Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread Karel Zak
On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 09:01:28AM -0500, mlw wrote: If it is mostly static data, why not just make it a static page? Because a static page is a maintenance nightmare. One uses a database in a web site to allow content to be changed and upgraded dynamically and with a minimum of work. It's

Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread mlw
Karel Zak wrote: On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 09:01:28AM -0500, mlw wrote: If it is mostly static data, why not just make it a static page? Because a static page is a maintenance nightmare. One uses a database in a web site to allow content to be changed and upgraded dynamically and with a

Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread Jean-Michel POURE
Le Lundi 18 Mars 2002 13:23, mlw a écrit : Lets face it, MySQL wins a lot of people because they put in features that people want. MySQL is very interested in benchmarks. It does not really care for data consistency. Cheers, Jean-Michel POURE ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread Greg Copeland
Yes. EVERY person that I've ever known which runs MySQL run for two very simple reasons. First, they believe it to be wicked fast. Second, they don't understand what ACID is, what a transaction is, or why running a single session against a database to perform a benchmark is a completely bogus

Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread mlw
Jean-Michel POURE wrote: Le Lundi 18 Mars 2002 13:23, mlw a écrit : Lets face it, MySQL wins a lot of people because they put in features that people want. MySQL is very interested in benchmarks. It does not really care for data consistency. In no way am I suggesting we avoid ACID

Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread mlw
Mattew T. O'Connor wrote: My big problem with putting the cache outside of the database is that it is now incumbent on the applications programmer to write a cache. A database should manage the data, the application should handle how the data is presented. Forcing the application to

Re: [HACKERS] postgres is not using tas

2002-03-18 Thread Tom Lane
Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: i'm working with pg7.2 on irix6.5 platform and i've realized that postgres = is using semop instead of tas, pg_config_os.h has define HAVE_TEST_AND_SET,= and i don't kwow where could be the mistake. s_lock.h seems to think that __sgi is

Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread Greg Copeland
On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 08:15, mlw wrote: Mattew T. O'Connor wrote: [snip] The primary use that you have suggested is for web sites, and they certainly won't mind of the cache is 0.3seconds out of date. Again, if they don't care about accuracy, then they will use MySQL. PostgreSQL is

Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread mlw
Greg Copeland wrote: On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 08:15, mlw wrote: Mattew T. O'Connor wrote: [snip] The primary use that you have suggested is for web sites, and they certainly won't mind of the cache is 0.3seconds out of date. Again, if they don't care about accuracy, then they

Re: [HACKERS] postgres is not using tas

2002-03-18 Thread Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro
hi tom It is compiled with mips pro compilers I've tried to remove if defined in s_lock.h, but it's still using semop, is there any other side it could be defined. thanks and regards. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Fw: [HACKERS] bad performance on irix

2002-03-18 Thread Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro
- Original Message - From: Robert E. Bruccoleri [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 4:08 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] bad performance on irix Dear Luis, Dear Bob: I've removed ifdefs from s_lock.h trying if semop using was

Re: Fw: [HACKERS] bad performance on irix

2002-03-18 Thread Tom Lane
Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro [EMAIL PROTECTED] forwards: It's using the spinlocks for some locks, but semaphores for others. That doesn't make any sense to me. For one thing, if HAS_TEST_AND_SET is defined in the config header, the executable will just plain fail to build if there's no tas

Re: [HACKERS] postgres is not using tas

2002-03-18 Thread Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro
As i know, it's only using semop, even with TAS_AND_SET defined, this is an extract from postmaster's process registry 2515.934mS(+ 5914uS)[ 4]postgres(38089): read(25, 00 00 00 00 68 a9 6e 10 00 00 00 22 00 a8 00 c8..., 8192) = 8192 2520.497mS(+ 4562uS)[ 4]postgres(38089):

Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread Greg Copeland
On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 10:08, mlw wrote: Greg Copeland wrote: On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 08:15, mlw wrote: Mattew T. O'Connor wrote: [snip] If you are using a web site and you need real time data within 0.3s, you've implemented on the wrong platform. It's as simple as that. In

Re: [HACKERS] insert statements

2002-03-18 Thread Fernando Nasser
Vince Vielhaber wrote: Looks like Sybase ignores the bar: 1 create table foo(a int) 2 go 1 insert into foo(bar.a) values(1) 2 go (1 row affected) 1 select * from foo 2 go a --- 1 (1 row affected) 1 This looks like a parser error to me. It probably only

Re: [HACKERS] insert statements

2002-03-18 Thread Fernando Nasser
Tom Lane wrote: I'd want it to error out on INSERT foo (bar.col), though ;-) And on INSERT foo (bar.foo.col) as well. This means we will have to take this check down to the analyze phase (where the schema where foo is located is finally known, if it was not specified explicitly). We could

Re: [HACKERS] insert statements

2002-03-18 Thread Fernando Nasser
Vince Vielhaber wrote: On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote: Out of curiosity, does SyBase allow you to qualify it with schema.table.column? Just tried it... Yes. What if you give it a bogus schema name? Does it error out or just ignore it? -- Fernando Nasser Red Hat Canada

