Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-06-04 Thread Andreas Pflug

Bruce Momjian wrote:


For use case, consider this:

COPY mytable TO '| rsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]  test ';

so you can COPY to another server directly.
  

Why not rsh psql -c \copy foobar to test ?

Regards,
Andreas


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-06-04 Thread Greg Stark
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Bruce Momjian wrote:
 
  For use case, consider this:
 
  COPY mytable TO '| rsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]  test ';
 
  so you can COPY to another server directly.
 
 Why not rsh psql -c \copy foobar to test ?

Who knows? The sysadmin could have any reason to prefer one to the other. 

One that comes to mind is that he or she may want to automate this and may be
happier granting password-free access to a filesystem server that just holds
encrypted backups than to the live production database.

-- 
greg


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-06-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
 On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 01:08:28PM -0700, Steve Atkins wrote:
  On May 31, 2006, at 12:58 PM, Dave Page wrote:
  On 31/5/06 19:13, Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  
  I wonder if we'd be able to ship gzip with the windows installer, to
  insure proper integration.
  
  'Fraid not. It's GPL'd.
  
  Well, one implementation of it is. zlib is new-bsd-ish, though, and
  includes minigzip, which should be just fine for use in a pipe on
  windows.
 
 Even then it's not relevent. The Windows Installer is already GPL'd by
 the fact it includes readline. zlib is indeed straight BSD like.

I assume gzip would be binary in the installer.  Does putting a GPL
binary in the installer make the entire thing GPL?  I don't think so.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us
  EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-06-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andreas Pflug wrote:
 Tom Lane wrote:
  After re-reading what I just wrote to Andreas about how compression of
  COPY data would be better done outside the backend than inside, it
  struck me that we are missing a feature that's fairly common in Unix
  programs.  Perhaps COPY ought to have the ability to pipe its output
  to a shell command, or read input from a shell command.  Maybe something
  like
  
  COPY mytable TO '| gzip /home/tgl/mytable.dump.gz';

For use case, consider this:

COPY mytable TO '| rsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]  test ';

so you can COPY to another server directly.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us
  EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-06-01 Thread Mark Woodward
 After re-reading what I just wrote to Andreas about how compression of
 COPY data would be better done outside the backend than inside, it
 struck me that we are missing a feature that's fairly common in Unix
 programs.  Perhaps COPY ought to have the ability to pipe its output
 to a shell command, or read input from a shell command.  Maybe something
 like

   COPY mytable TO '| gzip /home/tgl/mytable.dump.gz';

 (I'm not wedded to the above syntax, it's just an off-the-cuff thought.)

 Of course psql would need the same capability, since the server-side
 copy would still be restricted to superusers.

 You can accomplish COPY piping now through psql, but it's a bit awkward:

   psql -c COPY mytable TO stdout mydb | gzip ...

 Thoughts?  Is this worth doing, or is the psql -c approach good enough?


To be honest, I don't see much benefit in it. You can already accomplish
what you want to accomplish easily enough.

If you want to muck with COPY, I'd like to see it accept a query as:

psql -c COPY select * from mytable where foo='bar' TO stdout mydb | gzip
...




---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Andrew Dunstan

Tom Lane wrote:


You can accomplish COPY piping now through psql, but it's a bit awkward:

psql -c COPY mytable TO stdout mydb | gzip ...

Thoughts?  Is this worth doing, or is the psql -c approach good enough?




I think it's good enough. And there is also

  pg_dump -F c -t bigtable -f bigtable.dump

cheers

andrew

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

  http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread David Fetter
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 11:03:14AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
 After re-reading what I just wrote to Andreas about how compression
 of COPY data would be better done outside the backend than inside,
 it struck me that we are missing a feature that's fairly common in
 Unix programs.  Perhaps COPY ought to have the ability to pipe its
 output to a shell command, or read input from a shell command.
 Maybe something like
 
   COPY mytable TO '| gzip /home/tgl/mytable.dump.gz';

That's a great syntax :)

Similarly,

COPY mytable FROM 'create_sample_data --table mytable --rows 1000 |';

would be cool.

 (I'm not wedded to the above syntax, it's just an off-the-cuff
 thought.)

