Tom Lane wrote:
I see the following items standing between us and putting out 8.2beta1:
* Set client encoding based on OS environment - Peter E.
[snip]
Personally I'm willing to commit to making the VALUES-list docs and
userlock replacement code happen tomorrow. Bruce seems to be close
on the
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 12:32:13PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Tom proposed a modest roadmap type experiment a week or so ago. I'd like
to see that pursued. After all, we know of some things that are at least
at first cut stage for 8.3, and a few things high on may people'
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 12:20:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think it'd be better to attack this problem from the "other side";
> > namely looking at what's actually cached.
>
> You can kiss goodbye to plan stability if you go that route... and
> in
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 12:32:13PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> >Tom proposed a modest roadmap type experiment a week or so ago. I'd like
> >to see that pursued. After all, we know of some things that are at least
> >at first cut stage for 8.3, and a few things high on may people's
> >agen
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 10:10:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm inclined to fix this in HEAD but not back-patch it, on the grounds
> that there might be apps out there expecting the existing behavior,
> and it's not a big enough deal to change behavior in a minor release.
> Thoughts?
Isn't the exi
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 07:38:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> * The contrib/userlock replacement issue
>
> We have three possible choices for this: do nothing, install a
> bug-compatible, allegedly-clean-room implementation in contrib:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-09/msg00077.
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it'd be better to attack this problem from the "other side";
> namely looking at what's actually cached.
You can kiss goodbye to plan stability if you go that route... and
in any case I doubt the assumption that what's in shared buffers is
repre
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 12:29:56AM +0300, Enver ALTIN wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-09-15 at 09:38 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > Hello,
>
> Hi Joshua,
>
> > Yeah, this is a cross post and it is slightly off topic but IMHO this is
> > important.
> >
> > Tomorrow one of our own, Devrim Gunduz is beco
Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sep 14, 2006, at 9:16 PM, Golden Liu wrote:
>> I try to solve this problem this way:
>> First, update the table t but DON'T update the index.
>> Next, find all the tuples updated by this command and insert them into
>> the unique index.
> I suspect that y
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 04:18:36PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> * table and index. (Ideally other_pages should include all the other
> * tables and indexes used by the query too; but we don't have a good way
> * to get that number here.)
>
> A first-order approximation to this would be to add up t
On Sep 14, 2006, at 9:16 PM, Golden Liu wrote:
Suppose there are too tuples in a table t, named
id
---
1
2
and there is a unique index on id. Now we do an update on table t
update t set id=id+1
Since PG executes the update one tuple at a time, it updates tuple "1"
to "2" and insert it into the
On Sep 16, 2006, at 7:31 PM, Gregory Stark wrote:
Would that pose indexing issues? It would also mean that when
joining two
tables you'd have to handle some interesting type conversion
issues (at
times). We had someone accidentally create a largish table with
userid as
"numeric" and othe
On Sep 15, 2006, at 11:32 PM, Jeremy Drake wrote:
When I was first dealing with postgres, I found it extremely
annoying that
I had to type out "double precision" rather than just "double"
since every
sane programming language (as well as Java) uses double. I eventually
figured out that it wa
On Sep 16, 2006, at 9:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Then we should change autovacuum so that it stays out of the way when
tables are being vacuumed frequently enough via an external means.
What makes you think it doesn't do that already? Of course, it has
Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 2006-09-18, James William Pye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> FWIW, I'm +1 on the cleaner design you suggested. While I understand the
>> concerns of adding features/API this late;
> Adding features is one thing, breaking existing users of the code
Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane)
> wrote:
>> I see the following items standing between us and putting out 8.2beta1:
>> * AIX linking issues
> This has to do with the discussion about shared vs static libs?
regression=# select * from int8_tbl union all select * from int8_tbl order by
q2;
q1|q2
--+---
4567890123456789 | -4567890123456789
4567890123456789 | -4567890123456789
4567890123456789 | 123
4567890123456789 |
On 2006-09-18, James William Pye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW, I'm +1 on the cleaner design you suggested. While I understand the
> concerns of adding features/API this late;
Adding features is one thing, breaking existing users of the code is another.
--
Andrew, Supernews
http://www.supern
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 07:38:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> We have three possible choices for this: do nothing, install a
> bug-compatible, allegedly-clean-room implementation in contrib:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-09/msg00077.php
> or put a hopefully-cleaner design into c
On 9/15/06, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tomorrow one of our own, Devrim Gunduz is becoming a man. He is sucking
it up, and committing to the cvs repo of project marriage.
