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 -
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:
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
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
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.
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
(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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
(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
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:
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
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 =
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
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
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
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
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
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
* 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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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?
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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
[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
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
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
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
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
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
* 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
66 matches
Mail list logo