It will be familiar to Perl users, for better or worse.  Come to that,
should the prefixes  and  also mean their corresponding shell
things?

 Of course psql would need the same capability, since the server-side
 copy would still be restricted to superusers.

Roight.

 You can accomplish COPY piping now through psql, but it's a bit awkward:
 
   psql -c COPY mytable TO stdout mydb | gzip ...
 
 Thoughts?  Is this worth doing, or is the psql -c approach good enough?

I think it's worth doing :)

Cheers,
D
-- 
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778AIM: dfetter666
  Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Andreas Pflug

Tom Lane wrote:

After re-reading what I just wrote to Andreas about how compression of
COPY data would be better done outside the backend than inside, it
struck me that we are missing a feature that's fairly common in Unix
programs.  Perhaps COPY ought to have the ability to pipe its output
to a shell command, or read input from a shell command.  Maybe something
like

COPY mytable TO '| gzip /home/tgl/mytable.dump.gz';





(I'm not wedded to the above syntax, it's just an off-the-cuff thought.)

Of course psql would need the same capability, since the server-side
copy would still be restricted to superusers.


Won't help too much, until gzip's output is piped back too, so a 
replacement for COPY .. TO STDOUT COMPRESSED  would be
COPY ... TO '| /bin/gzip |' STDOUT, to enable clients to receive the 
reduced stuff. But clients should be agnostic of server side installed 
tools, and probably not be able to address them directly. Sounds like a 
potential security issue.


Regards,
Andreas

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

  http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Andreas Pflug

Andreas Pflug wrote:



Won't help too much, until gzip's output is piped back too, so a 
replacement for COPY .. TO STDOUT COMPRESSED  would be
COPY ... TO '| /bin/gzip |' STDOUT, to enable clients to receive the 
reduced stuff.


Forgot to mention:
COPY COMPRESSED was also meant to introduce a portable format that's 
efficient for both text and binary data. Relying on some external XYZzip 
version seems not too portable to me.


Regards,
Andreas

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Dave Page
 

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andreas Pflug
 Sent: 31 May 2006 16:41
 Cc: Tom Lane; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
 Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe
 
 Andreas Pflug wrote:
 
  
  Won't help too much, until gzip's output is piped back too, so a 
  replacement for COPY .. TO STDOUT COMPRESSED  would be
  COPY ... TO '| /bin/gzip |' STDOUT, to enable clients to 
 receive the 
  reduced stuff.
 
 Forgot to mention:
 COPY COMPRESSED was also meant to introduce a portable format that's 
 efficient for both text and binary data. Relying on some 
 external XYZzip 
 version seems not too portable to me.

It does have that advantage. Gzip and others are not particularly
Windows friendly for example.

Regards, Dave.


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Tom Lane
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Forgot to mention:
 COPY COMPRESSED was also meant to introduce a portable format that's 
 efficient for both text and binary data. Relying on some external XYZzip 
 version seems not too portable to me.

I dislike putting this into the backend precisely because it's trying to
impose a one-size-fits-all compression solution.  Someone might wish to
use bzip2 instead of gzip, for instance, or tweak the compression level
options of gzip.  It's trivial for the user to do that if the
compression program is separate, not trivial at all if it's wired into
COPY.  Also, a pipe feature would have uses unrelated to compression,
such as on-the-fly analysis or generation of data.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Andreas Pflug

Dave Page wrote:
 




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andreas Pflug

Sent: 31 May 2006 16:41
Cc: Tom Lane; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

Andreas Pflug wrote:


Won't help too much, until gzip's output is piped back too, so a 
replacement for COPY .. TO STDOUT COMPRESSED  would be
COPY ... TO '| /bin/gzip |' STDOUT, to enable clients to 


receive the 


reduced stuff.


Forgot to mention:
COPY COMPRESSED was also meant to introduce a portable format that's 
efficient for both text and binary data. Relying on some 
external XYZzip 
version seems not too portable to me.



It does have that advantage. Gzip and others are not particularly
Windows friendly for example.


... as most windows programs are pipe agnostic.

