Re: [HACKERS] Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann wrote: > Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do > that, can you inform me how? I thought we agreed on 2009-07? Anyhow, you just hit "Edit CommitFest". It requires admin privileges, which I have now given you. -- R

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade docs

2010-05-20 Thread Stefan Kaltenbrunner
On 05/19/2010 05:16 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Andres Freund wrote: >> On Wednesday 19 May 2010 22:39:32 Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> There are some limitations when migrating from 8.3 to 8.4, but not when >>> migrating from 8.3 to 9.0, because we added a feature to 9.0. Can you >>> give a specific ex

Re: [HACKERS] Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app

2010-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann > wrote: >> Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do >> that, can you inform me how? > I thought we agreed on 2009-07? Yeah, I thought the agreement was to keep the same target dates as for last

Re: [HACKERS] Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app

2010-05-20 Thread Stefan Kaltenbrunner
On 05/20/2010 07:21 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann > wrote: >> Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do >> that, can you inform me how? > > I thought we agreed on 2009-07? Anyhow, you just hit "Edit > CommitFest". It requir

Re: [HACKERS] Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > On 05/20/2010 07:21 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann >> wrote: >>> Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do >>> that, can you inform me how? >> >> I thought we agr

Re: [HACKERS] Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app

2010-05-20 Thread Selena Deckelmann
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann >> wrote: >>> Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do >>> that, can you inform me how? > >> I thought we agreed on 2009-07? > > Yeah, I thought

Re: [HACKERS] Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app

2010-05-20 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Selena Deckelmann wrote: > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Robert Haas writes: >>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann >>> wrote: Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do that, can you info

Re: [HACKERS] Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Selena Deckelmann wrote: > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Robert Haas writes: >>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann >>> wrote: Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do that, can you info

Re: [HACKERS] Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app

2010-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
Selena Deckelmann writes: > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Yeah, I thought the agreement was to keep the same target dates as >> for last year's commitfests. > Yes! However, we were going to do a "reviewfest" starting June 15. > Is there a way for me to specify that differe

[HACKERS] ExecutorCheckPerms() hook

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Haas
In yesterday's development meeting, we talked about the possibility of a basic SE-PostgreSQL implementation that checks permissions only for DML. Greg Smith offered the opinion that this could provide much of the benefit of SE-PostgreSQL for many users, while being much simpler. In fact, SE-Postg

Re: [HACKERS] Renaming '2010-Next' to '2010-6' in the commitfest app

2010-05-20 Thread Selena Deckelmann
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Selena Deckelmann writes: >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Yeah, I thought the agreement was to keep the same target dates as >>> for last year's commitfests. > >> Yes! However, we were going to do a "reviewfest" starting

Re: [HACKERS] ExecutorCheckPerms() hook

2010-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > In yesterday's development meeting, we talked about the possibility of > a basic SE-PostgreSQL implementation that checks permissions only for > DML. Greg Smith offered the opinion that this could provide much of > the benefit of SE-PostgreSQL for many users, while being muc

Re: [HACKERS] ExecutorCheckPerms() hook

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> In yesterday's development meeting, we talked about the possibility of >> a basic SE-PostgreSQL implementation that checks permissions only for >> DML.  Greg Smith offered the opinion that this could provide much of >> the

[HACKERS] Fwd: PGBuildfarm member polecat Branch HEAD Status changed from StartDb-C:2 failure to StartDb-C:3 failure

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Creager
And another one (different compiler): Process: postgres [48669] Path:/usr/local/src/build-farm-3.2/builds/HEAD/inst/bin/postgres Identifier: postgres Version: ??? (???) Code Type: X86-64 (Native) Parent Process: postgres [48015] Date/Time: 2010-05-19

[HACKERS] Fwd: PGBuildfarm member colugos Branch HEAD Status changed from OK to StartDb-C:3 failure

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Creager
If anyone is interested, I think this failure was accompanied by the following: Process: postgres [35159] Path: /usr/local/src/build-farm-3.2_llvm/builds/HEAD/inst/bin/postgres Identifier: postgres Version: ??? (???) Code Type: X86-64 (Native) Parent Process:

[HACKERS] Snapshot Materialized Views - GSoC

2010-05-20 Thread Pavel
First of all, I really appreciate you gave me change to participate on GSoC. It's great chance for me. For this summer I have plan to make patch inplementing snapshot materialized views (MV). I believe it will not be end of effort to implement more of MV. But I / we need discuss MV syntax and

Re: [HACKERS] ExecutorCheckPerms() hook

2010-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Hm, I think you need to ignore RT entries that have no requiredPerms >> bits set.  (Not that it matters too much, unless you were proposing to >> actually commit this contrib module.) > Well, that's an easy change - just

Re: [HACKERS] Snapshot Materialized Views - GSoC

2010-05-20 Thread Jaime Casanova
2010/5/20 Pavel : > > d) what to do when someone use INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE against MV? >   1 - raise error? - I prefer this option +1, FWIW >   2 - let commands change MV? (no chance to let changes propagate to > source tables, not for this summer :) >   if pg lets user to DML against MV, I ex

