This is a great patch. I was hoping to get this into 8.2 as a major
feature.
---
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> Here's the updated patch with DELETE RETURNING removed. This isn't
> really an issue because no one wanted DELETE RET
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> Here's the latest pg_dump patch I've been (too sporadically) working on.
> I abandoned building linked lists and decided to make the backend do all
> the work, from building the list of good relations, to doing the POSIX
> regex matching.
I sent the following through earlier but I think the attachment was too
large (thought that was limit was greatly increased?).
You can download the patch here:
http://www.alcove.com.au/~swm/bitmap-2.diff
Thanks,
Gavin
--
Hi all,
Attached is an update to the patch implementing
Here's the updated patch with DELETE RETURNING removed. This isn't
really an issue because no one wanted DELETE RETURNING to begin with.
It is important to note that this patch is not yet ready to be
committed. I still need to go through and run some more tests on it
but wanted to put it in the
Tom Lane wrote:
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I wanted to post an updated patch even though there are still things not
working again after conversion to bare expressions.
I've been through the planner part of this and it looks OK (one or two
small errors). I'm currently messing with
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wanted to post an updated patch even though there are still things not
> working again after conversion to bare expressions.
I've been through the planner part of this and it looks OK (one or two
small errors). I'm currently messing with a revised versi
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Robert Treat wrote:
> On Friday 14 July 2006 15:23, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >> Please let me know if there is anything e
Nice. I was going to ask if this could make it into 8.2.
---
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 20:56 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 15:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 20:56 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 15:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 12:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> A compromise that might be good enough is to add an rmgr routine defined
> > >> as "
WIP archive_timeout.
All we need to do is add LWLock support to archiver.
Thoughts/ideas/hints welcome.
This is a patch-on-patch atop the xswitch.patch recently posted.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Index: doc/src/sgml/backup.sgml
Patch included to implement xlog switching, using an xlog record
"processing instruction" and forcibly moving xlog pointers.
1. Happens automatically on pg_stop_backup()
2. Can happen manually via pg_switch_xlog()
3. Implement range of utility functions:
pg_current_wal_offset()
Michael Fuhr wrote:
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 04:19:43PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The good news is that from a memory and perfomance standpoint, my simple
test now shows us outperforming mysql:
Sweet ;-)
I love this team. Kudos!
So
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 04:19:43PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The good news is that from a memory and perfomance standpoint, my simple
> > > test now shows us outperforming mysql:
> >
> > Sweet ;-)
>
> I love this team. Kudos!
Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The good news is that from a memory and perfomance standpoint, my simple
> > test now shows us outperforming mysql:
>
> Sweet ;-)
I love this team. Kudos!
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The good news is that from a memory and perfomance standpoint, my simple
> test now shows us outperforming mysql:
Sweet ;-)
I'm up to my *ss in fixing relation locking, but will get back to your
thing as soon as that's done. I think you're close enough t
Tom Lane wrote:
As far as avoiding overhead goes, here's what I'm thinking:
* The Values RTE node should contain a list of lists of bare
expressions, without TargetEntry decoration (you probably do not
need ResTarget in the raw parse tree for VALUES, either).
* The ValuesScan plan node will jus
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> I performed some cleanup in my code as well. I reduced some
> conditions, which cannot occur and fixed context validation in the
> set_config_options function. I hope that It is final version of our
> patch.
The way I see it, combining a feature change with a code refactorin
On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 08:38:30PM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 20:20 -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
> > On Thursday 27 July 2006 09:28, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > >> UPDATE mytab SET
18 matches
Mail list logo
