Re: [HACKERS] pg_system_identifier()

2013-08-22 Thread bricklen
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > > FWIW I've wished for that function repeatedly. Mostly just to make sure > I am actually connected to the same "network" of replicas and not some > other. > It's also useful if you're providing support for a limited number of > machines and

Re: [HACKERS] ALTER TABLE ... REPLACE WITH

2010-12-16 Thread bricklen
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > Perhaps a more useful definition would be > > EXCHANGE TABLE target WITH source; > > which just swaps the heap and indexes of each table. At the risk of stating the obvious, this would work with partition exchange too? -- Sent via pgsql-hack

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump --snapshot

2013-05-07 Thread bricklen
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > Rather than take some locks, you can now prevent the database objects > from changing with an event trigger. pg_dump could install that event > trigger in a preparing transaction, then do its work as currently, then > when done either remo

Re: [HACKERS] leaky views, yet again

2010-10-05 Thread bricklen
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Right now this is managed by query classes in our Java applications, > but as we're moving to a variety of new and different technologies > it's getting harder for the DBAs to ensure that nothing is leaking > to inappropriate recipients.  :-(

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [ADMIN] PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum

2011-03-02 Thread bricklen
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 3:53 PM, daveg wrote: >> > Postgresql version is 8.4.4. >> >> I don't see how this could be related, but since you're running on NFS, >> maybe it is, somehow: >> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4d40ddb7.1010...@credativ.com >> (for example what if the visibility ma

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade bug found!

2011-04-08 Thread bricklen
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 15:03 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> A fix will be included in upcoming Postgres releases 8.4.8 and 9.0.4. >> These releases will remove the need for the above script by correctly >> updating all TOAST tables in the migrated

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade bug found!

2011-04-08 Thread bricklen
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 4:51 PM, bricklen wrote: > I've been noticing in my logs for the past few days the message you > note in the wiki. It seems to occur during a vacuum around 7:30am > every day. I will be running the suggested script shortly, but can > anyone tell me in how b

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade bug found!

2011-04-08 Thread bricklen
Hi Stephen, On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > bricklen, > > * bricklen (brick...@gmail.com) wrote: >> I've been noticing in my logs for the past few days the message you >> note in the wiki. It seems to occur during a vacuum around 7:30am >>

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade bug found!

2011-04-08 Thread bricklen
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > bricklen, > > * bricklen (brick...@gmail.com) wrote: >> I looked deeper into our backup archives, and it appears that I do >> have the clog file reference in the error message "DETAIL:  Could not >> open file

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade bug found!

2011-04-08 Thread bricklen
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 7:20 PM, bricklen wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> bricklen, >> >> * bricklen (brick...@gmail.com) wrote: >>> I looked deeper into our backup archives, and it appears that I do >>> have the clog file

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade bug found!

2011-04-08 Thread bricklen
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Stephen Frost wrote: > -- Start of PGP signed section. >> bricklen, >> >> * bricklen (brick...@gmail.com) wrote: >> > Now, is this safe to run against my production database? >> >> Yes, with

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade bug found!

2011-04-08 Thread bricklen
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Why is it important to have the original pg_clog files around?  Since > the transactions in question are below the freeze horizon, surely the > tuples that involve those transaction have all been visited by vacuum > and thus removed if they

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade bug found!

2011-04-08 Thread bricklen
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 10:01 PM, bricklen wrote: > Update on the status of the steps we took, which were: > - test on a hot standby by bringing it live, running the script, > determing the missing clog files, copying them into the live (hot > standby) pg_clog dir > > Now, on

Re: [HACKERS] Why we are going to have to go DirectIO

2013-12-05 Thread bricklen
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 12/05/2013 12:41 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > Do drunks lurch differently in cathedrals than they do elsewhere? > > Yeah, because they lurch from one column to another. > Row by row?