Re: [HACKERS] Fwd: PGBuildfarm member colugos Branch HEAD Status changed from OK to StartDb-C:3 failure

2010-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Creager writes: > If anyone is interested, I think this failure was accompanied by the > following: > [ apparent PANIC in UpdateControlFile ] Hmm, do you have the panic message in the postmaster log? So far as I can tell, the postmaster log isn't captured anywhere in the buildfarm report

Re: [HACKERS] Clarifications of licences on pgfoundry

2010-05-20 Thread Josh Berkus
On 05/18/2010 01:57 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: I notice that there are more than a few projects on pgfoundry that are marked as "BSD licence" but then the project files don't contain any mention of the licence details. In some cases, projects are also clearly marked Copyright of people or organizatio

Re: [HACKERS] Fwd: PGBuildfarm member colugos Branch HEAD Status changed from OK to StartDb-C:3 failure

2010-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Creager writes: > On May 20, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Was there any special environment here, like running out of disk space? > Not that I'm aware of. I did empty trash sometime yesterday after noticing I > was around 1Gb of free disk. Not sure if that correlates or not. M

Re: [HACKERS] Clarifications of licences on pgfoundry

2010-05-20 Thread Stefan Kaltenbrunner
On 05/20/2010 01:58 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 05/18/2010 01:57 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> I notice that there are more than a few projects on pgfoundry that are >> marked as "BSD licence" but then the project files don't contain any >> mention of the licence details. In some cases, projects are al

Re: [HACKERS] Clarifications of licences on pgfoundry

2010-05-20 Thread Josh Berkus
huh? that does not make any sense at all - the licence the submitter chooses _IS_ displayed on the main overview page of the project (see for example: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgbouncer/). That doesn't happen automatically -- after acceptance, the project owner needs to select a license

Re: [HACKERS] Fwd: PGBuildfarm member colugos Branch HEAD Status changed from OK to StartDb-C:3 failure

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Creager
On May 20, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Creager writes: >> If anyone is interested, I think this failure was accompanied by the >> following: >> [ apparent PANIC in UpdateControlFile ] > > Hmm, do you have the panic message in the postmaster log? So far as I > can tell, the pos

Re: [HACKERS] Clarifications of licences on pgfoundry

2010-05-20 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On Thu, May 20, 2010 3:06 pm, Josh Berkus wrote: > >> huh? that does not make any sense at all - the licence the submitter >> chooses _IS_ displayed on the main overview page of the project (see for >> example: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgbouncer/). > > That doesn't happen automatically -- afte

Re: [HACKERS] Fwd: PGBuildfarm member colugos Branch HEAD Status changed from OK to StartDb-C:3 failure

2010-05-20 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On Thu, May 20, 2010 2:12 pm, Tom Lane wrote: > It's annoying though that > the buildfarm script didn't capture the relevant log file in this > particular failure case. Andrew, can we get that fixed? > It was captured, but apparently had no new content - not surprising if it ran out of space. c

[HACKERS] [RFC][PATCH]: CRC32 is limiting at COPY/CTAS/INSERT ... SELECT + speeding it up

2010-05-20 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, I started to analyze XLogInsert because it was the major bottleneck when creating some materialized view/cached tables/whatever. Analyzing it I could see that content of the COMP_CRC32 macro was taking most of the time which isn't immediately obvious when you profile because it obviously do

[HACKERS] ERROR: GIN indexes do not support whole-index scans

2010-05-20 Thread Kevin Flanagan
Could anyone advise as to how to avoid this error? I'll describe the table and query below. The database contains a table 'tinytm_segments', which has two text columns, 'source_text' and 'target_text'. These are used to store sentences and their translations. The language of the text is specifi

Re: [HACKERS] [RFC][PATCH]: CRC32 is limiting at COPY/CTAS/INSERT ... SELECT + speeding it up

2010-05-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Andres, * Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote: > Statement: > INSERT INTO blub SELECT a.i, b.i, a.i *b.i FROM generate_series(1, 1) > a(i), generate_series(1, 1000) b(i); > > legacy crc: > > zlib: Is this legacy crc using the function-based calls, or the macro? Do you have statistics

Re: [HACKERS] [RFC][PATCH]: CRC32 is limiting at COPY/CTAS/INSERT ... SELECT + speeding it up

2010-05-20 Thread Andres Freund
Hi Stephen, On Thursday 20 May 2010 22:39:26 Stephen Frost wrote: > * Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote: > > Statement: > > INSERT INTO blub SELECT a.i, b.i, a.i *b.i FROM generate_series(1, 1) > > a(i), generate_series(1, 1000) b(i); > > > > legacy crc: > Is this legacy crc using the

Re: [HACKERS] Unexpected data beyond EOF during heavy writes

2010-05-20 Thread Tony Sullivan
> Hello everyone, > > We are seeing the following error message occasionally in the postgres logs: > > 2010-05-13 23:49:03 PDT ERROR: unexpected data beyond EOF in block 4106698 of > relation "custom_discoveryprofile" > 2010-05-13 23:49:03 PDT HINT: This has been seen to occur with buggy kern

Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: GIN indexes do not support whole-index scans

2010-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
"Kevin Flanagan" writes: > Why would adding "target_lang_code='en'" cause this error? Hard to tell without seeing the index definitions for this table. Also could we see the EXPLAIN plans for both queries? (If possible ... I'm not sure whether you'd get this error just from EXPLAINing the proble

Re: [HACKERS] Unexpected data beyond EOF during heavy writes

2010-05-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Tony Sullivan's message of jue may 20 16:54:17 -0400 2010: > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > We are seeing the following error message occasionally in the postgres logs: > > > > > > 2010-05-13 23:49:03 PDT ERROR: unexpected data beyond EOF in block 4106698 > > of relation "custom_d

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Postgres stats collector showing high disk I/O

2010-05-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Justin Pasher's message of jue may 20 16:10:53 -0400 2010: > Whenever I clear out the stats for all of the databases, the file > shrinks down to <1MB. However, it only takes about a day for it to get > back up to ~18MB and then the stats collector process start the heavy > disk wr

Re: [HACKERS] Unexpected data beyond EOF during heavy writes

2010-05-20 Thread Rosser Schwarz
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > We (at Command Prompt) researched this recently for another setup and > the common point you both have is NetApp.  I then wondered about a bug > in NetApp driver or NFS client implementation. It's definitely not (just) NetApp, though it ma

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Postgres stats collector showing high disk I/O

2010-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera writes: > Excerpts from Justin Pasher's message of jue may 20 16:10:53 -0400 2010: >> Whenever I clear out the stats for all of the databases, the file >> shrinks down to <1MB. However, it only takes about a day for it to get >> back up to ~18MB and then the stats collector proces

Re: [HACKERS] Unexpected data beyond EOF during heavy writes

2010-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
Rosser Schwarz writes: > Has anyone ever seen this message on non-NetApp NFS? It's been seen on non-NFS storage: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2006-09/msg00096.php I don't believe we implicated NFS in the other original report, either. However, it's certainly possible that there's

Re: [HACKERS] ecmascript 5 DATESTYLE

2010-05-20 Thread Ben Hockey
On May 19, 2010, at 4:31 AM, Mike Fowler wrote: Pavel Stehule wrote: 2010/5/19 Peter Eisentraut : On tis, 2010-05-18 at 18:26 -0400, Ben Hockey wrote: ecmascript 5 is the most recent specification for JavaScript and i would think that having a DATESTYLE format to simplify interoperability

Re: [HACKERS] Row-level Locks & SERIALIZABLE transactions, postgres vs. Oracle

2010-05-20 Thread Florian Pflug
On May 19, 2010, at 2:15 , Florian Pflug wrote: > On May 17, 2010, at 3:30 , Robert Haas wrote: >> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Florian Pflug wrote: >>> On May 14, 2010, at 22:54 , Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Florian Pflug writes: >> All

Re: [HACKERS] ecmascript 5 DATESTYLE

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Ben Hockey wrote: > thanks for looking into adding this feature.  custom formats for parsing and > formatting of dates would certainly be the better option if it can be done > securely. Well, Pavel expressed a concern about SQL injection, but I can't see why that

Re: [HACKERS] [RFC][PATCH]: CRC32 is limiting at COPY/CTAS/INSERT ... SELECT + speeding it up

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > I looked a bit around for faster implementations of CRC32 and found one in > zlib. After adapting it (pg uses slightly different computation (non- > inverted)) I found that it increases the speed of the CRC32 calculation itself > 3 fold. But

[HACKERS] Why SELECT keyword on parser is written as SELECTME ?

2010-05-20 Thread Mohammad Heykal Abdillah
All, I was trying to implement some database language into PostgreSQL. Let's say an SQL command that using local language as it's command. I know it's not standard, but it's not the issue for me. I made a lot modification in "scan.l" and "gram.y" and related file in parser (src/backend/parser). S

Re: [HACKERS] Why SELECT keyword on parser is written as SELECTME ?

2010-05-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Mohammad Heykal Abdillah wrote: > I just wonder why "select" keyword token in PostgreSQL is identified as > "selectme" (at src/backend/parser/keywords.c)? > > Whats it's the different between "select" and "selectme" ? The string "selectme" doesn't appear anywhere

Re: [HACKERS] Why SELECT keyword on parser is written as SELECTME ?

2010-05-20 Thread Mohammad Heykal Abdillah
On Kam, 2010-05-20 at 23:50 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > The string "selectme" doesn't appear anywhere in my copy of the > PostgreSQL source code, with any capitalization, or in any previous > version of keywords.c, in any capitalization. I think this must be > something you changed in your copy.

Re: [HACKERS] [RFC][PATCH]: CRC32 is limiting at COPY/CTAS/INSERT ... SELECT + speeding it up

2010-05-20 Thread Andres Freund
On Friday 21 May 2010 05:40:03 Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > I looked a bit around for faster implementations of CRC32 and found one > > in zlib. After adapting it (pg uses slightly different computation (non- > > inverted)) I found that it increase