Hi,
I had a problem where I needed to indirectly dereference a field from a
record.
To illustrate:
CREATE FUNCTION test2() returns bool as '
DECLARE
myrec record;
fld text;
BEGIN
select ''hello'' as a, ''world'' as b into myrec;
fld = ''a''; -- the fieldname
As part of attempting to gain an understanding of how Postgres works, I
wanted to see if I could display a summary of what relations were using
pages in the cache.
Having done that, I was all set to trash the code when I wondered if it
might be useful in its own right...
Here is a sample of
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mendola Gaetano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A test for null string is missing here:
MemoryContextStrdup(MemoryContext context, const char *string)
{
char *nstr;
-
- if ( !string )
- {
- elog(ERROR, MemoryContextStrdup called with a NULL pointer);
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi.
Will there be any more on-disk format changes before 7.4 goes final which will
require a dump-restore, or is that impossible to say?
- --
Andreas Joseph Krogh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Managing Director, Senior Software Developer
OfficeNet AS
- -
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 14:45:41 +0200,
Andreas Joseph Krogh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Will there be any more on-disk format changes before 7.4 goes final which will
require a dump-restore, or is that impossible to say?
While it is impossible to say with 100% certainly, the developers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 08 September 2003 15:27, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 14:45:41 +0200,
Andreas Joseph Krogh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Will there be any more on-disk format changes before 7.4 goes final which
will require a
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 19:13:47 +0530,
Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8 Sep 2003 at 8:42, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
If that was hash index, Tom suggested to bump version number of the indexes in
later versions and throw an error and ask user to reindex that particular
Gaetano Mendola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This seems inappropriate to me. Are you going to suggest that every
routine that takes a pointer parameter needs to explicitly test for
null?
Of course I'm not suggesting this, what I'm suggesting is put an
assert(
The current implementation of plpgsql lacks some details that makes
programming really hard: there's no language validator to check the code
when creating the function, and there's support to debug the code.
Before I start hacking on this, I'd like to share my thoughts.
Looking at the code, I
On Monday 08 September 2003 15:14, Andreas Pflug wrote:
Looking at the code, I think that a validator could be added quite soon.
The PLpgSQL_execstate struct could be extended by a validation_active
bool flag, which changes the behaviour of all exec_stmt_XXX routines.
The validator primarily
Richard Huxton wrote:
Actually, a simple trace ability would be a huge step forward. It'd save me
dotting RAISE statements around my functions while I write them.
Sounds bloody familiar... :-(
Even the ability to add DEBUG statements that checked some global flag before firing
would be very
Hi guys, I'm planning with some friends to develop a
port of pgsql, to native win32 environment using vc++;
We read about MingW choice of official dev team, and we comprise
their worries but we think that best results could be obtained
using some really native win32 libraries (for better or for
HI,
I found out that TupleTable stores per-tuple information(it stores
HeapTupleData) and that also there are multiple TupleTables in the db at a
time.Based on what are diffrent TupleTables created?
thank you
Jenny
From: Larry Douzie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL
Tom Lane wrote:
Here are some possible responses, roughly in order of difficulty
to implement:
1. Leave well enough alone (and perhaps document the behavior).
2. Throw an error if the expression doesn't return boolean.
I'd opt for 2.
It's quite common that newer compilers will detect more bogus
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
2. Throw an error if the expression doesn't return boolean.
I'd opt for 2.
It's quite common that newer compilers will detect more bogus coding
than older ones. There might be existing functions that break from
this because they
Doug McNaught [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I agree with another poster that deprecation in 7.4 and removal in
7.5 might make sense.
How would we deprecate it exactly? Throw a NOTICE?
regards, tom lane
---(end of
Jenny - [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I found out that TupleTable stores per-tuple information(it stores
HeapTupleData) and that also there are multiple TupleTables in the db at a
time.Based on what are diffrent TupleTables created?
TupleTables are just temporary data structures to hold
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
-On [20030908 06:32], Bruce Momjian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Your gethostbyname() is _not_ thread-safe
Your getpwuid() is _not_ thread-safe
Your functions are _not_ all thread-safe
Interesting. Do you have all the *_r files listed in thread.c? I sure
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Doug McNaught [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I agree with another poster that deprecation in 7.4 and removal in
7.5 might make sense.
How would we deprecate it exactly? Throw a NOTICE?
I was thinking of just a mention in the release notes that we've found
Tom Lane wrote:
Doug McNaught [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I agree with another poster that deprecation in 7.4 and removal in
7.5 might make sense.
How would we deprecate it exactly? Throw a NOTICE?
Good question. A NOTICE just might be ignored, breaking everything
surprisingly in 7.5.
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 09:57:30 -0400
From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gaetano Mendola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This seems inappropriate to me. Are you going to suggest that every
routine that takes a pointer parameter needs to explicitly test for
TupleTables are just temporary data structures to hold transiently
created tuples during execution of a query. There's usually one for
each plan node.
whats a 'plan node'?
