[HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Simon Riggs
We start with a database called Postgres and a schema called Public. Yet we don't start up with any usable tables. I propose we add a single table called Postgres when we Initdb CREATE TABLE Postgres (Id Integer, Data Jsonb); COMMENT ON TABLE Postgres IS 'Single table for quick start usage -

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes: By now, some of you will be doubled over laughing as if this is an April fool joke. Indeed. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Craig Ringer
On 04/23/2014 02:11 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: I propose we add a single table called Postgres when we Initdb CREATE TABLE Postgres (Id Integer, Data Jsonb); Without particular comment on the need for the table, I'd be concerned about calling it postgres. My personal impression from Stack

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello if you are thinking about this direction, then store there some demo project. I am don't think so isolated table has significant price. Regards Pavel 2014-04-23 8:45 GMT+02:00 Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com: On 04/23/2014 02:11 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: I propose we add a single

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Albe Laurenz
Simon Riggs wrote: I propose we add a single table called Postgres when we Initdb CREATE TABLE Postgres (Id Integer, Data Jsonb); COMMENT ON TABLE Postgres IS 'Single table for quick start usage - design your database'; The purpose of this is to make the database immediately usable.

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Craig Ringer
On 04/23/2014 03:20 PM, Albe Laurenz wrote: Good that you mention that! I have wondered what to do with it. When I first connected to PostgreSQL, I created a sample table, but the senior developer from the other office told me that this is the postgres database and that I shouldn't create any

Re: [HACKERS] Minor improvements in alter_table.sgml

2014-04-23 Thread Etsuro Fujita
(2014/04/15 15:27), Etsuro Fujita wrote: (2014/04/14 23:53), Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote: Attached is an updated version of the patch. I think the other changes deserve to be considered separately, and in particular I'm

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Simon Riggs
On 23 April 2014 07:14, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes: By now, some of you will be doubled over laughing as if this is an April fool joke. Indeed. I do like to share the odd joke now and then, it has to be said. So I'm glad I enriched your day.

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Albe Laurenz
Craig Ringer wrote: Good that you mention that! I have wondered what to do with it. When I first connected to PostgreSQL, I created a sample table, but the senior developer from the other office told me that this is the postgres database and that I shouldn't create any objects there. What

Re: [HACKERS] What use case is make_tuple_indirect() supposed to illustrate?

2014-04-23 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2014-04-22 20:22:23 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: And for that matter, it's a bit silly to be testing make_tuple_indirect in a BEFORE INSERT/UPDATE trigger, because even if the tuple gets out of the trigger without being flattened, it will certainly get flattened mere nanoseconds later before

Re: [HACKERS] Missing pfree in logical_heap_rewrite_flush_mappings()

2014-04-23 Thread Andres Freund
On 2014-04-22 22:37:37 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes: I had to revert this patch. It causes a failure in the /contrib/test_decoding regression test. On closer inspection, it was simply pfree'ing the wrong pointer. Thanks for fixing. I fixed that and also

Re: [HACKERS] Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation)

2014-04-23 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 23/04/14 00:40, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: Where are we on the default JSONB opclass change? FWIW, I still don't have any strong opinion here. I defer to others on this question. I vote for changing it, even though

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread David Rowley
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: I propose we add a single table called Postgres when we Initdb CREATE TABLE Postgres (Id Integer, Data Jsonb); COMMENT ON TABLE Postgres IS 'Single table for quick start usage - design your database'; The purpose

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE FOREIGN TABLE ( ... LIKE ... )

2014-04-23 Thread Etsuro Fujita
(2014/04/08 9:26), Michael Paquier wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2014-04-05 11:46:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: ISTM this is because the proposed feature is wrongheaded. The basic concept of CREATE TABLE LIKE is that you're copying

[HACKERS] Typo in doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml? s/tranche/trance?

2014-04-23 Thread Amit Langote
Hi, Attached fixes a typo in doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml. -- Amit docs-monitoring-lwlock-tranche-not-trance-fix.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

Re: [HACKERS] Typo in doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml? s/tranche/trance?

2014-04-23 Thread Amit Langote
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Amit Langote amitlangot...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Attached fixes a typo in doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml. Sorry, typo in subject (kinda ironic!); I meant s/trance/tranche? Patch attached again. -- Amit docs-monitoring-lwlock-tranche-not-trance-fix.patch

[HACKERS] Runing DBT2 on Postgresql

2014-04-23 Thread Rohit Goyal
Hi All, I am trying to install dbt2 on postgresql database. cmake(configure) command work fine and but make command(build) give an error given below. I have no idea about how to solve it I have set export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=home/abhi/project/lib:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH dbt2pgdata =

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 04/23/2014 08:11 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: We start with a database called Postgres and a schema called Public. Yet we don't start up with any usable tables. I propose we add a single table called Postgres when we Initdb CREATE TABLE Postgres (Id Integer, Data Jsonb); COMMENT ON TABLE

Re: [HACKERS] Typo in doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml? s/tranche/trance?

