[HACKERS] unsubscribe

2006-07-06 Thread Gourish Singbal
-- Best,Gourish Singbal

Re: [HACKERS] Scan Keys

2006-07-06 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 09:14:21PM -0400, Greg Stark wrote: Well what was tripping me up was figuring out the operator class. I just realized it's in the index's Relation object. But yes what you describe is really a problem. Even given the operator class there's no way for me to know which

[HACKERS] unsubscribe

2006-07-06 Thread Leandro Oliveri

Re: [HACKERS] Scan Keys

2006-07-06 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm a bit confused about how scan keys work. Is there any simple way given a list of Datums of the same type as the index tuple attributes to get all matching index entries? This is for a non-system index. Define matching. I tried just using

Re: [HACKERS] lastval exposes information that currval does not

2006-07-06 Thread Phil Frost
On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 05:57:08PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: I am well aware of what security definer means. The significant part of this example is that lastval() will allow the caller to see the value of a sequence where currval('seq') will not. This means that things which might

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] UUID's as primary keys

2006-07-06 Thread mark
On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 06:47:17PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: It seems to me that maybe the backend should include a 16-byte fixed length object (after all, we've got 1, 2, 4 and 8 bytes already) and then people can use that to build whatever they like, using domains, for example...

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] UUID's as primary keys

2006-07-06 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 12:12:18PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please answer the below questions, and state whether your opinion is just an opinion, or whether you are stating it as a PostgreSQL maintainer and it is law. If you wish, you can rank preferences. Do I have to pick only one?

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] UUID's as primary keys

2006-07-06 Thread Jochem van Dieten
On 7/6/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please answer the below questions, and state whether your opinion is just an opinion, or whether you are stating it as a PostgreSQL maintainer and it is law. If you wish, you can rank preferences. 1) The added 128-bit type should take the form of: a)

Re: [HACKERS] Help with casting and comparing.

2006-07-06 Thread Tzahi Fadida
I looked around in the code and the whole thing looks complex and prone to breaking my code often, i.e., whenever someone will decide to change the casting/operators. I thought about just issuing in SPI_prepare query the proper casting like: SELECT a0::text,a1::text ... Casting to equal types

Re: [HACKERS] Scan Keys

2006-07-06 Thread Greg Stark
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I tried just using index_getprocinfo(...,BTORDER) with InvalidStrategy like btree does but _bt_preprocess_keys runs into problems without a valid strategy number. And in any case that would be btree specific which seems like it ought not be

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] UUID's as primary keys

2006-07-06 Thread Greg Stark
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: e) Generic n-byte binary data type generator. Not sure of feasibility of this at this point. See thread. I don't like the idea of a generator that would have to be manually invoked, though such a thing would be a fine tool for contrib or pgfoundry, I think

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] UUID's as primary keys

2006-07-06 Thread Sander Steffann
Hi, Just MHO: 1) The added 128-bit type should take the form of: c) UUID, with only encode/decode/indexable - generic except for the name of the type, and the encoding format. 2) According to your answer in 1), the added 128-bit type should be: a) In core first. 1c is what I

Re: [HACKERS] Help with casting and comparing.

2006-07-06 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 07:43:20PM +0300, Tzahi Fadida wrote: The downside is that i noticed that the CTID is removed from the tuple if a cast occurs. Is there a way to tell postgresql to not remove the CTID? Err, the fact the ctid is removed is really just a side-effect. With no adjusting of

Re: [HACKERS] Help with casting and comparing.

2006-07-06 Thread Tzahi Fadida
On Thursday 06 July 2006 21:55, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 07:43:20PM +0300, Tzahi Fadida wrote: The downside is that i noticed that the CTID is removed from the tuple if a cast occurs. Is there a way to tell postgresql to not remove the CTID? Err, the fact the

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] UUID's as primary keys

2006-07-06 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Greg Stark wrote: In answer to your question, though my opinion carries no special weight at all, I would suggest adding a bare bones 16-byte data type to core and a second binary-compatible data type based on it that parsed/output as uuids. The extended uuid libraries should only go in

Re: [HACKERS] Scan Keys

2006-07-06 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But on that note, is it ok to use the bulkdelete index AM methods for non-vacuum purposes Um, what would those be? ambulkdelete and amvacuumcleanup are most certainly not designed to be used in any context other than VACUUM. You might be able to abuse them

[HACKERS] request for feature: psql DSN option

2006-07-06 Thread Christopher Browne
Per tonight's dinner discussion, it Sure Would Be Nice if psql had an additional option that allowed passing in a conninfo string. The notion: Plenty of libraries out there like Pg, DBI::Pg, and such make you specify connections in the form: host=my.db.host.example.org port=5678

[HACKERS] xlog viewer prototype and new proposal

2006-07-06 Thread Diogo Biazus
I've worked on a prototype (attached to this email) of the SRF function and I can query the xlog files for some useful info.I know that the error codes are still incorrect and the tests are missing, but this is only a proof of concept. Examples of usage:Query for committed transactions on the xlog