromise would be to change pg_ctl

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Bruce Momjian wrote: If you want ps to display the data dir, you should use -D. Remember, it is mostly important for multiple postmaster, so if you are doing that, just use -D, but don't prevent single-postmaster folks from using PGDATA. Perhaps another reasonable approach would be to put an

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Martin Coxall
If you are interested in reading a contrary position, you can read Berstein's arguments for his recommended way to install services at: http://cr.yp.to/unix.html But since DJB is a class-A monomaniac, he may not be the best person to listen to. /var/qmail/control for qmail configuration

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Martin Coxall
Generally things that live in /etc are owned and operated by the OS. Postgresql, by it's definition is a userspace program, not an OS owned one. Partially true. The FHS specifies that the /etc top layer is for system-own3d stuff, but the subdirectories off it are explicitly used for user

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Martin Coxall
On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 20:28, Steve Crawford wrote: I don't see why we can't keep everyone happy and let the users choose the setup they want. To wit, make the following, probably simple, changes: 1) Have postgresql default to using /etc/postgresql.conf /etc/postgres/postgresql.conf, if we

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Bruce Momjian wrote: I just set PGDATA in my login and I don't have to deal with it again. Hmm...you don't use pg_ctl to start/stop/whatever the database? You invoke the postmaster directly (I can easily see that you would, just asking if you do)? -- Kevin Brown

[HACKERS] unsubscribe

2003-02-14 Thread John Liu
unsubscribe ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Bruce Momjian wrote: I just set PGDATA in my login and I don't have to deal with it again. DuhI just realized a reason you guys might care about this so much. It's because you want to be able to start the postmaster from within a debugger (or profiler, or whatever), and you don't want to

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Vince Vielhaber
On 14 Feb 2003, Martin Coxall wrote: If you are interested in reading a contrary position, you can read Berstein's arguments for his recommended way to install services at: http://cr.yp.to/unix.html But since DJB is a class-A monomaniac, he may not be the best person to listen to.

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Martin Coxall
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 14:21, Vince Vielhaber wrote: On 14 Feb 2003, Martin Coxall wrote: If you are interested in reading a contrary position, you can read Berstein's arguments for his recommended way to install services at: http://cr.yp.to/unix.html But since DJB is a class-A

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, here is an updated proposal. I think we have decided: Moving postmaster.pid and postmaster.opts isn't worth it. We don't want per-file GUC variables, but assume it is in the same config directory as postgresql.conf. I don't see any valid

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Bruce Momjian wrote: Give it up. As long as we have -D, we will allow PGDATA. If you don't want to use it, don't use it. Agreed. I'm not sure I see how this diminishes the argument for fixing pg_ctl so that it passes an explicit -D option to the postmaster when invoking it... -- Kevin

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Bruce Momjian wrote: This way, people who start the database using the standard tools we supply will know exactly what's going on when they get a ps listing. No. If you want ps to display, don't use environment variables. Many don't care --- especially those with only one postmaster. You

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Kevin Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: The other side of that coin is, what's the good reason to remove it? There's a long way between I don't want my setup to depend on PGDATA and I don't think your setup should be allowed to depend on PGDATA. If you don't want to use it, then

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Vince Vielhaber
On 14 Feb 2003, Martin Coxall wrote: On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 14:21, Vince Vielhaber wrote: On 14 Feb 2003, Martin Coxall wrote: If you are interested in reading a contrary position, you can read Berstein's arguments for his recommended way to install services at:

Re: [HACKERS] Offering tuned config files

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Manfred Koizar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In postgresql.conf.sample-writeheavy you have: commit_delay = 1 Is this still needed with ganged WAL writes? Tom? I doubt that the current options for grouped commits are worth anything at the moment. Chris, do you have any evidence backing

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Tom Lane wrote: I am happy to design an arrangement that allows you not to depend on PGDATA if you don't want to. But I don't see why you need to break my configuration procedures in order to fix yours. As I outlined last night, it's possible to do what you want without breaking backwards