2014-04-23 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 04/23/2014 12:15 PM, Amit Langote wrote: Hi, Attached fixes a typo in doc/src/sgml/monitoring.sgml. Thanks, applied. - Heikki -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation)

2014-04-23 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:20:42AM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 23/04/14 00:40, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: Where are we on the default JSONB opclass change? FWIW, I still don't have any strong opinion here. I defer to others

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Simon Riggs
On 23 April 2014 09:26, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: I propose we add a single table called Postgres when we Initdb CREATE TABLE Postgres (Id Integer, Data Jsonb); COMMENT ON TABLE Postgres IS 'Single

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Mark Kirkwood
This seems like a much better idea - whereas a single table, related to nothing - on the other hand, is at best not very helpful (and it could be argued, might contribute to teaching poor data data design). Regards Mark On 23/04/14 19:13, Pavel Stehule wrote: Hello if you are thinking

Re: [HACKERS] Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation)

2014-04-23 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:20:42AM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: I vote for changing it, even though neither option is ideal I think that given the nature of datatype the current default will break inserts for common usage

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Stephen Frost
* Simon Riggs (si...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: +1 to the idea of an example database, used throughout the docs Sounds like a summer of code project. Agreed. I'll add it to the GSoC ideas page. Since we don't have that now, it won't work for 9.4. None of this is on the table for 9.4 as far as

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade and epoch

2014-04-23 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 07:08:42AM +0400, Sergey Burladyan wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:38 AM, Sergey Konoplev gray...@gmail.com wrote: BTW, I didn't manage to make a test case yet. Recently, when I was migrating several servers to skytools3 and upgrading from 9.0 to 9.2, I

Re: [HACKERS] WAL replay bugs

2014-04-23 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 04/17/2014 07:59 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: On 04/08/2014 06:41 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:16 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: I've been playing with a little hack that records a before and after image of every page modification that is

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 04/23/2014 03:28 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: * Simon Riggs (si...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: +1 to the idea of an example database, used throughout the docs Sounds like a summer of code project. Agreed. I'll add it to the GSoC ideas page. I don't think this is a good GSoC project.

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Thom Brown
On 23 April 2014 13:46, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: On 04/23/2014 03:28 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: * Simon Riggs (si...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: +1 to the idea of an example database, used throughout the docs Sounds like a summer of code project. Agreed. I'll add it to

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Stephen Frost
Heikki, * Heikki Linnakangas (hlinnakan...@vmware.com) wrote: On 04/23/2014 03:28 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: Agreed. I'll add it to the GSoC ideas page. I don't think this is a good GSoC project. Documentation-only projects are not eligible for GSoC

Re: [HACKERS] Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation)

2014-04-23 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes: On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:20:42AM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 23/04/14 00:40, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: Where are we on the default JSONB opclass change? FWIW, I still don't have any

Re: [HACKERS] Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation)

2014-04-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes: On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:20:42AM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 23/04/14 00:40, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: Where are we on the default JSONB opclass change? FWIW,

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] aggregate returning anyarray and 'cannot determine result data type'

2014-04-23 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: The same problem came up in connection with the ordered set aggregates that were added recently, and that patch implemented an interesting workaround: the final function for an OSA gets additional dummy arguments of the same type as the aggregate inputs. They are always passed as

Re: [HACKERS] Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation)

2014-04-23 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes: Tom Lane wrote: That seems to be the consensus, but now we need a name for the soon-to-be-not-default opclass. What's a good short adjective for it? comprehensive? Not particularly short ... According to Merriam Webster: Synonyms

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: We start with a database called Postgres and a schema called Public. Yet we don't start up with any usable tables. I propose we add a single table called Postgres when we Initdb CREATE TABLE Postgres (Id Integer,

[HACKERS] Review: ECPG FETCH readahead

2014-04-23 Thread Antonin Houska
I haven't been too familiar with the ECPG internals so far but tried to do my best. Generic criteria * Does it follow the project coding guidelines? Yes. * Are there portability issues? Shouldn't be. I even noticed the code tries to avoid platform-specific behaviour of

