Re: [HACKERS] allowed user/db variables

2003-06-19 Thread Andreas Pflug
Tom Lane wrote: Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: SHOW ALL; Will help, but won't tell the whole story... See my followup. Which bits of info would you like to see added that SHOW doesn't reveal? I'd like to have type (bool/numeric/alpha/value list), min, max and

Re: [HACKERS] pg_get_triggerdef in pg_dump

2003-06-19 Thread Andreas Pflug
Tom Lane wrote: Yes, you can check if they're binary compatible from the pg_cast table But nearly all of the interesting cases require you to understand the type's interpretation of typmod, and you can't learn that from a table. How many cases are there where blindly looking for a

Re: [HACKERS] allowed user/db variables

2003-06-19 Thread Andreas Pflug
Andreas Pflug wrote: I'd like to have type (bool/numeric/alpha/value list), min, max and values in pg_settings. Currently, you can select the name from a combobox, but type any value you like, waiting for the backend to complain (or accept). Additionally, it should be marked which vars are

[HACKERS] [Fwd: [GENERAL] [CYGWIN] Problems compiling PostgreSQL 7.3.3-1 underWin98]

2003-06-19 Thread Justin Clift
Hi everyone, Can anyone assist Diogo here? He's not some random user, he's our official Portuguese translator and helps us out a lot. Sounds like he really needs a hand. *please* Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift Original Message Subject: [GENERAL] [CYGWIN] Problems

Re: [HACKERS] Translation

2003-06-19 Thread Justin Clift
Hi, Bingo, count yourself in. :) Is your preference for translation of website related stuff (i.e. http://advocacy.postgresql.org), or existing manuals and documentation, or error messages in the code itself, or ...? (up to you) Translating some of the web materials into Slovak would open up

Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze

2003-06-19 Thread Jean-Michel POURE
On Thursday 19 June 2003 03:27, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Do we have any killer features added to 7.4 that we can shout about? We should not forget the availability of PostgreSQL companion products, like pgAdmin3 and PhpPgAdmin3. These two GUIs should be ready for release during July,

Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze

2003-06-19 Thread Robert Treat
On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 23:07, Tom Lane wrote: Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What about the nested transaction stuff? With all due respect to Alvaro et al, I can't imagine that that will make it into 7.4. (I have no confidence that PITR or Win32 native port will make it

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Rod Taylor
Someone can make it more efficient in regards to constraint checks, etc. in the future if they want -- I don't intend to. It'd be nice if you at least ensure that all the constraints are checked in a single pass over the table (not one per constraint). Right offhand I do not see why

Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze

2003-06-19 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, I suppose that history has shown that waiting on specific features causes trouble with postgresql development, but I don't see why a release can't be based around waiting for feature x as long as feature x is being actively worked on by trusted

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anyway, I suppose you have indirectly confirmed that user triggers, etc. should NOT fire on for the data update. I didn't see anything in the spec that said one way or the other. Actually, I didn't mean to take a position one way or the other. You could

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Rod Taylor
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 09:40, Tom Lane wrote: Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anyway, I suppose you have indirectly confirmed that user triggers, etc. should NOT fire on for the data update. I didn't see anything in the spec that said one way or the other. Actually, I didn't mean to

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Rod Taylor writes: Anyway, I suppose you have indirectly confirmed that user triggers, etc. should NOT fire on for the data update. I didn't see anything in the spec that said one way or the other. The spec doesn't say that they fire, so that means that they don't fire. -- Peter Eisentraut

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 09:52:14AM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote: On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 09:40, Tom Lane wrote: Do we want them to? If we don't mind them being executed, it is far easier to: - alter table structure - Add all new constraints (without confirming their correctness at that time) -

Re: [HACKERS] [Fwd: [GENERAL] [CYGWIN] Problems compiling PostgreSQL 7.3.3-1 under Win98]

2003-06-19 Thread Tom Lane
Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Can anyone assist Diogo here? I've never used cygwin, but given that the errors seem to relate to semaphore stuff, I wonder whether he's got cygipc installed. regards, tom lane ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - alter table structure - Add all new constraints (without confirming their correctness at that time) - update table contents via an SPI call to UPDATE WHERE column IS NULL The where clause would avoid issues with inherited data being overwritten when

Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze

2003-06-19 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Maybe a better strategy would be to get a release out soon but not wait 6 months for another release which would contain the Win32 port and the PITR stuff (assuming those aren't done in time for this release). Just a thought. andrew Tom Lane wrote: Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Rod Taylor
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 10:05, Alvaro Herrera wrote: On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 09:52:14AM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote: On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 09:40, Tom Lane wrote: Do we want them to? If we don't mind them being executed, it is far easier to: - alter table structure - Add all new