Re: [HACKERS] "stuck spinlock"

2013-12-17 Thread bricklen
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > Hard to say, the issues fixed in the release are quite important as > > well. I'd tend to say they are more important. I think we just need to > > release 9.3.3 pretty soon. > > Yeah. > Has there been any talk about wh

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump --exclude-table-data

2011-08-24 Thread bricklen
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > > FWIW, I have immediate use for this in creating cut-down versions of > databases for testing purposes.  It'll eliminate a couple pages of shell > scripts for me. Speaking of "cut-down versions", I have recently been using pg_sample, and been

Re: [HACKERS] Adding MERGE to the TODO list (resend with subject)

2004-05-11 Thread Bricklen
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Oh, I see. Complex stuff ... I wonder how will it work with sequences -- if one insertion fails and we have to try again, there's a chance a sequence could be advanced more than once. Note the article skips the "signal-statement" symbol (is it present in SQL99? What does i

Re: [HACKERS] Getting to 8.3 beta1

2007-09-28 Thread Bricklen Anderson
Simon Riggs wrote: ...knock-on... tackle Been watching the Rugby World Cup? :) ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do

Re: [HACKERS] UPSERT

2007-03-02 Thread Bricklen Anderson
Simon Riggs wrote: I'm a bit surprised the TODO didn't mention the MERGE statement, which is the SQL:2003 syntax for specifying this as an atomic statement. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-05/thrd5.php#00497 There is a thread there entitled "Adding MERGE to the TODO list" --

Re: [HACKERS] UPSERT

2007-03-02 Thread Bricklen Anderson
Tom Lane wrote: Bricklen Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-05/thrd5.php#00497 There is a thread there entitled "Adding MERGE to the TODO list" The more interesting discussion is the one that got it taken off TODO again, fro

Re: [HACKERS] Tablespace-level Block Size Definitions

2005-05-31 Thread Bricklen Anderson
Jonah H. Harris wrote: Hey everyone, I'm sure this has been thought of but was wondering whether anyone had discussed the allowance of run-time block size specifications at the tablespace level? I know that a change such as this would substantially impact buffer operations, transactions, acc

Re: [HACKERS] Rollback Mountain

2006-01-26 Thread Bricklen Anderson
Michael Fuhr wrote: Rollback Mountain A raw, powerful story of two young transactions, one serializable and the other read-committed, who meet in the summer of 2005 updating tables in the harsh, high-volume environment of a contemporary online trading system and form an unorthodox yet session-lo

Re: [HACKERS] New project launched : PostgreSQL GUI Installer for

2006-01-31 Thread Bricklen Anderson
J. Andrew Rogers wrote: A graphical installer for Unix is fine, but please, do not make it anything like Oracle's graphical installer. Oracle's graphical install process gives command line installs a good name for ease of use. J. Andrew Rogers I heartily second that! --

Re: [HACKERS] Anyone want to admit to being presinet.com?

2006-02-13 Thread Bricklen Anderson
Tom Lane wrote: And if so, would you mind stopping your mail system from regurgitating copies of pghackers traffic? It's especially bad that you're sending the stuff with a fraudulent envelope From, ie, one not pointing back at yourself. That would be me. I've notified one of our admins about

Re: [HACKERS] Anyone want to admit to being presinet.com?

2006-02-13 Thread Bricklen Anderson
Darcy Buskermolen wrote: On Monday 13 February 2006 14:27, Josh Berkus wrote: Tom, And if so, would you mind stopping your mail system from regurgitating copies of pghackers traffic? It's especially bad that you're sending the stuff with a fraudulent envelope From, ie, one not pointing back

Re: R: [HACKERS] Table Partitioning is in 8.1

2005-09-23 Thread Bricklen Anderson
Paolo Magnoli wrote: > Hi, I seem to recall that in Oracle you load into specific partitions > without specifically naming them in insert statements (in other words you > insert into table, the engine redirects data to the corrisponding > partition), This is correct -- __

Re: [HACKERS] prefix btree implementation

2005-10-05 Thread Bricklen Anderson
Qingqing Zhou wrote: > I am not sure if this idea was mentioned before. > > The basic prefix btree idea is quite straightforward, i.e., try to > compress the key items within a data page by sharing the common prefix. > Thus the fanout of the page is increased and the benefits is obvious > theorect