Congratulations Devrim!
--
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
EnterpriseDB Corporatio
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) wrote:
> I see the following items standing between us and putting out 8.2beta1:
> * AIX linking issues
>
> This isn't necessarily a beta-stopper, but it'd be nice to get it done
> so we can be sure that any beta testing done
I see the following items standing between us and putting out 8.2beta1:
* Set client encoding based on OS environment - Peter E.
I'm not sure whether Peter is intending to complete this item for 8.2
or not, but if it's to be done it ought to be done before we start beta.
* The contrib/userlock r
On 9/15/06, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
Yeah, this is a cross post and it is slightly off topic but IMHO this is
important.
Tomorrow one of our own, Devrim Gunduz is becoming a man. He is sucking
it up, and committing to the cvs repo of project marriage.
May the patches r
On Fri, 2006-09-15 at 09:38 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
Hi Joshua,
> Yeah, this is a cross post and it is slightly off topic but IMHO this is
> important.
>
> Tomorrow one of our own, Devrim Gunduz is becoming a man. He is sucking
> it up, and committing to the cvs repo of project m
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm not sure what we could do about the concurrent-sessions issue, but
>> we could make some sort of attack on the query complexity issue by
>> pro-rating the effective_cache_size among all the tables used by a
>> query.
> hmm n
Tom Lane wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> some additional numbers(first one is with default settings, second is
>> with enable_nestloop = 'off', third one is with enable_nestloop = 'off'
>> and enable_hashjoin='off'):
>
>> http://www.kaltenbrunner.cc/files/analyze_q7.tx
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> The big problem there seems to be the drastic misestimation of the
>> number of rows matching the p_name ~~ '%ghost%' condition. What does
>> pg_stats have for the p_name column?
> http://www.kaltenbrunner.cc/files/pg_stat_p_na
Um, whaddya mean "dumpall was getting stuck behind vacuum's lock"?
A plain vacuum doesn't take any locks that would block pg_dump.
Dammit, just looked and the setup I originally encountered the problem
on and tracked it down to the vacuum process, and it is indeed set up
to perform a full vacuum
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> some additional numbers(first one is with default settings, second is
> with enable_nestloop = 'off', third one is with enable_nestloop = 'off'
> and enable_hashjoin='off'):
> http://www.kaltenbrunner.cc/files/analyze_q7.txt
I'm inclined to think
Tom Lane wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> that is the explain for the 4h+ Q9:
>> http://www.kaltenbrunner.cc/files/analyze_q9.txt
>
> The big problem there seems to be the drastic misestimation of the
> number of rows matching the p_name ~~ '%ghost%' condition. What do
Tom proposed a modest roadmap type experiment a week or so ago. I'd like
to see that pursued. After all, we know of some things that are at least
at first cut stage for 8.3, and a few things high on may people's
agenda. I'd also like to see some work done on using a tracker (for
features as w
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> that is the explain for the 4h+ Q9:
> http://www.kaltenbrunner.cc/files/analyze_q9.txt
The big problem there seems to be the drastic misestimation of the
number of rows matching the p_name ~~ '%ghost%' condition. What does
pg_stats have for the p
Tom Lane wrote:
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 09:15:24PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Fortunately, none of the real developers would have to pay any attention
to any such page ... and you can bet they wouldn't.
If someone wants to spend an afternoon pu
"Dan Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've been having trouble running vacuumdb -a and pg_dumpall
> concurrently because they run through the databases in a different
> order (so dumpall was getting stuck behind vacuum's lock, and my
> firewall was rather unhelpfully closing the idle connectio
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 09:15:24PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Fortunately, none of the real developers would have to pay any attention
>> to any such page ... and you can bet they wouldn't.
> If someone wants to spend an afternoon putting up a coherent
> descriptio
On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Josh Berkus wrote:
Hi,
Greg,
I think the lessons of wikipedia is precisely that you *don't* want to add
such barriers. You want to let people add stuff pretty much freely. That
encourages people to get involved and put up information.
The other lesson of Wikipedia is tha
Gregory Stark wrote:
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
1. Authorized user: is that someone with an account, or someone who has
been authorized by someone else?
In my mind it is someone who without threw a process of email confirmation.
Just to help stave off the amount of trolling
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> AFAIK, nobody has stepped up to actually take *responsibility* for
> maintaining the wiki - both software and content-wise. But I may have
> missed something while I speed-read some lists after getting back.