Re: [HACKERS] Review: ECPG FETCH readahead

2014-04-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Antonin Houska wrote: I haven't been too familiar with the ECPG internals so far but tried to do my best. I'm afraid we're stuck on this patch until Michael has time to review it, or some other committer wants to acquire maintainership rights in the ECPG code. -- Álvaro Herrera

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Fabrízio de Royes Mello
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 23 April 2014 07:14, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes: By now, some of you will be doubled over laughing as if this is an April fool joke. Indeed. I do like to

Re: [HACKERS] Review: ECPG FETCH readahead

2014-04-23 Thread Boszormenyi Zoltan
Hi, thanks for the review. 2014-04-23 17:20 keltezéssel, Antonin Houska írta: I haven't been too familiar with the ECPG internals so far but tried to do my best. Generic criteria * Does it follow the project coding guidelines? Yes. * Are there portability issues?

Re: [HACKERS] assertion failure 9.3.4

2014-04-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Alvaro Herrera wrote: I'm thinking about the comparison of full infomask as you propose instead of just the bits that we actually care about. I think the only thing that could cause a spurious failure (causing an extra execution of the HeapTupleSatisfiesUpdate call and the stuff below) is

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Josh Berkus
On 04/23/2014 07:43 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: I can propose contrib PostgreNoSQL providing following: 1) Table postgres as you proposed. 2) Functions: get_postgres(id intgeger) returns jsonb, set_postgres(id integer, data jsonb) returns void, search_postgres(query jsonb) returns setof

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Josh Berkus wrote: On 04/23/2014 07:43 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: I can propose contrib PostgreNoSQL providing following: 1) Table postgres as you proposed. 2) Functions: get_postgres(id intgeger) returns jsonb, set_postgres(id integer, data jsonb) returns void, search_postgres(query

Re: [HACKERS] MultiXactId error after upgrade to 9.3.4

2014-04-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Andres Freund wrote: On 2014-03-31 08:54:53 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: My conclusion here is that some part of the code is failing to examine XMAX_INVALID before looking at the value stored in xmax itself. There ought to be a short-circuit. Fortunately, this bug should be pretty

Re: [HACKERS] MultiXactId error after upgrade to 9.3.4

2014-04-23 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:01:02PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andres Freund wrote: On 2014-03-31 08:54:53 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: My conclusion here is that some part of the code is failing to examine XMAX_INVALID before looking at the value stored in xmax itself. There ought

Re: [HACKERS] MultiXactId error after upgrade to 9.3.4

2014-04-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:01:02PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andres Freund wrote: On 2014-03-31 08:54:53 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: My conclusion here is that some part of the code is failing to examine XMAX_INVALID before looking at the value stored in xmax

Re: [HACKERS] MultiXactId error after upgrade to 9.3.4

2014-04-23 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:42:14PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: I still don't know under what circumstances this situation could arise. This seems most strange to me. I would wonder about this to be just papering over a different bug elsewhere, except that we know this tuple comes

Re: [HACKERS] MultiXactId error after upgrade to 9.3.4

2014-04-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:42:14PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: I still don't know under what circumstances this situation could arise. This seems most strange to me. I would wonder about this to be just papering over a different bug elsewhere, except that we

Re: [HACKERS] MultiXactId error after upgrade to 9.3.4

2014-04-23 Thread Andres Freund
On April 23, 2014 8:51:21 PM CEST, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:42:14PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: I still don't know under what circumstances this situation could arise. This seems most strange to me. I would wonder

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread David Fetter
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:26:50PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Josh Berkus wrote: On 04/23/2014 07:43 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: I can propose contrib PostgreNoSQL providing following: 1) Table postgres as you proposed. 2) Functions: get_postgres(id intgeger) returns jsonb,

Re: [HACKERS] MultiXactId error after upgrade to 9.3.4

2014-04-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Andres Freund wrote: I think this patch is a seriously bad idea. For one, it's not actually doing anything about the problem - the tuple can be accessed without freezing getting involved. Normal access other than freeze is not a problem, because other code paths do check for HEAP_XMAX_INVALID

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade and epoch

2014-04-23 Thread Sergey Konoplev
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: Sergey, are you seeing a problem only because you are interacting with other systems that didn't reset their epoch? I faced this after upgrading clusters with PgQ Skytools3 installed only. They didn't interact with any other

Re: [HACKERS] MultiXactId error after upgrade to 9.3.4

2014-04-23 Thread Andres Freund
On 2014-04-23 16:30:05 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andres Freund wrote: I think this patch is a seriously bad idea. For one, it's not actually doing anything about the problem - the tuple can be accessed without freezing getting involved. Normal access other than freeze is not a

