-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Lane wrote:
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bertram Scharpf wrote:
Wouldn't the release be a good opportunity for providing
this little tool?
As for whether we could accept this for 8.4, I thought the general
consensus was that we
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I believe this patch is an update to the table_funcs contrib module.
I spent 2 minutes looking. It has no Makefile and no comments. It
doesn't use our code conventions either. At that stage I stopped looking.
The author needs to spend some time looking at the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I believe this patch is an update to the table_funcs contrib module.
I spent 2 minutes looking. It has no Makefile and no comments. It
doesn't use our code conventions either. At that stage I
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I believe this patch is an update to the table_funcs contrib module.
I spent 2 minutes looking. It has no Makefile and no comments. It
doesn't use our code conventions either. At that stage I stopped
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joe Conway wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bertram Scharpf wrote:
Wouldn't the release be a good opportunity for providing
this little tool?
As for whether we could accept this for 8.4, I thought the general
consensus was that we
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
I noticed the following behavior in CVS HEAD, using a pattern that is
capable of matching no characters:
regression=# SELECT foo FROM regexp_matches('ab cde', $re$\s*$re$, 'g') AS
foo;
foo
---
{}
{}
{ }
{}
{}
{}
{}
(7 rows)
Robert,
I am working on a data integrity check tool (pgcheck).
I would like to discuss the following issues:
I'm a little confused. I assumed that your project would check the pages of a
*shut-down* database or one in recovery (single-user) mode as part of
recovery after a crash or HW
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[...]
3. When regexp_matches is done with the current call, it politely
releases the chunk, and AllocSetFree sticks it into the freelist for
4K chunks.
4. The next call of regexp_matches asks for a 2K chunk. There's nothing
in the 2K chunk freelist, so
Jason,
Aside from running into a known bug with too many triggers when creating
gratuitous indices on these tables, I feel as it may be possible to do what
I want without breaking everything. But then again, am I taking too many
liberties with technology that maybe didn't have use cases like
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is likely to be naive, but perhaps it'll help others understand
too. Would it be sensible to look at trying to fill a 2K request from
the next-larger (4K-chunk) freelist before allocating a new chunk?
That doesn't sound like a very good idea --- in
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps we should just remove lines 934-982 of aset.c, and always handle
small-chunk reallocs with the brute force case. Can anyone see a way
to salvage something from the realloc-in-place idea?
One thought that comes to mind is to try to make
Tom Lane commits
(http://www.postgresql.org/community/weeklynews/pwn20070121.html)
- Fix incorrect permissions check in
information_schema.key_column_usage view: it was checking a
pg_constraint OID instead of pg_class OID, resulting in relation with
OID n does not exist failures for anyone
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We could also only do the realloc-in-place only if there isn't a 4k chunk in
the 4k freelist. I'm imagining that usually there wouldn't be.
Or in general, if there's a free chunk of the right size then copy to
it, else consider realloc-in-place.
Hi,
Am Samstag, 11. Aug 2007, 10:22:24 -0400 schrieb Andrew Dunstan:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I believe this patch is an update to the table_funcs contrib module.
I spent 2 minutes looking. It has no Makefile and no comments. It
doesn't use our code conventions either. At that stage I
Bertram Scharpf wrote:
All I wanted to do is to float an idea by presenting a piece
of code that does what I mean instead of describing what it
should do if I considered right.
But that's exactly what I was making a point about. If you want to get
something included in PostgreSQL (and
Josh Berkus wrote:
Robert,
I am working on a data integrity check tool (pgcheck).
I would like to discuss the following issues:
I'm a little confused. I assumed that your project would check the pages of
a
*shut-down* database or one in recovery (single-user) mode as part of
April Lorenzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I had to feel my way carrying out this fix, and I don't know if I did
it right - I only know that it appears I no longer have the error.
Please confirm whether I was supposed to execute all of
share/information_schema.sql --- or just the portion that
17 matches
Mail list logo
