Re: [HACKERS] like/ilike improvements

2007-09-22 Thread Guillaume Smet
On 9/21/07, Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It applied cleanly for me. Yes, it seems something was screwed in my tree. I didn't notice you commited the patch I applied before Greg's patch. Anyway, I'm starting with a clean tree containing your fix and what Tom commited but I have to

Re: [HACKERS] First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher

2007-09-22 Thread Guillaume Smet
On 9/19/07, Decibel! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You missed my point... what we'd want to happen is for the analyze to take place while that table had a good chance of still being in memory. It seems to be a bit too intrusive for 8.3 at this point. It might be worth looking into creating a

Re: [HACKERS] like/ilike improvements

2007-09-22 Thread Guillaume Smet
On 9/22/07, Guillaume Smet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway, I'm starting with a clean tree containing your fix and what Tom commited but I have to import the data again due to the catalog version bump :). I have some good news. After Andrew's and Greg's patches, CVS HEAD is as fast as 8.2 with

Re: [HACKERS] First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher

2007-09-22 Thread Tom Lane
Guillaume Smet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So a total of: 16 minutes for 8.2 compared to 53 minutes for 8.3 to have the database in the same state. Please try that experiment with all three configurations on both versions: * autovacuum off * autovacuum on,

Re: [HACKERS] First steps with 8.3 and autovacuum launcher

2007-09-22 Thread Guillaume Smet
On 9/22/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Guillaume Smet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please try that experiment with all three configurations on both versions: * autovacuum off * autovacuum on, autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay = 0 * autovacuum on,

Re: [HACKERS] msvc, build and install with cygwin in the PATH

2007-09-22 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Hannes Eder wrote: Magnus Hagander wrote: Hannes Eder wrote: Is it worth doing this the Perl-way and using File::Find? If so, I can work an a patch for that. It's certainly cleaner that way, but I don't find it a major issue. But I'd rather see that fix than the other one. Here we

Re: [HACKERS] Add function for quote_qualified_identifier?

2007-09-22 Thread Brendan Jurd
I had some spare cycles so I went ahead and patched this. Patch includes documentation and new regression tests. While I was in there I also added regression tests for quote_ident(), which appeared to be absent. quote_literal doesn't seem to have any regression tests either, but I decided to

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Add function for quote_qualified_identifier?

2007-09-22 Thread Tom Lane
Brendan Jurd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Patch includes documentation and new regression tests. While I was in there I also added regression tests for quote_ident(), which appeared to be absent. This seems rather pointless, since it's equivalent to quote_ident(schemaname) || '.' ||

Re: [HACKERS] Text - C string

2007-09-22 Thread Brendan Jurd
On 9/22/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brendan Jurd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I just noticed a couple of macros defined in src/include/tsearch/ts_utils.h: #define TextPGetCString(t) DatumGetCString(DirectFunctionCall1(textout, PointerGetDatum(t))) #define CStringGetTextP(c)

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Add function for quote_qualified_identifier?

2007-09-22 Thread Brendan Jurd
On 9/23/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This seems rather pointless, since it's equivalent to quote_ident(schemaname) || '.' || quote_ident(relname). Yes it is, and I brought that up in the OP: I wrote: Clearly a DBA could just create this function himself in SQL (and it

Re: [HACKERS] Text - C string

2007-09-22 Thread Tom Lane
Brendan Jurd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The thing that's got me confused at the moment is what naming convention to use for the functions. Well, almost any convention you like has some precedent somewhere in the PG code, given all the contributors over the years. Almost the only thing we