On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:04 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 09:46:58AM -0700, Daniel Farina wrote:
>> I might try to find the segments leading up to the overflow point and
>> try xlogdumping them to see what we can see.
>
> That would be helpful to see.
>
> Just to grasp at yet-fli
Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> I'm looking at the following code in pg_dump.c
>
> /*
>* Start transaction-snapshot mode transaction to dump
>* consistent data.
>*/
> ExecuteSqlStatement(fout, "BEGIN");
> if (fout->remoteVersion >= 90100)
> {
> if (serializable_deferrable)
>
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 01:37:57AM -0700, Daniel Farina wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:04 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 09:46:58AM -0700, Daniel Farina wrote:
> >> I might try to find the segments leading up to the overflow point and
> >> try xlogdumping them to see what we
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 09/05/2012 06:13 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>
>> On 8/29/12 11:52 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> Why does this need to be tied into the build farm? Someone can surely
set up a script that just runs the docs build at e
On Thursday, September 06, 2012 9:58 PM Josh Berkus wrote:
On 9/6/12 7:06 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> 1.Set up postgresql-9.2beta2 on all hosts.
> Did you retest this with 9.2rc1? Beta2 was a while ago
Tested in 9.2rc1, the problem occurs incase I use database and backup of 9.2
Be
On 09/07/2012 09:57 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
A complete run of this process takes less than 15 minutes. And as I have
pointed out elsewhere that could be reduced substantially by skipping
certain steps. It's as simple as changing the com
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> Would socketpair(2) be simpler?
Attached is a revised version of the patch that uses socketpair(2).
This is definitely a lot less invasive --- the backend side of the
patch, in particular, is far shorter, and there are fewer portability
hazards since we're not trying
On 9/6/12 8:56 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of jue sep 06 21:33:33 -0300 2012:
>> I have developed a patch to make the python3 regression test setup a bit
>> simpler. Currently, we are making mangled copies of
>> plpython/{expected,sql} to plpython/python3/{
(Adding -hackers. Did not realize it got dropped)
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Pavan Deolasee
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Marie Bacuno II
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sep 7, 2012, at 2:19, Pavan Deolasee
>
adding pgsql-bugs list in case OP posts back.
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Pavan Deolasee
wrote:
> (Adding -hackers. Did not realize it got dropped)
>
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Gezeala M. Bacuño II
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Pavan Deolasee
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>>
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 01:37:57AM -0700, Daniel Farina wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:04 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> > On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 09:46:58AM -0700, Daniel Farina wrote:
>> >> I might try to find the segments leading up to the over
Excerpts from Andrew Dunstan's message of vie sep 07 13:50:44 -0300 2012:
> There is a filter mechanism used in detecting is a run is needed, and in
> modern versions of the client (Release 4.7, one version later than
> guaibasaurus is currently using) it lets you have both include and
> exclud
On 07.09.2012 10:49, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
Would socketpair(2) be simpler?
Attached is a revised version of the patch that uses socketpair(2).
This is definitely a lot less invasive --- the backend side of the
patch, in particular, is far shorter, and there are fewer port
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> It's worth noting that now that libpq constructs the command line to
> execute "postgres --child= -D ", we'll be stuck with that set
> of arguments forever, because libpq needs to be able to talk to
> different versions. Or at least we'd need to teach libpq to check
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 07.09.2012 10:49, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm a bit tempted though to pull out and apply the portions of the
>> patch that replace libpq's assorted ad-hoc closesocket() calls with
>> a centralized pqDropConnection routine. I think that's probably a good
>> idea independ
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-09-05 at 17:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In general I think the selling point for such a feature would be "no
>> administrative hassles", and I believe that has to go not only for the
>> end-user experience but also for the applicat
On Friday, September 07, 2012 11:21:00 PM Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-09-05 at 17:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> In general I think the selling point for such a feature would be "no
> >> administrative hassles", and I believe that has
On 9/2/12 7:23 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
4. As coded, the backend assumes the incoming pipe is on its FD 0 and the
outgoing pipe is on its FD 1. This made the command line simple but I'm
having second thoughts about it: if anything inside the backend tries to
read stdin or write stdout, unpleasant thi
On 09/04/2012 08:51 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 09/04/2012 08:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Frankly, I have had enough failures of parallel make that I think doing
this would generate a significant number of non-repeatable failures (I
had one just the other day that took thr
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> Well, it looks like it's always failing on ecpg, with preproc.h not
> being made in the right order. Here is the last bit of a make log
> starting from when it starts on ecpg. This is pretty repeatable.
Hmph. I can't reproduce it at all on my Fedora 16 box. What versi
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 09/05/2012 10:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>
>> The people who would be interested in this are currently using something
>> like SQLite within a single application program.
>>
>
> Exactly. I think it's worth stating that this has a HUGE
On 09/07/2012 08:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Well, it looks like it's always failing on ecpg, with preproc.h not
being made in the right order. Here is the last bit of a make log
starting from when it starts on ecpg. This is pretty repeatable.
Hmph. I can't reproduce it at
On 09/07/2012 09:55 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 09/07/2012 08:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Well, it looks like it's always failing on ecpg, with preproc.h not
being made in the right order. Here is the last bit of a make log
starting from when it starts on ecpg. This is pre
On 09/07/2012 10:46 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 09/07/2012 09:55 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 09/07/2012 08:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Well, it looks like it's always failing on ecpg, with preproc.h not
being made in the right order. Here is the last bit of a make log
s
24 matches
Mail list logo
