Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-04-14 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: I can see a usecase for having a pg_size_pretty(numeric) as an option. Not necessarily a very big one, but a 0 one. +1. +1, too. I did some

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-04-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: I can see a usecase for having a pg_size_pretty(numeric) as an option.

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-04-13 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: I can see a usecase for having a pg_size_pretty(numeric) as an option. Not necessarily a very big one, but a 0 one. +1. +1, too. I did some beautification of this patch. I think the attached version is cleaner and

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 03:04:23PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: The main actual simplification would be in getting rid of the hole at the end of each 4GB worth of WAL, cf this bit in xlog_internal.h: /* * We break each logical log file (xlogid value) into segment files of the * size indicated

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-12 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 18:18, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 15:37, Tom

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-12 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 5:04 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Hm.  I think thousands is an overestimate,

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-12 Thread Tom Lane
Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com writes: On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 5:04 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: The main actual simplification would be in getting rid of the hole at the end of each 4GB worth of WAL, cf this bit in xlog_internal.h: If we can't get rid of that and have a

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-12 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com writes: On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 5:04 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: The main actual simplification would be in getting rid of the hole at the end of each 4GB worth of WAL, cf this bit

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 00:53, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 25-02-2012 09:23, Magnus Hagander wrote: Do we even *need* the validate_xlog_location() function? If we just remove those calls,

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com writes: Euler proposed one more patch upthread, which replaces pg_size_pretty(bigint) with pg_size_pretty(numeric) so that pg_size_pretty(pg_xlog_location_diff()) succeeds. It's also worth committing this patch? Why would it be useful to use pg_size_pretty on

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com writes: Euler proposed one more patch upthread, which replaces pg_size_pretty(bigint) with pg_size_pretty(numeric) so that pg_size_pretty(pg_xlog_location_diff()) succeeds. It's also worth

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com writes: Euler proposed one more patch upthread, which replaces pg_size_pretty(bigint) with pg_size_pretty(numeric) so that pg_size_pretty(pg_xlog_location_diff()) succeeds. It's also worth committing this patch? Why would it be useful to use

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Why would it be useful to use pg_size_pretty on xlog locations? The point is that it would be useful to use it on the difference between two xlog locations, Um, that is exactly the

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I wrote: Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com writes: Euler proposed one more patch upthread, which replaces pg_size_pretty(bigint) with pg_size_pretty(numeric) so that pg_size_pretty(pg_xlog_location_diff()) succeeds. It's

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Actually ... now that I look at it, isn't it completely bogus to be using numeric for the result of pg_xlog_location_diff? rhaas=# select pg_xlog_location_diff('/0',

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 16:37, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Actually ... now that I look at it, isn't it completely bogus to be using numeric for the result of

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 15:37, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com writes: Euler proposed one more patch upthread, which replaces pg_size_pretty(bigint) with pg_size_pretty(numeric) so that pg_size_pretty(pg_xlog_location_diff()) succeeds. It's also worth

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 15:37, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Why would it be useful to use pg_size_pretty on xlog locations? -1 because of the large expense of bigint-numeric-whatever conversion that would be added to existing uses. Given the

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 18:18, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 15:37, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Why would it be useful to use pg_size_pretty on xlog locations? -1 because of the large expense of

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 18:18, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 15:37, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Why would it be useful to use pg_size_pretty

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On fre, 2012-03-09 at 18:13 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: and confusing XLogFileSize with XLogSegSize. Not the best choice of names. Yeah, the use of XLogFile to mean something other than, well a file in the xlog, is greatly annoying.. I guess we could change it, but it goes pretty deep

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: Yeah, the use of XLogFile to mean something other than, well a file in the xlog, is greatly annoying.. I guess we could change it, but it goes pretty deep in the system so it's not a small change... The whole thing was built around the lack of 64 bit

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: Yeah, the use of XLogFile to mean something other than, well a file in the xlog, is greatly annoying.. I guess we could change it, but it goes pretty deep in the system so it's not a

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Kevin Grittner
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: The whole thing was built around the lack of 64 bit integers. If we bit the bullet and changed the whole thing to be just a single 64-bit counter, we could probably delete thousands of lines of code. Hm. I

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: Yeah, the use of XLogFile to mean something other than, well a file in the xlog, is greatly annoying.. I guess we

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Hm.  I think thousands is an overestimate, but yeah the logic could be greatly simplified.  However, I'm not

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-09 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Hm.  I think thousands is an overestimate,

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-04 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 00:53, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 25-02-2012 09:23, Magnus Hagander wrote: Do we even *need* the validate_xlog_location() function? If we just remove those calls, won't we still catch all the incorrectly formatted ones in the errors of the

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-03-04 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 07:21, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 25-02-2012 09:23, Magnus Hagander wrote: Do we even *need* the validate_xlog_location() function? If we just remove those calls, won't

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-02-27 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 25-02-2012 09:23, Magnus Hagander wrote: Do we even *need* the validate_xlog_location() function? If we just remove those calls, won't we still catch all the incorrectly formatted ones in the errors of the

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-02-25 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 09:32, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 08-02-2012 09:35, Fujii Masao wrote: Fujii, new patch attached. Thanks for your tests. Thanks for the new patch! But another

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-02-25 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
On 25-02-2012 09:23, Magnus Hagander wrote: Do we even *need* the validate_xlog_location() function? If we just remove those calls, won't we still catch all the incorrectly formatted ones in the errors of the sscanf() calls? Or am I too deep into weekend-mode and missing something obvious?