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Kevin Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm quite interested in knowing why there seems to be so much resistance to removing the potential_DataDir = getenv(PGDATA); line from postmaster.c. Backwards compatibility. Also, you still haven't explained why I don't want to use PGDATA should translate

Re: [HACKERS] Incremental backup

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, once we have PITR, will anyone want incremental backups? None of my database references (Date's Introduction to Database Systems and Garcia-Molina's Database Systems - The Complete Book, in particular) seem to talk about PITR at all. At least, there's no index entry

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Martin Coxall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Partially true. The FHS specifies that the /etc top layer is for system-own3d stuff, but the subdirectories off it are explicitly used for user space programs and, well, everything. (/etc/apache, /etc/postgres, /etc/tomcat3, /etc/tomcat4...) FHS or no

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Robert Treat
On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 19:22, Adam Haberlach wrote: On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 05:59:17PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote: On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 15:08, mlw wrote: Stephan Szabo wrote: On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, mlw wrote: Personally I think a postgresql installation is much more like an apache

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Curtis Faith
tom lane wrote: How does that help? The left-moving indexscan still has no way to recover. It can't go back to the page it was on before and try to determine which entries you added there, because it has no reliable reference point to do so. The entry it previously returned might not

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My point is that folks with multiple postmasters may not want to use PGDATA, but for folks who have single postmasters, it makes things easier and less error-prone. Actually, for multi postmasters too. I have little shell-environment config files that

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Manfred Koizar
On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 17:42:44 -0500, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Instead of an actively maintained freelist on disk as per Alvaro Herrera's patch, I plan to use the FSM to remember where recyclable pages are, much as we do for tables. Given that we have a mostly empty metapage per index, and

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration

2003-02-14 Thread Robert Treat
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 03:00, Daniel Kalchev wrote: Jason Hihn said: Pardon my ignorance, but there's no way to auto-tune? Ship it with a thread that gathers statistics and periodically re-tunes the database parameters. Of course, be able to turn it off. People that actually take the time

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Shridhar Daithankar[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Friday 14 Feb 2003 9:05 pm, you wrote: Martin Coxall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Here's a pretty topic for a flamewar: should it be /etc/postgres/ or /etc/postgresql/ ? I vote for /etc/pgsql. Keeping in line of unix philosophy of cryptic and short names. Who wants a descriptive names

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread scott.marlowe
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, mlw wrote: scott.marlowe wrote: These are not issues at all. You could put the configuration file anywhere, just as you can for any UNIX service. postmaster --config=/home/myhome/mydb.conf I deal with a number of PG databases on a number of sites, and it is a

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Manfred Koizar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Given that we have a mostly empty metapage per index, and the metapage is in memory most of the time, using it for the freelist looks almost like a free lunch. No, because of locking. Every time you write-lock the metapage to add or remove freelist

Re: [HACKERS] Offering tuned config files

2003-02-14 Thread Rod Taylor
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 07:41, Manfred Koizar wrote: On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 14:24:23 +0200, Daniel Kalchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The default [cache] on BSD systems is 10% of the total RAM, so on a 256MB machine this would be ~26MB or effective_cache_size = 32000. I was a bit too

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread scott.marlowe
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Curt Sampson wrote: On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, scott.marlowe wrote: If I do a .tar.gz install of apache, I get /usr/local/apache/conf, which is not the standard way you're listing. I'm going to stay out of this argument from now on, but this struck a sore point. /usr

[HACKERS] postgresql 7.3 versus 7.2

2003-02-14 Thread Ulf Rehmann
Hi! Is there any way to adjust dumps from postgresql 7.3 for use by version 7.2 and vice versa ? Or is there a way to transport a full database via csv or in any other kind to 7.2 and vice versa ? We are running a couple of servers/mirrors at various locations in the world, handling data based

[HACKERS] Problems with insert rule called from plpython

2003-02-14 Thread Pavel Hanak
Hello, I've noticed one problem by upgrading from postgresql-7.3.1 to 7.3.2. The example of this problem looks like this: create table test (a int, b text); create view testview as select * from test; create or replace rule testview_ins as on insert to testview do instead (