From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jenny - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] row level lock
-On [20030908 18:52], Bruce Momjian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
So you don't have all the *_r functions, and your non-*_r functions
aren't thread-safe. Should we disable theading on FreeBSD? Seems so.
Exactly. Most other threading works though. :)
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven asmodai
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 10:17:46AM -0700, Jenny - wrote:
TupleTables are just temporary data structures to hold transiently
created tuples during execution of a query. There's usually one for
each plan node.
whats a 'plan node'?
Have you tried reading the documentation, source code and the
Tom Lane wrote:
Doug McNaught [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I agree with another poster that deprecation in 7.4 and removal in
7.5 might make sense.
How would we deprecate it exactly? Throw a NOTICE?
Release notes, I guess. A NOTICE would be fine as long as it didn't
result in a flood
Hi people,
can someone add:
Add an ALTER TABLE MODIFY CONSTRAINT
item to the todo list? I am even willing to pick this one up in a
while, after I finish some other outstanding tasks.
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven asmodai(at)wxs.nl / asmodai
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88
-Original Message-
From: luke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 9:16 AM
To: Hackers
Subject: [HACKERS] pgsql vc++|win32
Hi guys, I'm planning with some friends to develop a
port of pgsql, to native win32 environment using vc++;
We read about MingW
On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 14:32, Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
Hi people,
can someone add:
Add an ALTER TABLE MODIFY CONSTRAINT
item to the todo list? I am even willing to pick this one up in a
while, after I finish some other outstanding tasks.
This could be rather time consuming to
On Monday 08 September 2003 17:14, Andreas Pflug wrote:
Richard Huxton wrote:
Actually, a simple trace ability would be a huge step forward. It'd save
me dotting RAISE statements around my functions while I write them.
Sounds bloody familiar... :-(
Even the ability to add DEBUG statements
-On [20030908 20:52], Rod Taylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
This could be rather time consuming to actually write but having the
ability to change foreign key on update / on delete modes without
rechecking all of the data would be very useful.
I was more interested in this feature for CHECK
Dann Corbit wrote:
Mingw uses the native Win32 libraries.
Porting from a Mingw port to VC++ will be trivial compared to what we
have now.
where can I access latest dev source code and dev docs in
the/from CVS ?
Maybe you want the Win32 page. There are some links to it in recent
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
How would we deprecate it exactly? Throw a NOTICE?
Release notes, I guess. A NOTICE would be fine as long as it didn't
result in a flood of them. If that happened once at parse time that
should be fine, I think.
It would be
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
can someone add:
Add an ALTER TABLE MODIFY CONSTRAINT
item to the todo list?
Why? For a constraint, it's not obvious what this would do for you that
dropping and re-adding the constraint wouldn't do. In the places where
we support CREATE OR
hi,
ist possible to compile postgres (after same small modification) to shared
so, or dll , and usr it like normal postgres , but without any server and
so on. Its whould be work like simple database (with all funciton in one
lib), which dont need any others additionals like (network,other
ivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
hi,
ist possible to compile postgres (after same small modification) to shared
so, or dll , and usr it like normal postgres , but without any server and
so on.
Not without very major code changes.
-Doug
---(end of
Tom Lane wrote:
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
can someone add:
Add an ALTER TABLE MODIFY CONSTRAINT
item to the todo list?
Why? For a constraint, it's not obvious what this would do for you that
dropping and re-adding the constraint wouldn't do. In the places where
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Dann Corbit wrote:
Mingw uses the native Win32 libraries.
Porting from a Mingw port to VC++ will be trivial compared to what we
have now.
where can I access latest dev source code and dev docs in
the/from CVS ?
Maybe you want the
ivan wrote:
hi,
ist possible to compile postgres (after same small modification) to shared
so, or dll , and usr it like normal postgres , but without any server and
so on. Its whould be work like simple database (with all funciton in one
lib), which dont need any others additionals like
-On [20030908 22:42], Bruce Momjian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I assume MODIFY would allow you to alter the constraint without
re-checking all the rows, as would be required by DROP/ADD. However, if
you are modifying the constraint, wouldn't we have to recheck all the
rows anyway. Of course, one
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I assume MODIFY would allow you to alter the constraint without
re-checking all the rows, as would be required by DROP/ADD. However, if
you are modifying the constraint, wouldn't we have to recheck all the
rows anyway.
Yeah. Rod's point about altering
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Because what I can imagine, and please correct me if I miss something in
my thought pattern, you have a small gap between dropping a constraint
and adding the new one allowing the possibility of missing checks.
If you're concerned about
Doug McNaught [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ist possible to compile postgres (after same small modification) to shared
so, or dll , and usr it like normal postgres , but without any server and
so on.
Not without very major code changes.
... which are unlikely to
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What's the practice in deprecating other features?
We generally don't ;-). Certainly 7.4 contains bigger incompatible
changes than this one, and so have most of our prior releases.
