Re: [PATCHES] HOT latest patch - version 8

2007-07-23 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On 7/15/07, Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually storing InvalidOffsetNumber in lp_off is a bit bogus in the first place since lp_off is unsigned, and InvalidOffsetNumber is -1, so I fixed that as well. I see InvalidOffsetNumber as 0 in off.h:26 #define

Re: [PATCHES] COPYable logs

2007-07-23 Thread Dave Page
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Here is my latest version of this patch. The good news is that it now seems to work on Windows. Please review carefully (esp Magnus, Dave, Tom). Hi Andrew, I've eyeballed the code quite thoroughly and given it a whirl under VC++. The only problem I found was that the

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Oops in fe-auth.c

2007-07-23 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 03:36:21PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: I've been debugging some really weird crashes in libpq on win32, and I think I've finally found the reason for the heap corruption that shows up in msvc debug mode. When run in debug mode, the runtime for msvc will *zero-pad

Re: [PATCHES] COPYable logs

2007-07-23 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Dave Page wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: Here is my latest version of this patch. The good news is that it now seems to work on Windows. Please review carefully (esp Magnus, Dave, Tom). Hi Andrew, I've eyeballed the code quite thoroughly and given it a whirl under VC++. The only

[PATCHES] tsearch core path, v0.58

2007-07-23 Thread Teodor Sigaev
http://www.sigaev.ru/misc/tsearch_core-0.58.gz Changes since 0.52 version: 1) Introduce dictionary's template which contains only methods of dictionary and can be managed only by superuser. CREATE TEXT SEARCH DICTIONARY dictname TEMPLATE dicttmplname [OPTION opt_text ] ; CREATE

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Oops in fe-auth.c

2007-07-23 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Actually coding up a patch for that was just a bunch of simple search/replace ops. Attached is one that appears to work fine for me. Was there any reason why this wasn't done before, or just nobody had the time? If there was a reason, please let me

Re: [PATCHES] Updated bitmap index patch

2007-07-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Simon Riggs wrote: Alvaro, As you note above there is some linkage between bit map indexes and clustered indexes, so it seems like we'll either get both or neither. I notice the GIT patch is being listed as under review by Alexey and yourself. Are you actively working on this, or is

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Oops in fe-auth.c

2007-07-23 Thread Magnus Hagander
Tom Lane wrote: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Actually coding up a patch for that was just a bunch of simple search/replace ops. Attached is one that appears to work fine for me. Was there any reason why this wasn't done before, or just nobody had the time? If there was a

Re: [PATCHES] COPYable logs

2007-07-23 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Here is my latest version of this patch. The good news is that it now seems to work on Windows. Please review carefully (esp Magnus, Dave, Tom). The GUC arrangements for this patch are utterly broken. The reason for the separation between

Re: [PATCHES] COPYable logs

2007-07-23 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Here is my latest version of this patch. The good news is that it now seems to work on Windows. Please review carefully (esp Magnus, Dave, Tom). The GUC arrangements for this patch are utterly broken. As always I submit to

Re: [PATCHES] Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)

2007-07-23 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for reading. Updated version in new patch. What was the reasoning for basing walwriter.c on autovacuum (which needs to be able to execute transactions) rather than bgwriter (which does not)? The shutdown logic in particular seems all wrong; you can't

Re: [PATCHES] Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)

2007-07-23 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 18:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for reading. Updated version in new patch. What was the reasoning for basing walwriter.c on autovacuum (which needs to be able to execute transactions) rather than bgwriter (which does not)?

Re: [PATCHES] Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)

2007-07-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Simon Riggs wrote: Autovac is the most clean implementation of a special process, so seemed like a good prototype. I'd thought I'd combed out any pointless code though. What, you mean there's pointless code in autovac? Hey, be sure to let me know about it! -- Alvaro Herrera

Re: [PATCHES] Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)

2007-07-23 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Simon Riggs wrote: Here's v23, including all suggested changes, plus some reworking of the transaction APIs to reduce the footprint of the patch. What's the thing about doing the flush twice in a couple of comments in calls to XLogBackgroundFlush? Are they just leftover comments from older

Re: [PATCHES] Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)

2007-07-23 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 18:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: The shutdown logic in particular seems all wrong; you can't have a process connected to shared memory that is going to outlive the postmaster. It seemed to work cleanly when I tested it initially, but

Re: [PATCHES] Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)

2007-07-23 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's the thing about doing the flush twice in a couple of comments in calls to XLogBackgroundFlush? Are they just leftover comments from older code? I was wondering that too --- they looked like obsolete comments to me. My current thinking BTW is

Re: [PATCHES] Async Commit, v21 (now: v22)

2007-07-23 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: (BTW, in case you can't tell from the drift of my questions, I've separated the patch into add background wal writer and add async commit, and am working on the first half.) I've committed the first half of that. Something that still needs investigation is what the default