Tom,
> Ah, you are right. I had confused this with another option that I did
> remove during 7.4 devel (fixbtree or something like that). Yeah, the
> correct fix is to document it under Developer Options as
> "LOG_BTREE_BUILD_STATS".
OK, have another (replacement) patch, then.
--
-Josh Berkus
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Also, one of the Red Hat guys pointed out to me that
>> SHOW_BTREE_BUILD_STATS seems to have crept back into runtime.sgml,
>> although it was removed during 7.4 development. Could we have that
>> out of there in the next patch?
> Accoring to GUC.c this m
Tom,
> Also, one of the Red Hat guys pointed out to me that
> SHOW_BTREE_BUILD_STATS seems to have crept back into runtime.sgml,
> although it was removed during 7.4 development. Could we have that
> out of there in the next patch?
Accoring to GUC.c this morning, the option is still there ... it
Tom,
OK, this is the checked-by-Rod patch, which should be perfect.
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
Index: runtime.sgml
===
RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml,v
retrieving rev
Folks,
Actually, I've just confirmed that that last patch has some syntax problems.
So please ignore it. I will send a good patch through Rod to check.
Sorry! I'll get the hang of this soon, really!
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
---(en
Guys,
I've just discovered that I have some sort of library corruption on this
laptop in my SGML libraries. So could someone check my SGML with a "make
check" before applying that last patch?
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
---(end of broad
Tom,
> It's gone. You might want to crosscheck the docs against the CVS-tip
> version of guc.c ...
Well, I did 2 weeks ago when I started this process. I'll do it again before
beta.
In the meantime, here's a new patch for runtime.sgml, based on today's CVS:
1) drops SHOW_BTREE
2) drops HAS_R
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Also, one of the Red Hat guys pointed out to me that
>> SHOW_BTREE_BUILD_STATS seems to have crept back into runtime.sgml,
>> although it was removed during 7.4 development. Could we have that
>> out of there in the next patch?
> Will do. Is SHOW_BTREE
Tom,
> It should be removed from runtime.sgml then.
>
> Also, one of the Red Hat guys pointed out to me that
> SHOW_BTREE_BUILD_STATS seems to have crept back into runtime.sgml,
> although it was removed during 7.4 development. Could we have that
> out of there in the next patch?
Will do. Is S
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Is the HAS_RENDEZVOUS GUC still coming? Is there docs for it?
>
> > I haven't gotten to it --- it may have to wait for 7.5.
>
> It should be removed from runtime.sgml then.
>
> Also, one of the Red Hat guys pointed out to me that
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Is the HAS_RENDEZVOUS GUC still coming? Is there docs for it?
> I haven't gotten to it --- it may have to wait for 7.5.
It should be removed from runtime.sgml then.
Also, one of the Red Hat guys pointed out to me that
SHOW_BTREE_BUILD_STATS seems to
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> > Patch applied. Thanks.
>
> Great. 'cause I need to patch the patch, due to a cut-and-paste error. Next
> patch coming Friday, much less extensive than this one.
>
> Is the HAS_RENDEZVOUS GUC still coming? Is there docs for it?
I haven't gotten to it --- i
Tom,
> (But if you are not happy with the current state of runtime.sgml,
> we need fixes for that ASAP.)
I just yesterday realized that the STATISTICS section could be profitably
folded into LOGGING and QUERY TUNING. I will send a second patch tommorrow
if possible.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Dat
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is the HAS_RENDEZVOUS GUC still coming? Is there docs for it?
Don't worry about it. If it gets added, it will be the adder's
responsibility to update the docs too.
(But if you are not happy with the current state of runtime.sgml,
we need fixes for that
Bruce,
> Patch applied. Thanks.
Great. 'cause I need to patch the patch, due to a cut-and-paste error. Next
patch coming Friday, much less extensive than this one.
Is the HAS_RENDEZVOUS GUC still coming? Is there docs for it?
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
---
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Rod Taylor wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> This is the other portion he is referring to.
>
> client-auth.sgml references a renamed ID in runtime.sgml
>
> On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 16:46, T
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> Attached is the fully corrected version of the re-ording patch for
> Runtime.sgml and dependant files.
>
> Can you please expedite applying this? Since it inv
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
---
Rod Taylor wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
---
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> Attached
19 matches
Mail list logo
