On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 00:53 -0400, Alon Goldshuv wrote:
My thoughts were -- see how the responses are, and if people think
that this is a better way to go than replace the COPY parsing logic to
the new one.
If the new approach to parsing can handle all the cases that the old
approach can
Luke Lonergan said:
Andrew,
I will be the first to admit that there are probably some very good
possibilities for optimisation of this code. My impression though has
been that in almost all cases it's fast enough anyway. I know that on
some very modest hardware I have managed to load a 6m
On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 21:25 +0530, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
I have attached the following seven patches to address this problem:
Does anyone with the skills to review this (i.e. someone other than me)
have any comments on this patch?
Otherwise I'll apply it in a day or two.
-Neil
On Sun, 2005-05-08 at 19:00 +0200, Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
Here is a small patch that implements a function lastval() that
works just like currval() except that it give the current
value of the last sequence used by nextval().
Have you had a chance to respin this patch per my earlier comments
This patch simplified Win32 signaling code per discussion in hackers. In
this implementation, each process will have a named (by its pid) mutex,
named shared memory area and named event in global namespace. The process
is
sending/receiving signals as the following:
(*) the process who kill the
Andrew,
OK ... that seems fair enough. The next question is where the data being
loaded comes from? pg_dump? How does load speed compare with using COPY's
binary mode?
Oddly, our tests in the past have shown that binary is actually slower.
Luke
---(end of
Pavel Stehule wrote:
http://www.techonthenet.com/oracle/functions/add_months.htm
http://www.techonthenet.com/oracle/functions/last_day.htm
http://www.techonthenet.com/oracle/functions/next_day.htm
http://www.techonthenet.com/oracle/functions/months_between.htm
Are these functions useful enough
Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Looking at this patch reminds me of another discussion we had:
Signals sent by the postmaster *before the signaling code is running in
the child* has to be handled.
This is handled in the curernt code by creating the pipe in the
postmaster and then
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Neil Conway wrote:
Pavel Stehule wrote:
http://www.techonthenet.com/oracle/functions/add_months.htm
http://www.techonthenet.com/oracle/functions/last_day.htm
http://www.techonthenet.com/oracle/functions/next_day.htm
Pavel Stehule wrote:
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Neil Conway wrote:
Pavel Stehule wrote:
http://www.techonthenet.com/oracle/functions/add_months.htm
http://www.techonthenet.com/oracle/functions/last_day.htm
http://www.techonthenet.com/oracle/functions/next_day.htm
Why not a pgFoundry project called Oracle-Compat or something? There
are plenty of functions etc... that can be included in the package as a
whole.
Once it is large enough, push it to contrib or vie for core support.
Is exists. Not in very usefull state, true.
In thread:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers-win32/2004-11/msg00010.php
---
Do we actually need to pass the handle, or could the subprocess reopen
the pipe for itself?
Nope, we need to pass the handle. Only one process can be the
server-side of the pipe, and once the postmaster has
12 matches
Mail list logo