I thought I had seen discussions along the
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because what I can imagine, and please correct me if I miss something in
my thought pattern, you have a small gap between dropping a constraint
and adding the new one allowing the possibility of missing checks.
I think, someone correct me if I'm
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I assume MODIFY would allow you to alter the constraint without
re-checking all the rows, as would be required by DROP/ADD. However, if
you are modifying the constraint, wouldn't we have to recheck all the
rows
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the percentage of deployments that enable assertions (which
causes a runtime performance hit) but NOT debugging info (which does
not) is pretty small.
How big a penalty is it? If it's small, or if it could be made small by making
a few assertions
Bruce Momjian writes:
Both gethostbyname() and getpwuid() have no _r equivalents on
FreeBSD-STABLE, ergo no thread-safe functions of these.
So you don't have all the *_r functions, and your non-*_r functions
aren't thread-safe. Should we disable theading on FreeBSD? Seems so.
Why would
-On [20030908 23:52], Peter Eisentraut ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Why would FreeBSD have a library of thread-safe libc functions (libc_r)
if the functions weren't thread-safe? I think the test is faulty.
Having libc_r is not a guarantee that all functions of libc are
represented in that library
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
-On [20030908 23:52], Peter Eisentraut ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Why would FreeBSD have a library of thread-safe libc functions (libc_r)
if the functions weren't thread-safe? I think the test is faulty.
A thread-safe library has a per-thread errno value
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the percentage of deployments that enable assertions (which
causes a runtime performance hit) but NOT debugging info (which does
not) is pretty small.
How big a penalty is it? If it's small, or if it could be
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
-On [20030908 22:42], Bruce Momjian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I assume MODIFY would allow you to alter the constraint without
re-checking all the rows, as would be required by DROP/ADD. However, if
you are modifying the constraint, wouldn't we have to recheck
Manfred Spraul wrote:
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
-On [20030908 23:52], Peter Eisentraut ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Why would FreeBSD have a library of thread-safe libc functions (libc_r)
if the functions weren't thread-safe? I think the test is faulty.
A thread-safe
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Manfred Spraul wrote:
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
-On [20030908 23:52], Peter Eisentraut ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Why would FreeBSD have a library of thread-safe libc functions (libc_r)
if the functions weren't thread-safe? I think the test is faulty
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oh, you bring up two important issues --- one is is the gap in time
between the drop and the recreate. This case can be done by
doing the query in a transaction --- the lock will exist until the
transaction completes, and in fact, you can roll it back
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I assume MODIFY would allow you to alter the constraint without
re-checking all the rows, as would be required by DROP/ADD. However, if
you are modifying the constraint, wouldn't we have to recheck all the
rows anyway.
Yeah.
Tom wrote...
At this point it should move to pghackers, I think.
Background for pghackers first, open issues below...
Over on pgpatches we've been discussing ISO syntax for
time intervals of the format with time-unit designators.
TupleTables are just temporary data structures to hold transiently
created tuples during execution of a query. There's usually one for
each plan node.
So, if i have the following transaction:
begin work;
select * from students where a age=19 for update;
lock table studens in share mode;
commit;
Jenny - [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
TupleTables are just temporary data structures to hold transiently
created tuples during execution of a query. There's usually one for
each plan node.
The TupleTable will exist for the query from the point the query is made
untill the transaction is
Is our maximum table size limited by the maximum block number?
With our block number maximum of:
#define MaxBlockNumber ((BlockNumber) 0xFFFE)
0xFFFE = 4294967294
would the max table size really be (4GB * 8k) or 32 TB, not 16TB, as
listed in the FAQ:
On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 11:09, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see no value at all in an assert. The code will dump core just fine
with or without an assert ...
Right but an assert can display information about the file and line number
without debug the
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gaetano Mendola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This seems inappropriate to me. Are you going to suggest that every
routine that takes a pointer parameter needs to explicitly test for
null?
Of course I'm not suggesting
I don't think so, because the patch does nothing to keep the sort
order once the index is initially created.
As Tom mentioned, we might not want to keep the tid's in order after the
index is created because he wants the most recent tid's first, so the
expired ones migrate to the end.
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 11:31:05 +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As Tom mentioned, we might not want to keep the tid's in order after the
index is created because he wants the most recent tid's first, so the
expired ones migrate to the end.
But on average this argument
Following up this gripe
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-sql/2003-09/msg00044.php
I've realized that plpgsql just assumes that the test expression
of an IF, WHILE, or EXIT statement is a boolean expression. It
doesn't take any measures to ensure this is the case or convert
the value if it's
Tom Lane wrote:
Following up this gripe
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-sql/2003-09/msg00044.php
I've realized that plpgsql just assumes that the test expression
of an IF, WHILE, or EXIT statement is a boolean expression. It
doesn't take any measures to ensure this is the case or convert
65 matches
Mail list logo
