[PATCHES] Typo in README

Hi there, Noticed a typo in the root README file. Patch below. Regards, BJ --- a/README +++ b/README @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ PHP - http://www.php.net Python - http://www.initd.org/ Ruby - http://ruby.scripting.ca/postgres/ -Other language binding are available from a variety of contributing +Other

Re: [PATCHES] Typo in README

Brendan Jurd wrote: > Hi there, > > Noticed a typo in the root README file. Patch below. > > Regards, > BJ > > --- a/README > +++ b/README > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ PHP - http://www.php.net > Python - http://www.initd.org/ > Ruby - http://ruby.scripting.ca/postgres/ > > -Other language binding are

[PATCHES] libpq patch for pqtypes hook api and PGresult creation

Here are the changes to libpq. It adds the ability to register an Object Hook and create a home-grown result. Patch adds 4 functions. We changed the name of PQresultSetFieldValue to PQsetvalue, which better compliments PQgetvalue. If this patch is acceptable, we will move on to making the r

Re: [PATCHES] libpq patch for pqtypes hook api and PGresult creation

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here are the changes to libpq. It adds the ability to register an Object > Hook and create a home-grown result. Patch adds 4 functions. > > We changed the name of PQresultSetFieldValue to PQsetvalue, which better > comp

[PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

I noticed several months ago, and came across it again today, that libpq's pthread-win32.c implementation is using CreateMutex rather than CRITICAL_SECTION. CreateMutex is like a semaphore in that it is designed to be accessible via name system-wide. Even when you don't give it a name, thus b

Re: [PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

Andrew Chernow wrote: > I noticed several months ago, and came across it again today, that > libpq's pthread-win32.c implementation is using CreateMutex rather > than CRITICAL_SECTION. CreateMutex is like a semaphore in that it is > designed to be accessible via name system-wide. Even when you

Re: [PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

Magnus Hagander wrote: >It changes the behavior when the pointer passed in is invalid from >crash to silent working, right? Correct, it a Habit. I sub-consciously write code that checks pointers. We can remove the pointer checks and let the thing dump core if people prefer. Which brings u

Re: [PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Chernow wrote: > > I noticed several months ago, and came across it again today, that > > libpq's pthread-win32.c implementation is using CreateMutex rather > > than CRITICAL_SECTION. CreateMutex is like a sema

Re: [PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The attached patch replaces the win32 mutex calls with critical section > calls. The change will not affect the behavior of the windows > pthread_xxx functions. Why have you defined the lock/unlock functions as willing to fall through silently if han

Re: [PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: The attached patch replaces the win32 mutex calls with critical section calls. The change will not affect the behavior of the windows pthread_xxx functions. Why have you defined the lock/unlock functions as willing to fall through si

Re: [PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

Tom Lane wrote: Silently not locking is surely not very safe. Here is the dump code version of the patch. If anyone wants the return value idea, let me know. -- Andrew Chernow eSilo, LLC every bit counts http://www.esilo.com/ Index: src/port/pthread-win32.h

Re: [PATCHES] Maintaining cluster order on insert

This idea has been rejected to do poor performance results reported later in the thread. --- Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > While thinking about index-organized-tables and similar ideas, it > occurred to me that there's some l

Re: [PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

Andrew Chernow wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Silently not locking is surely not very safe. Here is the dump code version of the patch. If anyone wants the return value idea, let me know. A more graceful solution would

Re: [PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > A more graceful solution would be to print something to stderr and then > exit. stderr doesn't exist, or point to a useful place, in many environments. And a forced exit() is no better than a crash for most purposes. > I don't think libpq should core

Re: [PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 06:25:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > A more graceful solution would be to print something to stderr and then > > exit. > > stderr doesn't exist, or point to a useful place, in many environments. > And a forced exit() is no bett

Re: [PATCHES] libpq Win32 Mutex performance patch

daveg wrote: On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 06:25:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: A more graceful solution would be to print something to stderr and then exit. stderr doesn't exist, or point to a useful place, in many environments. And a forced exit() is no bett

Re: [PATCHES] Reference by output in : \d

On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 3:50 AM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "kenneth d'souza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > With reference to the post > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-02/msg00104.phpand as > stated by -hackers and -patchers, I am submitting the diff -c output as