[HACKERS] Views and unique indicies optimisation

2003-02-14 Thread Robert Osowiecki
Here's an example: create view master_detail as select * from master left join detail on (master.detail_key=detail.key); I noticed that PostgreSQ performs join even when I execute select some_master_fields from master_detail; but there exists an unique index on

Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration (was Re: [pgsql-advocacy]

2003-02-14 Thread Jason Hihn
Nutshell: Easy to install but is horribly slow. or Took a couple of minutes to configure and it rocks! Since when is it easy to install on win32? The easiest way I know of is through Cygwin, then you have to worry about installing the IPC service (an getting the

Re: [HACKERS] Incremental backup

2003-02-14 Thread Christopher Browne
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Brown) wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, once we have PITR, will anyone want incremental backups? None of my database references (Date's Introduction to Database Systems and Garcia-Molina's Database Systems - The Complete

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Bruce Momjian wrote: The big question is whether PGDATA is still our driving config variable, and PGCONFIG/-C is just an additional option, or whether we are moving in a direction where PGCONFIG/-C is going to be the driving value, and data_dir is going to be read as part of that. I'm

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 11:53:26 -0500, mlw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where, specificaly are his arguements against a configuration file methodology? I don't think he is argueing against a configuration methodology, but rather against the methodology being used in Unix distributions. In

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Greg Stark
scott.marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But this isn't the same thing at all. Apache, when built from a tar ball, goes into /usr/local/apache/ and ALL it's configuration files are there. Two comments: 1) Even in that case the config files go into /usr/local/apache/conf and the other

Re: [HACKERS] Do we always need the socket file?

2003-02-14 Thread Greg Stark
Michael Brusser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We're trying to avoid creating any unnecessary files, especially outside of the product installation tree. Look at this as a policy. Experience shows that sooner or later some of your customers ask you: what is this /tmp/.s.PGSQL.xxx file is? What do

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 02:58:49 -0800, Kevin Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lest you think that this is an unlikely scenario, keep in mind that most startup scripts, including pg_ctl, currently start the postmaster without arguments and rely on PGDATA, so a shop that hasn't already been

Re: [HACKERS] Incremental backup

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Christopher Browne wrote: What PITR generally consists of is the notion that you want to recover to the state at a particular moment in time. In O*-nomenclature, this means that you recover as at some earlier moment for which you have a good backup, and then re-apply changes, which in

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
Bruce Momjian wrote: I see your point --- pg_ctl does a PGDATA trick when passed -D: -D) shift # pass environment into new postmaster PGDATA=$1 export PGDATA It should pass -D just like it was given. Yes, exactly. Now, the more

[HACKERS] help me!!

2003-02-14 Thread XIE, Rong
Hello, My name is rong xie. I am a Student at TU-Munich. I have a question to Postgresql an Linux. e.g: for IBM DB2: I can write a test.sql file. --test.sql connect to database1; set schema xie; select * from table1; insert table1 value('rong','xie',22); select * from table1; terminate;

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Steve Crawford
On Friday 14 February 2003 6:07 am, Martin Coxall wrote: On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 20:28, Steve Crawford wrote: I don't see why we can't keep everyone happy and let the users choose the setup they want. To wit, make the following, probably simple, changes: 1) Have postgresql default to using

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Curtis Faith
tom lane wrote: Hmmm ... that might be made to work, but it would complicate inserts. By the time an insert navigates to the page it should insert on, it might find the page is dead, and then it would have no easy way to get to the replacement page (unless you want to dedicate another

[HACKERS] stats_command_string default?

2003-02-14 Thread Kevin Brown
One of the functions of the DBA is to monitor what people are doing to the database. My experience is that ps is often sorely lacking in this regard: its output is somewhat limited, from what I've seen, and in any case the DBA's domain is the database itself: that's the environment he's going to

Re: [HACKERS] stats_command_string default?