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Rod Taylor
Anyway, I suppose you have indirectly confirmed that user triggers, etc. should NOT fire on for the data update. I didn't see anything in the spec that said one way or the other. The spec doesn't say that they fire, so that means that they don't fire. Sounds like a definitive answer to

Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze

2003-06-19 Thread Rod Taylor
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 06:12, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Maybe a better strategy would be to get a release out soon but not wait 6 months for another release which would contain the Win32 port and the PITR stuff (assuming those aren't done in time for this release). Thats what Justin was saying

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 10:05, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Sorry, I haven't read the spec, but what happens when there is a default value already and it's not NULL? Are tuples where column =3D default updated? Are tuples where column IS NULL updated? We're

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Rod Taylor
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 10:42, Tom Lane wrote: Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 10:05, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Sorry, I haven't read the spec, but what happens when there is a default value already and it's not NULL? Are tuples where column =3D default updated? Are

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Right now if the column exists in the child table, the add column is rejected. I assume that will remain. Have you actually tried it? regression=# create table p1 (f1 int); CREATE TABLE regression=# create table c1 (f2 int) inherits(p1); CREATE TABLE

[HACKERS] Access to transaction status

2003-06-19 Thread Christian Plattner
Hi all, I am currently implementing an experimental middleware based replicator for a set of fully replicated databases. Do be able to handle all sorts of failures I needed two functions: - A function to get the current XID - A function which I can use later to tell if a given XID

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Rod Taylor
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 15:00, Tom Lane wrote: Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Right now if the column exists in the child table, the add column is rejected. I assume that will remain. Have you actually tried it? I used different datatypes which, of course, was the wrong test. When

Re: [HACKERS] src/bin/scripts seems a bit of a misnomer now

2003-06-19 Thread Jon Jensen
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Does anyone care about contrib/reindexdb anymore? I would've found it handy, but didn't know about it and wrote my own in Perl. Inside a transaction it drops the index then rebuilds it using what it gets from pg_get_indexdef(), and it looks at

Re: [HACKERS] Access to transaction status

2003-06-19 Thread Tom Lane
Christian Plattner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do be able to handle all sorts of failures I needed two functions: - A function to get the current XID - A function which I can use later to tell if a given XID commited/aborted/whatever How much later? clog is not kept forever.

[HACKERS] same new code

2003-06-19 Thread ivan
here is function to get client ip address (only ipv4), server address, and fe/be ports , details inside www.psycho.pl/public/src/pgsql/ivnet.tar.bz2 please test it in yours systems (i tested on Debian 2.4.21 with grsec.) 2. Whatz up with PG_RETURN_UINT16 ?? and with type uintXX ? And why do

Re: [HACKERS] Access to transaction status

2003-06-19 Thread Jeroen T. Vermeulen
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 05:16:10PM +0200, Christian Plattner wrote: Do be able to handle all sorts of failures I needed two functions: - A function to get the current XID - A function which I can use later to tell if a given XID commited/aborted/whatever I ran into the same need (Bruce,

[HACKERS] Access to transaction status

2003-06-19 Thread Christian Plattner
Hi all, I am currently implementing an experimental middleware based replicator for a set of fully replicated databases. Do be able to handle all sorts of failures I needed two functions: - A function to get the current XID - A function which I can use later to tell if a given XID

Re: [HACKERS] ss_family in hba.c

2003-06-19 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 11:01:27PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: My system does have its own sockaddr_storage definition. I think it uses __ss_ as the prefix. Also, after looking at the fallback definition in pqcomm.h, I don't see where that defines ss_family and hence don't see how that

[HACKERS] again: Bug #943: Server-Encoding from EUC_TW to UTF-8 doesn'twork

2003-06-19 Thread Enke, Michael
Hello, I reported bug #943 (I found in 7.3.2) and you checked in some change against integer overflow. Now I upgraded to 7.3.3 and I'm not happy with this. The exact error as I described is fixed, but I found new errors in conversion UTF-8 - EUC_TW and BIG5: Copy to table (DB has UTF-8

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Our FLOAT(p) precision does not conform to spec

2003-06-19 Thread Richard Hall
Fix the problem and inform the users about code that may break. Rick ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html

Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze

2003-06-19 Thread Ron Mayer
Tom wrote: Do we have any killer features added to 7.4 that we can shout about? We have a lot of pretty good stuff. You're not happy that the performance of IN (subselect) has been fixed? That btree index bloat is fixed... For warehousing reporting, Add hash for evaluating GROUP BY

Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze

2003-06-19 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
We have a lot of pretty good stuff. You're not happy that the performance of IN (subselect) has been fixed? All our code uses workaround now :) That btree index bloat is fixed (at least in large part, it remains to be seen whether the field performance is all that we need...)? Yes,

Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze

2003-06-19 Thread The Hermit Hacker
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Robert Treat wrote: Well, I suppose that history has shown that waiting on specific features causes trouble with postgresql development, but I don't see why a release can't be based around waiting for feature x as long as feature x is being actively worked on by trusted

Re: [HACKERS] allowed user/db variables

2003-06-19 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
See my followup. Which bits of info would you like to see added that SHOW doesn't reveal? Unlike andreas, I'm not interested in the types and ranges of values, what I need to know is the GUC variables that the user is allowed to set, in particular what they can ALTER USER / SET ... so that I

Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze

2003-06-19 Thread The Hermit Hacker
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Maybe a better strategy would be to get a release out soon but not wait 6 months for another release which would contain the Win32 port and the PITR stuff (assuming those aren't done in time for this release). Just a thought. And definitely in

Re: [HACKERS] add column .. default

2003-06-19 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
There is no alternative, unless you want the command to be non-roll-back-able. Well, you can do a cluster-type table duplication... Someone can make it more efficient in regards to constraint checks, etc. in the future if they want -- I don't intend to. It'd be nice if you at least

Re: [HACKERS] src/bin/scripts seems a bit of a misnomer now

2003-06-19 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does anyone care about contrib/reindexdb anymore? I'd think it's still at least as useful as clusterdb. Why, are you thinking of doing some work on it? No, I just noticed that it escaped the C conversion... Chris

tsearch V2 (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze)

2003-06-19 Thread The Hermit Hacker
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Oleg Bartunov wrote: I'm not sure if contrib/tsearch is a killer feature, but we hope to submit completely new version of tsearch V2 before July 1. Actually, we have stable code already used in some projects but currently lacking documentation. Several people are working

[HACKERS] RServ patch to support multiple slaves (sorta)

2003-06-19 Thread Michael A Nachbaur
Attached is a patch that provides *VERY* limited support for multiple slave servers. I haven't tested it very well, so use at your own risk (and I recommend against using it in production). Basically, I have a central database server that has 4 summary tables inside it replicated to a remote

Re: tsearch V2 (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze)

2003-06-19 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, The Hermit Hacker wrote: On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Oleg Bartunov wrote: I'm not sure if contrib/tsearch is a killer feature, but we hope to submit completely new version of tsearch V2 before July 1. Actually, we have stable code already used in some projects but currently

Re: tsearch V2 (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze)

2003-06-19 Thread The Hermit Hacker
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Oleg Bartunov wrote: Is there a strong reason why tsearch isn't in gborg? How gborg could help us submitting changes to pgsql CVS ? It wouldn't ... is there a reason why tsearch needs to be in the pgsql CVS any more then, say, ODBC drivers, or the tcl interface, or the

Re: tsearch V2 (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze)

2003-06-19 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, The Hermit Hacker wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Oleg Bartunov wrote: Is there a strong reason why tsearch isn't in gborg? How gborg could help us submitting changes to pgsql CVS ? It wouldn't ... is there a reason why tsearch needs to be in the pgsql CVS any more

Re: tsearch V2 (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze)

2003-06-19 Thread Tom Lane
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, The Hermit Hacker wrote: Is there a strong reason why tsearch isn't in gborg? I think text search is a pretty important facility that should eventually be part of the core distribution. It's more likely to get there from contrib than from gborg ...

Re: tsearch V2 (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze)

2003-06-19 Thread The Hermit Hacker
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Tom Lane wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, The Hermit Hacker wrote: Is there a strong reason why tsearch isn't in gborg? I think text search is a pretty important facility that should eventually be part of the core distribution. It's more likely to get there from contrib

Re: tsearch V2 (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Two weeks to feature freeze)

2003-06-19 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Why part of the core distribution, and not just left as a loadable module, like it is now? The day I can go 'CREATE FULLTEXT INDEX ...' just like MySQL can I will be a very happy chappy... Chris ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze

[HACKERS] Hash Tables

2003-06-19 Thread Nailah Ogeer
We came across an error while using the hash_search function to find a database entry in the pg_statdbhash hash table. Just wondering if there are any recorded errors using this function when doing the initdb. It seems to work fine while using sql statements but internally something is going

[HACKERS] psql

2003-06-19 Thread Nailah Ogeer
What i am trying to do is to maintain a linked list of all the relations in a database. When i create a db then i want it to insert into the linked list the relation ids. As it stands now, i can create a db fine and i see the relation id's in the linked list. BUT, as soon as i psql into the db

Re: [HACKERS] psql

2003-06-19 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 17:07:43 -0400, Nailah Ogeer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please don't respond to other messages to start a new thread. What i am trying to do is to maintain a linked list of all the relations in a database. When i create a db then i want it to insert into the linked