>>
>>Add a "FROM " after the "ON " to
>>the CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER statements. That's it.
>>
>
>I'll make the change ASAP.
>
I'm about to do this - does anyone object to me adding the 7.0 backward
compatibility changes at the same time?
-
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 12:39:29PM +0800, Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
> At 03:09 PM 23-04-2001 -0300, you wrote:
> >Basically, if great to set max clients to 256, but if load hits 50
> >as a result, the database is near to useless ... if you set it to 256,
> >and 254 idle connections are going, load won
Is anyone else seeing this?
I have the current CVS sources and "make check" ends up with one
failure. My regression.diffs shows:
*** ./expected/join.out Thu Dec 14 17:30:45 2000
--- ./results/join.out Mon Apr 23 20:23:15 2001
***
*** 1845,1851
-- UNION JOIN isn't implemente
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 10:50:42PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Basically, if we do this then we are abandoning the notion that Postgres
> runs as an unprivileged user. I think that's a BAD idea, especially in
> an environment that's open enough that you might feel the need to
> load-throttle your us
Hi,
I believe i found two minor bugs in the linux start/stop scripts for the
downloadable rpm version of postgres 7.1. I don't think these have been
reported already (i did some quik searches). Please look these over and see
if i'm just smoking something or if these bugs are valid. Also, i did a
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Rather than do system('uptime') and incur the process start-up each time,
> > you could do fp = popen('vmstat 60', 'r'), then just read the fp.
>
> popen doesn't incur a process start? Get real. But you're right, popen()
> is the right call not system()
At 03:09 PM 23-04-2001 -0300, you wrote:
>
>Anyone thought of implementing this, similar to how sendmail does it? If
>load > n, refuse connections?
>
>Basically, if great to set max clients to 256, but if load hits 50 as a
>result, the database is near to useless ... if you set it to 256, and 254
On 23 Apr 2001, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Linux and BSD it seems to be more common to put /dev/kmem into a
> > specialized group "kmem", so running postgres as setgid kmem is not so
> > immediately dangerous. Still, do you think it's a good idea to l
other then a potential buffer overrun, what would be the problem with:
open(kmem)
read values
close(kmem)
?
I would think it would be less taxing to the system then doing a system()
call, but still effectively as safe, no?
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker <[EMAIL PROT
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Linux and BSD it seems to be more common to put /dev/kmem into a
> specialized group "kmem", so running postgres as setgid kmem is not so
> immediately dangerous. Still, do you think it's a good idea to let an
> attacker have open-ended rights to read yo
> Rather than do system('uptime') and incur the process start-up each time,
> you could do fp = popen('vmstat 60', 'r'), then just read the fp.
popen doesn't incur a process start? Get real. But you're right, popen()
is the right call not system(), because you need to read the stdout.
> I beli
The Hermit Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
>> sendmail expects to be root.
> Actually, not totally accurate ... sendmail has a 'RunAs' option for those
> that don't wish to have it run as root,
True, it doesn't *have* to be root, but the loadavg code sti
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > sendmail does it now, and, apparently relatively portable across OSs ...
>
> sendmail expects to be root. It's unlikely (and very undesirable) that
> postgres will be installed with adequate privileges to re
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > > ... if there is interest in an A4 layout of the docs, let me know...
> > I've gotten several requests for the A4 format, and have completed four
> > of the six docs in that format. Thanks for the feedback. They should be
> > available in the next
The Hermit Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> sendmail does it now, and, apparently relatively portable across OSs ...
sendmail expects to be root. It's unlikely (and very undesirable) that
postgres will be installed with adequate privileges to read /dev/kmem,
which is what it'd take to run th
"Mauricio Breternitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My concern is whether that is enough to maintain consistency
> in the buffer cache
No, it isn't --- for one thing, WriteBuffer wouldn't cause other
backends to update their copies of the page. At the very least you'd
need to synchronize w
Karel Zak writes:
> Great! With this feature is possible use persisten connection and
> on-the-fly changing actual user, right? It's very useful for example
> web application that checking user privilege via SQL layout.
A real persistent connection solution would require real session
management
Nathan Myers wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 03:09:53PM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> >
> > Anyone thought of implementing this, similar to how sendmail does it? If
> > load > n, refuse connections?
> > ...
> > If nobody is working on something like this, does anyone but me feel that
> > it
Hi,
I just got trapped by one of my own features in the
referential integrity area.
The problem is, that the trigger run on the FK row at UPDATE
allways checks and locks the referenced PK, even if the FK
attributes didn't change. That's because if there'd be an
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 03:09:53PM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> Anyone thought of implementing this, similar to how sendmail does it? If
> load > n, refuse connections?
> ...
> If nobody is working on something like this, does anyone but me feel that
> it has merit to make use of? I'll
Anyone thought of implementing this, similar to how sendmail does it? If
load > n, refuse connections?
Basically, if great to set max clients to 256, but if load hits 50 as a
result, the database is near to useless ... if you set it to 256, and 254
idle connections are going, load won't rise mu
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > A different approach that's been discussed on pghackers is to make use
> > of btree indexes for columns that have such indexes: we could scan the
> > indexes to visit all the column values in sorted order. I have rejected
> > that approach because (a) it doesn't help for
Just a question, where is NAMEDATALEN now in 7.1, I didn't see it in
postgres.h. If this is no longer used to change column name length, what
is? Your help is appreciated.
