Tom Lane wrote:
Hence, attached revised patch ...
Looks good.
Something I'm still wondering is about the archiver/logger combination.
What happens if a postmaster is stopped by the user and the archiver is
still running, and the user starts a new postmaster? This would launch
a new archiver
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 04:01:20PM +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
Hi Magnus, and Dave.
It seems that it is different in nmake although the initial value of
VisualStudio is embedding. Then, It sees a reference problem by
the dll independent. Therefore, embedding considers like an ideal.
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Something I'm still wondering is about the archiver/logger combination.
What happens if a postmaster is stopped by the user and the archiver is
still running, and the user starts a new postmaster? This would launch
a new archiver and logger; and there
From: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Condition understanding of '=' is not made as for namke of VC6 to a
regrettable thing, but it causes an error to it:-(
So, except all thought that it was good.
Hmm. Crap.
Perhaps there's something else we can check on? Like a feature or
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 12:15:53AM +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
From: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Condition understanding of '=' is not made as for namke of VC6 to a
regrettable thing, but it causes an error to it:-(
So, except all thought that it was good.
Hmm. Crap.
Perhaps
Hi.
- Original Message -
From: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 04:01:20PM +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
Hi Magnus, and Dave.
It seems that it is different in nmake although the initial value of
VisualStudio is embedding. Then, It sees a reference problem
From: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't think of a good idea. However, since our document has announced
officially, saying =VC7.1. Therefore, I think that it is satisfactory.
Ah, good point, I forgot about that.
But - if we do that, why do we need that IF check *at all*?
It is
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 11:52:15PM +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
Hi.
- Original Message -
From: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 04:01:20PM +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
Hi Magnus, and Dave.
It seems that it is different in nmake although the initial
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 12:28 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Yeah, that seems the safest to me -- the problem is that it complicates
the shutdown sequence a fair bit, because postmaster must act
differently depending on whether archiving is enabled or not: wait for
bgwriter exit if disabled, or
Tom Lane wrote:
There was discussion of having a lock file for the archiver, but
it's still an open issue. I'm not sure how to solve the problem
of stale lockfiles --- unlike the postmaster, the archiver can't
assume that it's the only live process with the postgres userid.
For example,
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Maybe we should go back to the plan of having the postmaster
wait for the archiver to exit.
Yeah, that seems the safest to me -- the problem is that it complicates
the shutdown sequence a fair bit, because postmaster must act
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 12:29:53AM +0900, Hiroshi Saito wrote:
From: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't think of a good idea. However, since our document has announced
officially, saying =VC7.1. Therefore, I think that it is satisfactory.
Ah, good point, I forgot about that.
But
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 10:13 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Something I'm still wondering is about the archiver/logger combination.
What happens if a postmaster is stopped by the user and the archiver is
still running, and the user starts a new postmaster?
I wrote:
I'll respin my patch this way...
Third time's the charm?
regards, tom lane
binFKkWVCJKov.bin
Description: archiver-shutdown-3.patch
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
Tom Lane escribió:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps a better idea is to create a separate LibxmlContext memcxt,
child of QueryContext, and have xml_palloc etc always use that. That
way it won't be reset between calls. It probably also means we could
wire xml reset to
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
+ void
+ AtEOXact_xml(void)
+ {
+ if (LibxmlContext == NULL)
+ return;
+
+ MemoryContextDelete(LibxmlContext);
+ LibxmlContext = NULL;
+
+ xmlCleanupParser();
+ }
[ blink... ] Shouldn't that be the other way
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane escribió:
One thing I was wondering about earlier today is whether libxml isn't
expecting NULL-return-on-failure from the malloc-substitute routine.
If we take control away from it unexpectedly, I wouldn't be a bit
surprised if its data
17 matches
Mail list logo