Regards,
Andreas

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
  choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
  match


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Joshua D. Drake


I dislike putting this into the backend precisely because it's trying to
impose a one-size-fits-all compression solution.  Someone might wish to
use bzip2 instead of gzip, for instance, or tweak the compression level
options of gzip.  It's trivial for the user to do that if the
compression program is separate, not trivial at all if it's wired into
COPY.  Also, a pipe feature would have uses unrelated to compression,
such as on-the-fly analysis or generation of data.


It seems that it would be better to have the options within pg_dump 
which would give the most flexibility.


Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--

   === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
   Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
 http://www.commandprompt.com/



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
  subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
  message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Andreas Pflug

Joshua D. Drake wrote:


I dislike putting this into the backend precisely because it's trying to
impose a one-size-fits-all compression solution.  Someone might wish to
use bzip2 instead of gzip, for instance, or tweak the compression level
options of gzip.  It's trivial for the user to do that if the
compression program is separate, not trivial at all if it's wired into
COPY.  Also, a pipe feature would have uses unrelated to compression,
such as on-the-fly analysis or generation of data.



It seems that it would be better to have the options within pg_dump 
which would give the most flexibility.


What about all other client tools?

My COPY WITH COMPRESSION is not the same as taking a copy file and 
zipping it; it creates a copy file with BinarySignature that has 
compressed bytes in the data part, thus it can be handled by any client 
app that can stream binary copy files from/to the server.


Regards,
Andreas

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Magnus Hagander
 Won't help too much, until gzip's output is piped back too, so a 
 replacement for COPY .. TO STDOUT COMPRESSED  would be 
 COPY ... TO '| 
 /bin/gzip |' STDOUT, to enable clients to
 
 receive the
 
 reduced stuff.
 
 Forgot to mention:
 COPY COMPRESSED was also meant to introduce a portable 
 format that's 
 efficient for both text and binary data. Relying on some external 
 XYZzip version seems not too portable to me.
  
  
  It does have that advantage. Gzip and others are not particularly
  Windows friendly for example.
 
 ... as most windows programs are pipe agnostic.

For the record, gzip on win32 works perfectly fine both as a separate
program and running in a pipe. No problem at all. The only issue is that
it's not available by default. (And possible issues with programs
launching it that don't know how to deal with windows style directory
naming)

//Magnus

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas Pflug) writes:
 Dave Page wrote:

-Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andreas
 Pflug
Sent: 31 May 2006 16:41
Cc: Tom Lane; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

Andreas Pflug wrote:


 Won't help too much, until gzip's output is piped back too, so a
 replacement for COPY .. TO STDOUT COMPRESSED  would be
 COPY ... TO '| /bin/gzip |' STDOUT, to enable clients to

 receive the

reduced stuff.

Forgot to mention:
 COPY COMPRESSED was also meant to introduce a portable format
 that's efficient for both text and binary data. Relying on some
 external XYZzip version seems not too portable to me.
 It does have that advantage. Gzip and others are not particularly
 Windows friendly for example.

 ... as most windows programs are pipe agnostic.

Shall we make PostgreSQL less powerful because of that?
-- 
cbbrowne,@,cbbrowne.com
http://cbbrowne.com/info/advocacy.html
Love is like a snowmobile flying over the frozen tundra that suddenly
flips, pinning you underneath.  At night, the ice weasels come.
-- Matt Groening

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Andreas Pflug

Chris Browne wrote:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas Pflug) writes:


Dave Page wrote:


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andreas
Pflug
Sent: 31 May 2006 16:41
Cc: Tom Lane; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

Andreas Pflug wrote:




Won't help too much, until gzip's output is piped back too, so a
replacement for COPY .. TO STDOUT COMPRESSED  would be
COPY ... TO '| /bin/gzip |' STDOUT, to enable clients to


receive the



reduced stuff.


Forgot to mention:
COPY COMPRESSED was also meant to introduce a portable format
that's efficient for both text and binary data. Relying on some
external XYZzip version seems not too portable to me.


It does have that advantage. Gzip and others are not particularly
Windows friendly for example.


... as most windows programs are pipe agnostic.



Shall we make PostgreSQL less powerful because of that?


I never said that. We shall seek solutions that run painless on most 
popular platforms are useful to users.
I wonder if we'd be able to ship gzip with the windows installer, to 
insure proper integration.