-
Adam Rose
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe com
Postgresql Programmer's Guide
by Thomas Lockhart, Thomas Lochart (Editor)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0595149170/ref=pd_sim_elt_l1/107-6921356-0996510
--
Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 853-3000
+ If y
Actually, the text I quoted was wrong. It was from the Amazon web page.
The book cover says:
Postgresql Programmer's Guide
by The PostgreSQL Development Team
Edited by Thomas Lochart
Also, somone reviewed my book at:
http://Linuxiso.org/bookreviews/postgresql.ht
Folks:
I'm planning a port of Postgres to a multiprocessor
architecture in which all nodes have both local memory
and fast access to a shared memory. Shared memory it more
expensive than local memory.
My intent is to put the shmem & lock structures in
shared memory, but use a copy-i
Thanks for you help
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Adam Rose writes:
>
> > I noticed in the documentation that row length is unlimited. I think I
> > took that to mean row name length is now unlimited. But, row
>
> You took that wrong...
>
> > name length still appears to be
At 10:10 23/04/01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> All that we're discussing here is one specific parameter in the cost
>>> estimation for an indexscan, viz, the extent to which the table ordering
>>> agrees with the index ordering.
>
>> This does not necessarily follow. A table ordering need not follo
Tom Lane wrote:
> Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> What I'm suggesting is that if you look at a random sample of index nodes,
>> you should be able to get a statistically valid estimate of the 'clumping'
>> of the data pointed to by the index.
>
>
> And I'm saying that you don't
Adam Rose writes:
> I noticed in the documentation that row length is unlimited. I think I
> took that to mean row name length is now unlimited. But, row
You took that wrong...
> name length still appears to be set to a static width. Do I still need to
> recompile postgres to get 64 characte
Dominic J. Eidson writes:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Joel Burton wrote:
>
> > pg_user holds users
> >
> > (passwords in pg_shadow)
>
> I doubt the -hackers people would let me add SPI_* stuff into libpq, just
> to retrieve whether a user exists or not..
You wouldn't have to do that. There are bette
Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> All that we're discussing here is one specific parameter in the cost
>> estimation for an indexscan, viz, the extent to which the table ordering
>> agrees with the index ordering.
> This does not necessarily follow. A table ordering need not follow th
I noticed in the documentation that row length is unlimited. I think I
took that to mean row name length is now unlimited. But, row
name length still appears to be set to a static width. Do I still need to
recompile postgres to get 64 character row headers?
Postgres 7.1 RPMS
Redhat 6.2
Help
"Dominic J. Eidson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am trying to add another authentication mechanism to PostgreSQL... And,
> in doing that, I need to verify the existance of an user within PG. Short
> of hacking together code from verify_password(), is there any way to check
> if a user exists in
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> If you're trying to do this from the postmaster, I think the only way is
> to look at $PGDATA/global/pg_pwd, which is a flat-file version of
> pg_shadow.
This is what I thought - thanks.
--
Dominic J. Eidson
"Baruk
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Okay, would it be helpful if I made a few suggestions on things that I
> as a user/tool developer of postgres might find helpful?
Not sure. I recommend hanging around, and when the discussion starts,
you can add things.
>
> >
> > > Is there an easy way to read the WAL
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. Will something bad happen if I put index on xmin ?
I was just testing that sort of thing yesterday. pg_dump prior to
yesterday's patch will crash upon seeing such an index, but that was
the only problem I found.
regards, tom
Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a question about pg_statistic: Can we safely remove all records
> from pg_statistic?
Sure.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Joel Burton wrote:
> pg_user holds users
>
> (passwords in pg_shadow)
I doubt the -hackers people would let me add SPI_* stuff into libpq, just
to retrieve whether a user exists or not.. My first thought was to check
the existance of users against $PGDATA/pg_pwd... One ques
What I'd like to see in 7.2 is a WAL API with the following
functionality:
* Get the latest transaction in the WAL
* Get transaction, transId, from the WAL
* Was a given transaction rolled back?
What I don't want to have to worry about is all the internals needed for
writting the log. I
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Dominic J. Eidson wrote:
> I am trying to add another authentication mechanism to PostgreSQL... And,
> in doing that, I need to verify the existance of an user within PG. Short
> of hacking together code from verify_password(), is there any way to check
> if a user exists in
Hi,
I'm about to write a simple one-way replication script relying on xmin
and would like to speed up things by putting an index on it.
So I have a few questions:
1. Will something bad happen if I put index on xmin ?
2. Is it just a bad idea to do it that way ?
(there will be no deletes, j
At 22:27 19/04/01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> At 21:14 19/04/01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> But you don't really need to look at the index (if it even exists
>>> at the time you do the ANALYZE). The extent to which the data is
>>> ordered in the table is a
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Okay, would it be helpful if I made a few suggestions on things that I
as a user/tool developer of postgres might find helpful?
>
> > Is there an easy way to read the WAL files generated by Postgres? I'm
> > looking into writting a replication deamon for postgres and think
> >> But you don't really need to look at the index (if it even exists
> >> at the time you do the ANALYZE). The extent to which the data is
> >> ordered in the table is a property of the table, not the index.
>
> > Think compound, ascending, descending and functional index.
> > The (let's call
On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 05:43:02PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I have implemented this; it seems to do what we need:
>
> $ ~/pg-install/bin/psql -U peter
>
> peter=# set session authorization 'joeblow';
> SET VARIABLE
> peter=# create table foo (a int);
> CREATE
> peter=# \dt
> List of
46 matches
Mail list logo
