Hi,
Can someone please explain why we do not reset the expression context
if an SRF is involved during execution?
Consider
srf(foo(col))
where foo returns a pass-by-reference datatype. Your proposed patch
would cut the knees out from under argument values that the SRF could
On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 15:00 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 12:08 +0200, Yeb Havinga wrote:
That's funny because when I was reading this thread, I was thinking the
exact opposite: having max_standby_delay always set to 0 so I know the
standby server is as up-to-date as
Robert Haas wrote:
Oh, I see. Well, that might be reasonable syntactic sugar, although I
think you should make it wrap the path in exists() unconditionally,
rather than testing for an existing wrap.
I'll leave it out for now, it saves me some effort after all.
Please email your patch to
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Andy Lester a...@petdance.com wrote:
I was looking for how to undo a CLUSTER call earlier today. Nothing on
the CLUSTER page told me how to do it, or pointed me to the ALTER TABLE
page. I figure a pointer to would help the next person in my situation.
I've
Erik Rijkers wrote:
Everything together: the raid is what Areca call 'raid10(1E)'.
(to be honest I don't remember what that 1E exactly means -
extra flexibility in the number of disks, I think).
Standard RAID10 only supports an even number of disks. The 1E variants
also allow putting an
Someone just posted to the -admin list with a database corrupted
while running with fsync=off. I was all set to refer him to the
documentation explaining why he should stop doing this, but to my
surprise the documentation waffles on the issue way past what I
think is reasonable.
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Someone just posted to the -admin list with a database corrupted
while running with fsync=off. I was all set to refer him to the
documentation explaining why he should stop doing this, but to my
surprise the
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 16:00, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Someone just posted to the -admin list with a database corrupted
while running with fsync=off. I was all set to refer him to the
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
| If you trust your operating system, your hardware, and your
| utility company (or your battery backup), you can consider
| disabling fsync.
Isn't this a little too rosy a picture to paint?
I think that statement is true as far as it goes,
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
What amazes me is how many people who closely follow our development are
mystified by what we do during that pre-beta period.
Hey, I'm still mystified. Maybe you and Tom could do twice-a-week
status updates on what
Kevin Grittner wrote:
There are dire-sounding statements interspersed with:
| using fsync results in a performance penalty
| Due to the risks involved, there is no universally correct setting
| for fsync.
| If you trust your operating system, your hardware, and your
| utility company
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie may 07 07:33:55 -0400 2010:
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Andy Lester a...@petdance.com wrote:
I was looking for how to undo a CLUSTER call earlier today. Nothing on
the CLUSTER page told me how to do it, or pointed me to the ALTER TABLE
page.
nly
one sentence I think we should add it adjacent to the existing
sentence discussing remembering the index. My proposed patch
attached; thoughts?
As long as there's a pointer to the answer I'm happy.
xoa
--
Andy Lester = a...@petdance.com = www.theworkinggeek.com = AIM:petdance
--
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
I think the critical question is really whether you are prepared
to lose your database.
Precisely; and the docs don't make that at all clear. They mention
the possibility of database corruption, but downplay it:
| When fsync is disabled, the
Nikhil Sontakke nikhil.sonta...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Consider
srf(foo(col))
where foo returns a pass-by-reference datatype.
Yeah this is my basic confusion. But wouldn't the arguments be
evaluated afresh on the subsequent call for this SRF?
No, see ExecMakeFunctionResult(). If
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I am fuzzier on what happens now. I understand that it depends on
what bug reports we get as a result of beta testing, but what I don't
quite know is what the expectations are for individual developers, how
we're tracking what issues still need to be
Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
quietly removing NULL is maybe good for compatibility but is wrong for
functionality.
I agree. I wasn't aware of this little misfeature.
Default display for NULL should be a zero-length string.
That's just
I never meant to suggest any statement in that section is factually
wrong; it's just all too rosy, leading people to believe it's no big
deal to turn it off.
Yeah, that section is overdue for an update. I'll write some new text
and post it to pgsql-docs.
--
All,
BTW, it would be good if some other folks than me were monitoring -testers.
Can someone verify that these two C interface issues are intentional?
If not, they're bugs:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-testers/2010-05/msg00011.php
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
Can someone verify that these two C interface issues are intentional?
If not, they're bugs:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-testers/2010-05/msg00011.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-testers/2010-05/msg00010.php
That's ecpg, not C interface
On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 02:14:12PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
That's ecpg, not C interface --- the latter term is unlikely to
draw the attention of the right person, namely Michael.
Right, thanks Tom. I have an email filter that filters all emails containing
ecpg anf puts them into a special
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I would say the expectation for individual developers is test, and
read code. It's certainly not time to be starting new feature
development yet.
I am humbly of the opinion that the expectation you have enclosed in
quotation
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie may 07 07:33:55 -0400 2010:
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Andy Lester a...@petdance.com wrote:
I was looking for how to undo a CLUSTER call earlier today. Nothing on
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
[ argues, in effect, for starting 9.1 development right now ]
I can't stop you from spending your time as you please. My development
time for at least the next month or two is going to be spent on
code-reading the HS/SR code and fixing bugs as they come
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
[ argues, in effect, for starting 9.1 development right now ]
I can't stop you from spending your time as you please. My development
time for at least the next month or two is going
2010/5/6 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
OK, seems people like pg_upgrade, but do we call it pgupgrade or
pg_upgrade?
pg_upgrade sounds good. I just bet that some users will want it to
upgrade their postgresql from 9.0.0 to 9.0.1..
The latter. The former
--On 7. Mai 2010 09:48:53 -0500 Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
I think it goes beyond tweaking -- I think we should have a bald
statement like don't turn this off unless you're OK with losing the
entire contents of the database cluster. A brief listing of some
cases
hernan gonzalez hgonza...@gmail.com writes:
The issue is that psql tries (apparently) to convert to UTF8
(even when he plans to output the raw text -LATIN9 in this case)
just for computing the lenght of the field, to build the table.
And because for this computation he (apparently) rely on the
Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de writes:
I've recently even started to wonder if the performance gain with fsync=off
is still that large on modern hardware. While testing large migration
procedures to a new version some time ago (on an admitedly fast storage) i
forgot here and then to turn
--On 7. Mai 2010 19:49:15 -0400 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de writes:
I've recently even started to wonder if the performance gain with
fsync=off is still that large on modern hardware. While testing large
migration procedures to a new version some
However, it appears that glibc's printf
code interprets the parameter as the number of *characters* to print,
and to determine what's a character it assumes the string is in the
environment LC_CTYPE's encoding.
Well, I myself have problems to believe that :-)
This would be nasty... Are you
Sorry about a error in my previous example (mixed width and precision).
But the conclusion is the same - it works on bytes:
#includestdio.h
main () {
char s[] = ni\xc3\xb1o; /* 5 bytes , 4 utf8 chars */
printf(|%*s|\n,6,s); /* this should pad a black */
Yeah this is my basic confusion. But wouldn't the arguments be
evaluated afresh on the subsequent call for this SRF?
No, see ExecMakeFunctionResult(). If we did that we'd have serious
problems with volatile functions, ie srf(random()).
Ok thanks. So if someone uses a really long-running
33 matches
Mail list logo