[HACKERS] All caught up

2014-04-23 Thread Bruce Momjian *EXTERN*
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 07:42:06AM +, Albe Laurenz wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: I suggest the attached documentation fix. Patch applied and backpatched to 9.3. Thanks. What would PostgreSQL do without Bruce who undertakes the Herculean task of making sure that nothing gets

Re: [HACKERS] Review: ECPG FETCH readahead

2014-04-23 Thread Antonin Houska
[Now I'm only replying where my explanation seems useful. If you expect anything else, please remind me.] On 04/23/2014 06:41 PM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: All exported ECPG functions returns bool. IIRC the code generated by EXEC SQL WHENEVER something-else-than-CONTINUE makes use of the

Re: [HACKERS] Review: ECPG FETCH readahead

2014-04-23 Thread Antonin Houska
On 04/23/2014 05:24 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Antonin Houska wrote: I haven't been too familiar with the ECPG internals so far but tried to do my best. I'm afraid we're stuck on this patch until Michael has time to review it, or some other committer wants to acquire maintainership rights in

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread David Fetter
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 12:24:21PM -0700, David Fetter wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:26:50PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Josh Berkus wrote: On 04/23/2014 07:43 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: I can propose contrib PostgreNoSQL providing following: 1) Table postgres as you

Re: [HACKERS] Perfomance degradation 9.3 (vs 9.2) for FreeBSD

2014-04-23 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
Included is the graph (from PostgreSQL Enterprise Consortium's 2014 report page 13: https://www.pgecons.org/downloads/43). I see up to 14% degration (at 128 concurrent users) comparing with 9.2. That URL returns 'Forbidden'... Sorry for this. I sent a problem report to the person in

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread Tom Lane
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes: Is there any good reason not to roll native UUID generation into our standard distribution? It's already there (as of 9.4) in pg_crypto. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To

Re: [HACKERS] extension_control_path

2014-04-23 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 09:36 +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: Please find attached the v2 version of the patch, including fixes for the crash and documentation aspects you've listed before. Do we want to get this version committed (will need some small tweaks), or do we want to wait for the next

Re: [HACKERS] extension_control_path

2014-04-23 Thread Stephen Frost
* Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote: On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 09:36 +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: Please find attached the v2 version of the patch, including fixes for the crash and documentation aspects you've listed before. Do we want to get this version committed (will need some

Re: [HACKERS] extension_control_path

2014-04-23 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 09:36 +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: Please find attached the v2 version of the patch, including fixes for the crash and documentation aspects you've listed before. Do we want to get this version committed (will need some small

Re: [HACKERS] Review: ECPG FETCH readahead

2014-04-23 Thread Noah Misch
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 12:15:41AM +0200, Antonin Houska wrote: Whether this review is enough to move the patch to ready for committer - I tend to let the next CFM decide. (I don't find it productive to ignite another round of discussion about kinds of reviews - already saw some.) In today's

Re: [HACKERS] Perfomance degradation 9.3 (vs 9.2) for FreeBSD

2014-04-23 Thread Mark Wong
On Apr 22, 2014, at 5:07 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote: On 04/22/2014 06:43 PM, Mark Wong wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com mailto:j...@commandprompt.com wrote: On 04/22/2014 08:26 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: I'm

Re: [HACKERS] Perfomance degradation 9.3 (vs 9.2) for FreeBSD

2014-04-23 Thread Noah Misch
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:25:35PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: On 2014-04-21 17:21:20 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 02:08:51PM -0700, Joshua Drake wrote: If the community had more *BSD presence I think it would be great but it isn't all that viable at this point. I

Re: [HACKERS] 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

2014-04-23 Thread David Fetter
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 08:27:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes: Is there any good reason not to roll native UUID generation into our standard distribution? It's already there (as of 9.4) in pg_crypto. Sorry I wasn't clear enough. Since contrib/pgcrypto is

Re: [HACKERS] Runing DBT2 on Postgresql

2014-04-23 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 2:33 AM, Rohit Goyal rhtgyl...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to install dbt2 on postgresql database. cmake(configure) command work fine and but make command(build) give an error given below. I have no idea about how to solve it ld has become less tolerant of certain

Re: [HACKERS] bgworker crashed or not?

2014-04-23 Thread Craig Ringer
On 04/17/2014 08:35 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: On 04/17/2014 04:47 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: Well the logging is just too spammy in general when it comes to dynamic bgworkers but that's easy to fix in the future, no need to make decisions for 9.4. Agreed - it's the *API* that we need sorted out