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-02-10 Thread Fujii Masao
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 08-02-2012 09:35, Fujii Masao wrote: Fujii, new patch attached. Thanks for your tests. Thanks for the new patch! But another problem happened. When I changed pg_proc.h so that the unused OID was assigned

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-02-09 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
On 08-02-2012 09:35, Fujii Masao wrote: Fujii, new patch attached. Thanks for your tests. But another problem happened. When I changed pg_proc.h so that the unused OID was assigned to pg_xlog_location_diff(), and executed the above again, I encountered the segmentation fault: I reproduced

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-02-08 Thread Fujii Masao
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 2:29 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 26-01-2012 06:19, Fujii Masao wrote: Thanks for your review. Comments below. When I compiled the source with xlogdiff.patch, I got the following warnings. xlogfuncs.c:511:2: warning: format '%lX' expects

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-02-07 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
On 26-01-2012 06:19, Fujii Masao wrote: Thanks for your review. Comments below. When I compiled the source with xlogdiff.patch, I got the following warnings. xlogfuncs.c:511:2: warning: format '%lX' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int *', but argument 3 has type 'uint64 *'

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-01-26 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 23-12-2011 12:05, Tom Lane wrote: I too think a datatype is overkill, if we're only planning on providing one function.  Just emit the values as numeric and have done. Here it is. Output changed to numeric.

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-01-21 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
On 23-12-2011 12:05, Tom Lane wrote: I too think a datatype is overkill, if we're only planning on providing one function. Just emit the values as numeric and have done. Here it is. Output changed to numeric. While the output was int8 I could use pg_size_pretty but now I couldn't. I attached

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-01-17 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On 20 December 2011 10:27, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: Doing it in numeric should be perfectly fine. The only real reason to pick int8 over in this context would be performance, but it's not like this is something that's going to be called in really performance critical paths...

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-01-14 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: Hi, A while ago when blogging about WAL [1], I noticed a function to deal with xlog location arithmetic is wanted. I remembered Depez [2] mentioning it and after some questions during trainings and conferences

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-01-14 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
On 14-01-2012 11:06, Fujii Masao wrote: I think that this function is very useful. Can you add the patch into CommitFest 2012-1 ? Sure. But I must adjust the patch based on the thread comments (basically, numeric output). I have a new patch but need to test it before submitting it. I'll post

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-01-14 Thread Greg Smith
On 01/14/2012 09:12 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: But I must adjust the patch based on the thread comments (basically, numeric output). I have a new patch but need to test it before submitting it. I'll post this weekend. It's now at

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2012-01-14 Thread Gurjeet Singh
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 01/14/2012 09:12 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: But I must adjust the patch based on the thread comments (basically, numeric output). I have a new patch but need to test it before submitting it. I'll post this

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-23 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 14:08, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 20-12-2011 07:27, Magnus Hagander wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 19:06, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 06-12-2011

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-23 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: At this point, my question is: do we want to support the lsn data type idea or a basic function that implements the difference between LSNs? Personally I think a function is enough - it solves the only case that I've actually seen. But a datatype

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-23 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I too think a datatype is overkill, if we're only planning on providing one function. Are there any other functions we ought to provide? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-23 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 12/23/2011 10:05 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Magnus Hagandermag...@hagander.net writes: At this point, my question is: do we want to support the lsn data type idea or a basic function that implements the difference between LSNs? Personally I think a function is enough - it solves the only case

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-23 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I too think a datatype is overkill, if we're only planning on providing one function. Are there any other functions we ought to provide? Even if there are several, what exact

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-23 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I too think a datatype is overkill, if we're only planning on providing one function. Are there any other

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-23 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Even if there are several, what exact advantage does a datatype offer over representing LSN values as numerics? It seems to me to be adding complication and extra code (I/O

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-23 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Even if there are several, what exact advantage does a datatype offer over representing LSN values as numerics?  

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-20 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 19:06, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 06-12-2011 13:11, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: I've been considering

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-20 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
On 20-12-2011 07:27, Magnus Hagander wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 19:06, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 06-12-2011 13:11, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Magnus Hagander

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-13 Thread Jim Nasby
On Dec 6, 2011, at 12:06 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 06-12-2011 13:11, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: I've been considering similar things, as you

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-13 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jim Nasby j...@nasby.net wrote: I've often wondered about adding uint2/4/8... I suspect it's actually pretty uncommon for people to put negative numbers into int fields, since one of their biggest uses seems to be surrogate keys. I realize that this opens a

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-06 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 05:19, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: Hi, A while ago when blogging about WAL [1], I noticed a function to deal with xlog location arithmetic is wanted. I remembered Depez [2] mentioning it and after some questions during trainings and conferences I

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-06 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: I've been considering similar things, as you can find in the archives, but what I was thinking of was converting the number to just a plain bigint, then letting the user apply whatever arithmetic wanted at the SQL

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-06 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
On 06-12-2011 07:14, Magnus Hagander wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 05:19, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: Hi, A while ago when blogging about WAL [1], I noticed a function to deal with xlog location arithmetic is wanted. I remembered Depez [2] mentioning it and after some

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-06 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
On 06-12-2011 13:11, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: I've been considering similar things, as you can find in the archives, but what I was thinking of was converting the number to just a plain bigint, then letting the user apply

Re: [HACKERS] xlog location arithmetic

2011-12-06 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: On 06-12-2011 13:11, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: I've been considering similar things, as you can find in the archives, but what I was thinking