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Kevin Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Would it make more sense to enable stats_command_string by default? I'd vote against it. If we turn it on by default, people are paying for a feature they may not even know exists. Once they find out about it and decide they want it, they can turn it on

Re: [HACKERS] client_encoding directive is ignored in postgresql.conf

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Tatsuo Ishii [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: + /* Flag to we need to initialize client encoding info */ + static bool need_to_init_client_encoding = -1; Surely that should be int, not bool. ! if (!PQsendQuery(conn, begin; select

Re: [HACKERS] plpython trigger code is wrong (Re: [GENERAL] Potential bug -- script that drops postgres server)

2003-02-14 Thread Bradley McLean
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030214 19:35]: Lance Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Below is something that may be of interest -- a short, 7-statement script that seems to drop my postgres server. It appears that the plpython trigger implementation assumes that any given procedure will

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Curtis Faith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stored in the index? And how will you do that portably? Sorry for the lack of rigorous language. I meant that there would be one mutex per index stored in the header or internal data structures associated with each index somewhere. Probably in the

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
I don't want to over-engineer this. Propogating -D into postmaster makes sense, but grabbing PGDATA doesn't to me. --- Kevin Brown wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: I see your point --- pg_ctl does a PGDATA trick when passed

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Curt Sampson
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, scott.marlowe wrote: Asking for everything in a directory with the name local in it to be shared is kind of counter intuitive to me. Not really. If you install a particular program that doesn't come with the OS on one machine on your site, why would you not want to install

Re: [HACKERS] Location of the configuration files, round 2

2003-02-14 Thread mlw
One of the things that I HATE about this discussion is that everyone wants to put limits on configurability. I am an old fashion UNIX guy, capability without enforcing policy! Adding an ability is different than enforcing a policy. All I any to do is add the capability of configuration in a

Re: [HACKERS] Berkeley and CMU classes adopt/extend PostgreSQL

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Any chance of giving them all separate TODO items? That way, we would get more items completed; greedy request, I know. ;-) --- Anastassia Ailamaki wrote: Hi everyone, with some frequency. We have the usual 180

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Curtis Faith
I previously wrote: 5) A mutex/spinlock that was stored in the index could be acquired by the scan code like this: buf = ReadBuffer(rel, blkno); /* pin next page */ SpinLockAcquire( indexSpecificMutex );/* lock the index reorg mutex */

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and inserts

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Attached is a patch the more clearly handles autocommit in pg_dump. I had already fixed pg_dump for doing autocommit while dumping, but didn't handle setting autocommit on restore. I focused on the initial script file startup, every \\connect, pg_restore, and pg_dumpall. I think I got them

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Tom Lane writes: I would favor a setup that allows a -C *directory* (not file) to be specified as a postmaster parameter separately from the -D directory; A directory is not going to satisfy people. Who is asking to put postgresql.conf, pg_hba.conf, and

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Curtis Faith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 4) This could easily be reordered into: buf = ReadBuffer(rel, blkno); /* pin next page */ LockBuffer(buf, BUFFER_LOCK_UNLOCK);/* release lock on current page */ LockBuffer(buf, BT_READ); /* lock

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane writes: I would favor a setup that allows a -C *directory* (not file) to be specified as a postmaster parameter separately from the -D directory; A directory is not going to satisfy people. Why not? Who won't it satisfy, and what's their

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane writes: I would favor a setup that allows a -C *directory* (not file) to be specified as a postmaster parameter separately from the -D directory; A directory is not going to satisfy people. I don't see any great value in a separate postgresql.conf parameter for each secondary

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think the big question is whether we want the default to install the configs in a separate directory, pgsql/etc, or just allow the specification of a separate location. Advantages of pgsql/etc are initdb-safe, and easier backups.

Re: [HACKERS] psql and readline

2003-02-14 Thread Patrick Welche
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 10:25:52AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Patrick Welche [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The sad thing is that my readline wrapper for libedit doesn't wrap replace_history_entry, Well, is that a bug in your wrapper? Or must we add a configure test for the presence of

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Curtis Faith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Another way this could be handled is by not merging onto one of the existing pages but to a brand new page, a kind of special case shadow index page. Hmmm ... that might be made to work, but it would complicate inserts. By the time an insert navigates to

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [HACKERS] Changing the default configuration

2003-02-14 Thread Curt Sampson
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: To auto-tune, you would need to monitor swap usage and other stuff that may vary too much based on load from other systems. Only the admin knows how to answer some of those questions. No, to auto-tune many parameters that currently require manual

Re: [HACKERS] psql and readline

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Patrick Welche [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 10:25:52AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Well, is that a bug in your wrapper? Or must we add a configure test for the presence of replace_history_entry()? Good question. Easiest for now for me would be add a configure test. Okay with

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Oliver Elphick
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 15:35, Tom Lane wrote: Here's a pretty topic for a flamewar: should it be /etc/postgres/ or /etc/postgresql/ ? It should be configurable! Debian uses /etc/postgresql, if you want to stick to what quite a lot of people are familiar with. -- Oliver Elphick

Re: [HACKERS] Incremental backup

2003-02-14 Thread Martin Marques
On Jue 13 Feb 2003 16:38, Bruce Momjian wrote: Patrick Macdonald wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Someone at Red Hat is working on point-in-time recovery, also known as incremental backups. PITR and incremental backup are different beasts. PITR deals with a backup + logs. Incremental

Re: [HACKERS] Incremental backup

2003-02-14 Thread Manfred Koizar
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003 19:24:13 -0500, Patrick Macdonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know Oracle and DB2 have incremental backup in their arsenal (and iirc, SQL Server has something called differential backup). Whatever the name, it's a win at the enterprise level. A differential backup copies only

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Kevin Brown wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Kevin Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I agree with your assessment for the most part, except for PGDATA. There's no good reason I can think of for the postmaster to look at it. The other side of that coin is, what's the good reason to remove it?

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, here is an updated proposal. I think we have decided: Moving postmaster.pid and postmaster.opts isn't worth it. We don't want per-file GUC variables, but assume it is in the same config directory as postgresql.conf. I don't see any valid reason they would

Re: [HACKERS] PG_TEMP_FILES_DIR

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
It is under each database directory, per-database. --- Sailesh Krishnamurthy wrote: Quick question for the group I'm assuming that the PG_TEMP_FILES_DIR for BufFile temps is automatically under the PGDATA directory.

Re: [HACKERS] Incremental backup

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, once we have PITR, will anyone want incremental backups? --- Martin Marques wrote: On Jue 13 Feb 2003 16:38, Bruce Momjian wrote: Patrick Macdonald wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Someone at Red Hat is working on

Re: [HACKERS] Terrible performance on wide selects

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Added to TODO: * Cache last known per-tuple offsets to speed long tuple access --- Tom Lane wrote: Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: i.e. for tuple with 100 cols, allocate an array of 100 pointers, plus

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Oliver Elphick
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 12:17, Bruce Momjian wrote: If you want ps to display the data dir, you should use -D. Remember, it is mostly important for multiple postmaster, so if you are doing that, just use -D, but don't prevent single-postmaster folks from using PGDATA. Could not the ps line be

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
I am not sure if it is a good idea to be mucking with it. For backend, we do the entire thing, so it is clear we modified something. --- Oliver Elphick wrote: On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 12:17, Bruce Momjian wrote: If you

Re: [HACKERS] Incremental backup

2003-02-14 Thread Martin Marques
On Vie 14 Feb 2003 09:52, Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, once we have PITR, will anyone want incremental backups? I will probably not need it, but I know of people how have databases which build dumps of more then 20GB. They are interested in live incremental backups. -- Porqué usar una base de

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Kevin Brown wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: If you want ps to display the data dir, you should use -D. Remember, it is mostly important for multiple postmaster, so if you are doing that, just use -D, but don't prevent single-postmaster folks from using PGDATA. Perhaps the best compromise

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Kevin Brown wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: I just set PGDATA in my login and I don't have to deal with it again. Hmm...you don't use pg_ctl to start/stop/whatever the database? You invoke the postmaster directly (I can easily see that you would, just asking if you do)? I can use either to

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Give it up. As long as we have -D, we will allow PGDATA. If you don't want to use it, don't use it. --- Kevin Brown wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: I just set PGDATA in my login and I don't have to deal with it again.