Regards,
Andreas

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
  choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
  match


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread David Fetter
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 02:46:29PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

 I wish somebody would explain to me the compelling use case for
 this.

As with in-place upgrades,[1] the compelling use case is being short
on disk space.  For somebody with a multi-TB (or whatever figure
sounds big this week) PostgreSQL database, it may be impossible to get
space for twice or more that.  Giving people the option to stream
COPYs through a pipe would alleviate a lot of pain.

Cheers,
D

[1]  A feature people seem to think we don't need, although convincing
cases have been made for it.
-- 
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778AIM: dfetter666
  Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Dave Page



On 31/5/06 18:28, Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Won't help too much, until gzip's output is piped back too, so a
 replacement for COPY .. TO STDOUT COMPRESSED  would be
 COPY ... TO '| 
 /bin/gzip |' STDOUT, to enable clients to
 
 receive the
 
 reduced stuff.
 
 Forgot to mention:
 COPY COMPRESSED was also meant to introduce a portable
 format that's 
 efficient for both text and binary data. Relying on some external
 XYZzip version seems not too portable to me.
 
 
 It does have that advantage. Gzip and others are not particularly
 Windows friendly for example.
 
 ... as most windows programs are pipe agnostic.
 
 For the record, gzip on win32 works perfectly fine both as a separate
 program and running in a pipe. No problem at all. The only issue is that
 it's not available by default. (And possible issues with programs
 launching it that don't know how to deal with windows style directory
 naming)

Exactly my point; how many production Windows servers do you have with gzip
anywhere near them? Andreas' point about pipes is also valid though - it's
simply not the norm on Windows as I found when we were porting Slony
(more.exe barfs at 8MB being pipe in).

Regards, Dave.



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Dave Page



On 31/5/06 19:13, Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I wonder if we'd be able to ship gzip with the windows installer, to
 insure proper integration.

'Fraid not. It's GPL'd.

Regards, Dave.


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
   choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
   match


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
 David Fetter wrote:

 As with in-place upgrades,[1] the compelling use case is being short
 on disk space.  For somebody with a multi-TB (or whatever figure
 sounds big this week) PostgreSQL database, it may be impossible to get
 space for twice or more that.  Giving people the option to stream
 COPYs through a pipe would alleviate a lot of pain.
 
 But why is that hugely better than piping psql output to gzip?

psql output has already travelled over the network.

-- 
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Steve Atkins


On May 31, 2006, at 12:58 PM, Dave Page wrote:





On 31/5/06 19:13, Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


I wonder if we'd be able to ship gzip with the windows installer, to
insure proper integration.


'Fraid not. It's GPL'd.


Well, one implementation of it is. zlib is new-bsd-ish, though, and  
includes

minigzip, which should be just fine for use in a pipe on windows.

(Not that that's an argument one way or the other as to whether this
is something we should do).

Cheers,
  Steve




---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Magnus Hagander
  I wonder if we'd be able to ship gzip with the windows 
 installer, to 
  insure proper integration.
 
 'Fraid not. It's GPL'd.
 

Well, if we want to go down that route, we could probably hack up
something simple around zlib. IIRC, there's even sample code in there
for how to write a gzip pipe program...

No, not as convenient, but should be handlable.

//Magnus

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Tom Lane
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 My COPY WITH COMPRESSION is not the same as taking a copy file and 
 zipping it; it creates a copy file with BinarySignature that has 
 compressed bytes in the data part, thus it can be handled by any client 
 app that can stream binary copy files from/to the server.

If you mean you're compressing each data field separately, that's surely
a very bad idea.  If you mean you're compressing everything except the
file header, I fail to see the value.  Binary is binary.  I *seriously*
doubt there are clients out there that look for a PGCOPY header before
deciding whether to send the file to the server or not.  And a client
that did know that much about a PGCOPY file would likely spit up on a
critical flag it didn't recognize, anyway.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Tom Lane
Dave Page dpage@vale-housing.co.uk writes:
 Exactly my point; how many production Windows servers do you have with gzip
 anywhere near them? Andreas' point about pipes is also valid though - it's
 simply not the norm on Windows as I found when we were porting Slony
 (more.exe barfs at 8MB being pipe in).