I'm responsible for the software. I'll
On 2006-09-17, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Any view over the full timezone names should also include the
>>> corresponding data from zone.tab in the timezone library source.
>
>> Just noticed this mail, so that's not included in my patch.
-Original Message-
From: "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Martijn van Oosterhout"
Cc: "Gregory Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Josh Berkus" ;
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Neil Conway" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
"Dave Page" ; "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org"
Sent: 17/09/06
> >> 1. It isn't easy to login
> >
> > Really? You're kidding, right? You click a link that
> requires login,
> > and you get a browser login box. How much easier can it be?
>
> What URL are you talking about?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/techdocs
Yes.
> Where do I click login? Where d
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 1. Authorized user: is that someone with an account, or someone who has
>> been authorized by someone else?
>
> In my mind it is someone who without threw a process of email confirmation.
> Just to help stave off the amount of trolling that may happ
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Two points I'm not clear about on this thread though:
1. Authorized user: is that someone with an account, or
someone who has been authorized by someone else?
IIRC, the idea was "someone with an account". Basically you add a (very
very small) hurdle so you only get the
1. It isn't easy to login
Really? You're kidding, right? You click a link that requires login, and
you get a browser login box. How much easier can it be?
What URL are you talking about?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/techdocs
Where do I click login? Where do I click create account? Where
1. Authorized user: is that someone with an account, or someone who has
been authorized by someone else?
In my mind it is someone who without threw a process of email
confirmation. Just to help stave off the amount of trolling that may happen.
Joshua D. Drake
2. I can see the official t
> > > The wiki has been sitting there for two weeks and hasn't had any
> > > problems.
> >
> > Uh, you mean apart from the fact that it took very little
> time (days,
> > IIRC) before we had people writing attempts at user documentation,
>
>
>
> Really? Where was that? Did it get deleted in t
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 03:09:29PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > The wiki has been sitting there for two weeks and hasn't had
> > any problems.
>
> Uh, you mean apart from the fact that it took very little time (days,
> IIRC) before we had people writing attempts at user documentation,
Rea
> Two points I'm not clear about on this thread though:
>
> 1. Authorized user: is that someone with an account, or
> someone who has been authorized by someone else?
IIRC, the idea was "someone with an account". Basically you add a (very
very small) hurdle so you only get the people who actuall
> Techdocs is a different problem all together. Josh has
> already mentioned some problems with it. I can mention more.
[warning: thread hi-jack]
> 1. It isn't easy to login
Really? You're kidding, right? You click a link that requires login, and
you get a browser login box. How much easier ca
> The wiki has been sitting there for two weeks and hasn't had
> any problems.
Uh, you mean apart from the fact that it took very little time (days,
IIRC) before we had people writing attempts at user documentation,
somthing that we already have *two* different systems (interactive docs
+ new tec
Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> [already sent a variant of that yesterday but it doesn't look like it
> made it to the list]
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Tom Lane wrote:
Apparently we've made the planner a bit too optimistic about the savings
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 08:56:11PM +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
>
> [Re inet and cidr]
>
>> Why are these varlena? Just for ipv6 addresses? Is the network mask length
>> not
>> stored if it's not present? This gives us a strange corner case in that ipv4
>> address
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 08:56:11PM +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
[Re inet and cidr]
> Why are these varlena? Just for ipv6 addresses? Is the network mask length not
> stored if it's not present? This gives us a strange corner case in that ipv4
> addresses will *always* fit in the smallfoo data type
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 09:15:24PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Gregory Stark wrote:
> >> A TODO list people can freely add stuff to is precisely what would make it
> >> useful. It would have things we don't already know.
>
> > I am just going to hope
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 04:19:48PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I've applied this along with some extra work to get it to show GMT
> offsets and DST status, which should be useful for helping people
> to choose which setting they want. This effectively obsoletes
> Table B-5 as well as B-4 in the SGML
Hi Heikki and all,
I just sent the latest bitmap index patch to the list. I am not sure if
there is any size limit for this mailing list. If you have received my
previous email, please let me know.
Thanks,
Jie
On 9/12/06 2:43 AM, "Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What's
Understood, Thank you :)
On Sat, 2006-09-16 at 21:23 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gevik Babakhani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I was wondering if I should go ahead and add a macro datatype like the
> > SERIAL, only this time for the uuid.
>
> This assumes a fact not in evidence, which is that we'r
57 matches
Mail list logo