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
My point is that folks with multiple postmasters may not want to use PGDATA, but for folks who have single postmasters, it makes things easier and less error-prone. --- Bruce Momjian wrote: Give it up. As long as we

Re: [HACKERS] WAL replay logic (was Re: [PERFORM] Mount options for Ext3?)

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Is there a TODO here, like Allow recovery from corrupt pg_control via WAL? --- Kevin Brown wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Kevin Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One question I have is: in the event of a crash, why not simply

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane kirjutas R, 14.02.2003 kell 01:13: How is returning the same data twice not an ill effect? From earlier discussions I understood that there had been some work done on using btrees for indexing arrays by storing each separate element in a löeaf

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Kevin Brown wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, here is an updated proposal. I think we have decided: Moving postmaster.pid and postmaster.opts isn't worth it. We don't want per-file GUC variables, but assume it is in the same config directory as postgresql.conf. I don't

Re: [HACKERS] Incremental backup

2003-02-14 Thread Greg Copeland
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 06:52, Bruce Momjian wrote: OK, once we have PITR, will anyone want incremental backups? --- Martin Marques wrote: On Jue 13 Feb 2003 16:38, Bruce Momjian wrote: Patrick Macdonald wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So, we add data_dir to postgresql.conf, and add -C/PGCONFIG to postmaster. Wait one second. You are blithely throwing in a PGCONFIG variable without any detailed proposal of exactly how it will work. Does that override a PGDATA environment variable?

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Tom Lane
Oliver Elphick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 12:17, Bruce Momjian wrote: If you want ps to display the data dir, you should use -D. Remember, it is mostly important for multiple postmaster, so if you are doing that, just use -D, but don't prevent single-postmaster folks from

Re: [HACKERS] Someone's broken psql's connection-failure error reporting

2003-02-14 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 08:55:23PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: I've done a little bit of cleanup, but that code is still a mess... someone should rewrite these routines. Yes, I looked at it and struggled to get both IPv4 and IPv6

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So, we add data_dir to postgresql.conf, and add -C/PGCONFIG to postmaster. Wait one second. You are blithely throwing in a PGCONFIG variable without any detailed proposal of exactly how it will work. Does that override a PGDATA

Re: [HACKERS] Brain dump: btree collapsing

2003-02-14 Thread Curtis Faith
tom lane wrote: How does that help? The left-moving indexscan still has no way to recover. It can't go back to the page it was on before and try to determine which entries you added there, because it has no reliable reference point to do so. The entry it previously returned might not

[HACKERS] Berkeley and CMU classes adopt/extend PostgreSQL

2003-02-14 Thread Joe Hellerstein
Hi all: I emailed Marc Fournier on this topic some weeks back, but haven't heard from him. I am teaching the undergrad DB course at UC Berkeley, something I do with some frequency. We have the usual 180 students we get every semester (yep: 180!), but this year we've instituted 2 changes:

Re: [HACKERS] Berkeley and CMU classes adopt/extend PostgreSQL

2003-02-14 Thread Anastassia Ailamaki
Hi everyone, with some frequency. We have the usual 180 students we get every semester (yep: 180!), but this year we've instituted 2 changes: We're looking at 100 students taking the class here every year. Double cool. I'm just down the road, if Natassa needs a visiting lecturer. Tom

Re: [HACKERS] location of the configuration files

2003-02-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Kevin Brown wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: The big question is whether PGDATA is still our driving config variable, and PGCONFIG/-C is just an additional option, or whether we are moving in a direction where PGCONFIG/-C is going to be the driving value, and data_dir is going to be read as

  1   2   >