I don't see that we should allow Windows' deficiencies to be an argument
against providing a facility that would be useful on all our other platforms.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Andrew Dunstan

Alvaro Herrera wrote:

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
  


But why is that hugely better than piping psql output to gzip?



psql output has already travelled over the network.

  


As I understand Tom's suggestion, it does not involve compression of 
over the wire data. He suggested that on the server you would be able to do:


 COPY mytable TO '| gzip /home/tgl/mytable.dump.gz';


and that there could be an equivalent extension on psql's \copy command, as an alternative to doing 



 psql -c COPY mytable TO stdout mydb | gzip ...



It's the second piece especially that seems to me unnecessary. 



So I am still unconvinced.



cheers

andrew

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

  http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Dave Page



On 31/5/06 21:10, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Dave Page dpage@vale-housing.co.uk writes:
 Exactly my point; how many production Windows servers do you have with gzip
 anywhere near them? Andreas' point about pipes is also valid though - it's
 simply not the norm on Windows as I found when we were porting Slony
 (more.exe barfs at 8MB being pipe in).
 
 I don't see that we should allow Windows' deficiencies to be an argument
 against providing a facility that would be useful on all our other platforms.

It's not about a primarily GUI based OS not being able to do everything a
traditionally command line based OS can do on the command line, it's about
providing a solution that will work on either and remain portable. Whilst I
agree with your objection to using pg_lzcompress, I for one would rather see
a builtin solution that I know will work whatever platform/box I'm on
without having to go and download additional tools.

Regards, Dave. 


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 01:08:28PM -0700, Steve Atkins wrote:
 On May 31, 2006, at 12:58 PM, Dave Page wrote:
 On 31/5/06 19:13, Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 I wonder if we'd be able to ship gzip with the windows installer, to
 insure proper integration.
 
 'Fraid not. It's GPL'd.
 
 Well, one implementation of it is. zlib is new-bsd-ish, though, and
 includes minigzip, which should be just fine for use in a pipe on
 windows.

Even then it's not relevent. The Windows Installer is already GPL'd by
the fact it includes readline. zlib is indeed straight BSD like.

Have a nice day,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout   kleptog@svana.org   http://svana.org/kleptog/
 From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to 
 litigate.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Andreas Pflug

Dave Page wrote:


 It's not about a primarily GUI based OS not being able to do
 everything a traditionally command line based OS can do on the
 command line, it's about providing a solution that will work on
 either and remain portable. Whilst I agree with your objection to
 using pg_lzcompress,


Well, pg_lzcompress is in the backend for more than 6 years now, strange 
the objections arise now. However, a replacement for it might be a good 
idea, since apparently the fastest gzip algorithm is 3x faster for 10% 
better compression. TOAST write performance would probably profit 
significantly from a better algorithm.


I wonder what other use-cases exist for server side copy filters beyond 
compression.


Regards,
Andreas


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

  http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Magnus Hagander
  I wonder if we'd be able to ship gzip with the windows 
 installer, to 
  insure proper integration.
  
  'Fraid not. It's GPL'd.
  
  Well, one implementation of it is. zlib is new-bsd-ish, though, and 
  includes minigzip, which should be just fine for use in a pipe on 
  windows.
 
 Even then it's not relevent. The Windows Installer is already 
 GPL'd by the fact it includes readline. zlib is indeed 
 straight BSD like.

Uh. The installer does *not* include readline.

We do include PostGIS, but the PostGIS people themselves don't consider
us GPLed because of that ;-) 

Everything else is != GPL.

//Magnus

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Joshua D. Drake



Uh. The installer does *not* include readline.

We do include PostGIS, but the PostGIS people themselves don't consider
us GPLed because of that ;-) 



That is a tad different. PostgreSQL does not link to Postgis. Readline 
does :)



Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


Everything else is != GPL.

//Magnus

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend




--

   === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
   Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
 http://www.commandprompt.com/



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

  http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq


Re: [HACKERS] Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe

2006-05-31 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 11:20:21PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
 Uh. The installer does *not* include readline.

Terribly sorry, I misinterpreted the thread about it at the beginning
of the year.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-02/msg00539.php

Have a nice day,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout   kleptog@svana.org   http://svana.org/kleptog/
 From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to 
 litigate.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature