Sent directly. Anyone else who's interested can have a copy. Just
email me.
I *think* it's structurally sound. Please tell me if you find a
problem. It lacks a lot: proper specification of required security
properties, a way to specify different mechanism lists for local,
vice TCP,
Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the system I described is a slightly modified Lamport generator. The
maximum timestamp of any row updated in this transaction, you can consider
that
the counters received from other nodes. Then I make sure that the next
counter (timestamp) is
Hi,
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I haven't done that yet, since the current incarnation does not need it.
But I have considered using some signal like SIGUSR1 to mean something
changed in your processes, look into your shared memory. The
autovacuum shared memory area would contain PIDs (or maybe
Hi,
Jim Nasby wrote:
Note that those terms only make sense if you limit yourself to thinking
the master is pushing data out to the slave...
I don't really get the limitation here. It's all about distinguishing
between master/slave, origin/replica, local/remote - however you want to
call it.
On 1/27/2007 7:26 AM, Gregory Stark wrote:
Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the system I described is a slightly modified Lamport generator. The
maximum timestamp of any row updated in this transaction, you can consider that
the counters received from other nodes. Then I make sure
We seem to have 2 ECPG regression failures on Windows - see below, taken
from buildfarm log. Can we either fix ecpg or fix the expected results?
cheers
andrew
*** expected/compat_informix-dec_test-MinGW32.stdoutSat Jan 27 02:34:46 2007
--- results/compat_informix-dec_test.stdout Sat
Hello,
With all the recent discussion on contrib modules etc.. I would like to
offer the following suggestion. I am willing to do a good portion of the
work myself and I can get it done before feature freeze. I will need
help with the global make file stuff however so that is one dependency.
Add
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With all the recent discussion on contrib modules etc.. I would like to
offer the following suggestion.
AFAICT you're proposing an entirely cosmetic reclassification of /contrib.
Aside from the difficulty of getting agreement on which ones should be
in
Tom Lane wrote:
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With all the recent discussion on contrib modules etc.. I would like to
offer the following suggestion.
AFAICT you're proposing an entirely cosmetic reclassification of /contrib.
For the most part yes. Perception is reality and all.
Sorry for the spam. I am not sure if the email I sent earlier went
though as it was before I signed up for this email list.
Hi,
I am looking for a way via configuration to make Postgres
not to use the openssl lib libeay32.dll as I need to delete that
library. I basically
Tom Dong wrote:
Sorry for the spam. I am not sure if the email I sent earlier went
though as it was before I signed up for this email list.
Hi,
I am looking for a way via configuration to make Postgres
not to use the openssl lib libeay32.dll as I need to delete
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 09:27:59AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
We seem to have 2 ECPG regression failures on Windows - see below, taken
from buildfarm log. Can we either fix ecpg or fix the expected results?
Should be fixed now. You're right I simply forgot to update the expected
result files
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmm. There seems to be something wrong in the free space calculation in
the algorithm for choosing the right split location. I'll dig deeper,
unless someone beats me to it..
I think I found it. The page splitting code didn't take into account
I wrote:
Michael Fuhr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've found a situation that causes DROP FUNCTION to fail (tested
in 8.1.6, 8.2.1, and 8.3devel):
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg00937.php
Ugh ... I haven't traced this through in detail, but I'm pretty sure
the problem
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 08:59:47AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hello,
With all the recent discussion on contrib modules etc.. I would like to
offer the following suggestion. I am willing to do a good portion of the
work myself and I can get it done before feature freeze. I will need
help
David Fetter wrote:
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 08:59:47AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hello,
With all the recent discussion on contrib modules etc.. I would like to
offer the following suggestion. I am willing to do a good portion of the
work myself and I can get it done before feature
On Jan 28, 2007, at 11:25 , Joshua D. Drake wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
Not so great. SQL:2003 has a special meaning for the word module.
Yeah I saw mention of that in another thread, but I really didn't like
the word plugins. Do you have another thought? Extensions?
Extensions would tie
PostgreSQL can be extended by the user in many ways ...
PostgreSQL also accepts escape string constants, which are an extension
to the SQL standard
To use the infrastructure for your extension ...
Here is an example that builds an extension module ...
They test standard SQL operations as
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So what are we thinking here? Along with my suggestion of extensions /
contrib that we modify initdb to load an extensions schema with all
extensions into template1?
No, I don't think so. If you do that it's effectively moving all that
stuff into
Tom Lane wrote:
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So what are we thinking here? Along with my suggestion of extensions /
contrib that we modify initdb to load an extensions schema with all
extensions into template1?
No, I don't think so. If you do that it's effectively moving all
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 09:49:25PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So what are we thinking here? Along with my suggestion of
extensions / contrib that we modify initdb to load an extensions
schema with all extensions into template1?
On 1/27/07, Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So what are we thinking here? Along with my suggestion of extensions /
contrib that we modify initdb to load an extensions schema with all
extensions into template1?
No, I don't
22 matches
Mail list logo