Re: [HACKERS] insert statements

2002-03-18 Thread Vince Vielhaber
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Fernando Nasser wrote: Vince Vielhaber wrote: On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote: Out of curiosity, does SyBase allow you to qualify it with schema.table.column? Just tried it... Yes. What if you give it a bogus schema name? Does it error out or

Re: [HACKERS] postgres is not using tas

2002-03-18 Thread Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro
here is the execution of one backend summary: System call summary: Average Total Name #Calls Time(ms) Time(ms) - semop 39305 0.06 2497.53 select 7 19.86139.01 unlink

[HACKERS] My only post with regard to query caching

2002-03-18 Thread Adam Haberlach
After reading way too many threads on this (probably too many on pgsql-* in general) I'll just go over how I feel about the caching issue. It seems that MySQL has implemented a system that allows the database to cache queries that are frequently used and reduce latency for them. This, to me,

Re: [HACKERS] postgres is not using tas

2002-03-18 Thread Tom Lane
Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As i know, it's only using semop, even with TAS_AND_SET defined, this is an extract from postmaster's process registry The fact that there are some semops in the strace doesn't prove anything. We do use semaphores when we have to block the

Re: [HACKERS] postgres is not using tas

2002-03-18 Thread Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro
hi tom could you please tell me where to find info on when and why is semop used, this thread began because i had excessive sem usage as u can see thanks and regards ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send

Re: [HACKERS] My only post with regard to query caching

2002-03-18 Thread Doug McNaught
Adam Haberlach [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: MySQL is doing some things right. They are providing useful documentation. They are adding features that target the web market (they may be adding them incorrectly, however). If we expect PostgreSQL to beat MySQL in anything but My database is

Re: [HACKERS] postgres is not using tas

2002-03-18 Thread Tom Lane
Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: could you please tell me where to find info on when and why is semop used, It's used when we need to block the current process (or to unblock another process that had been waiting). Look for calls to IpcSemaphoreLock and IpcSemaphoreUnlock.

Re: [HACKERS] postgres is not using tas

2002-03-18 Thread Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro
hi tom If i track a single backend during an 8 read-only queries parallel execution these are the results( System call summary: Average Total Name #Calls Time(ms) Time(ms) - semop3803 0.20774.03

Re: [HACKERS] postgres is not using tas

2002-03-18 Thread Tom Lane
Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If i track a single backend during an 8 read-only queries parallel execution these are the results( System call summary: Average Total Name #Calls Time(ms) Time(ms)

Re: [HACKERS] postgres is not using tas

2002-03-18 Thread Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro
hi tom how may we have believable statistics? what do u think about the graph i've sent to you, there are retrieved using hardware counters, i believe they are exact. Any idea? Thanks and regards ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all

Re: [HACKERS] insert statements

2002-03-18 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
I'd want it to error out on INSERT foo (bar.col), though ;-) And on INSERT foo (bar.foo.col) as well. Why accept above at all ? Seems much too error prone, I would eighter accept table with schema or without schema, mixing both cases seems unnecessarily confusing and error prone to me.

Re: Fw: Fw: [HACKERS] bad performance on irix

2002-03-18 Thread Robert E. Bruccoleri
Dear Tom, The evidence is from the Process Activity Recorder, an Irix utility similar to strace the reports syscall usage. A number of semop's are performed in the operation of backend. Luis can send you specifics. --Bob Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro writes: - Original Message

[HACKERS] Platform comparison ...

2002-03-18 Thread Dale Anderson
Hello Group, I need your help, in putting together a list of comparisons, and good solid technical reasons, to why to use PostgreSQL over using Microsoft SQL Server. Right now, we are using PostgreSQL for a back-end for some of our web stuff. A couple of our developers, which are

Re: [HACKERS] Platform comparison ...

2002-03-18 Thread Doug McNaught
Dale Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello Group, [snip: why would PG be better than MSSQL?] Better isn't meaningful except in the context of the problem you're trying to solve. There will be some problems where PG is right, some where MSSQL works better, and some where neither is the

Re: [HACKERS] Time for 7.2.1?

2002-03-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, I have branded 7.2.1 and updated HISTORY/release.sgml. Do we want any special text about the sequence bug fix, or just mention in the announcement that all 7.2 people should upgrade? --- Bruce Momjian wrote: Tom Lane

Re: [HACKERS] plsql as an officially supported language?

2002-03-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
We have this in the TODO: o Add plsh server-side shell language (Peter E) This is Peter's language that allows shell calls. I think Peter wants to add it for 7.3 and I think it is a good idea. --- Rod Taylor

Re: [HACKERS] Time for 7.2.1?

2002-03-18 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: OK, I have branded 7.2.1 and updated HISTORY/release.sgml. Do we want any special text about the sequence bug fix, or just mention in the announcement that all 7.2 people should upgrade? The first change item should maybe be more explicit, say

Re: [HACKERS] Time for 7.2.1?

2002-03-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: OK, I have branded 7.2.1 and updated HISTORY/release.sgml. Do we want any special text about the sequence bug fix, or just mention in the announcement that all 7.2 people should upgrade? The first change item should maybe be more

Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread Neil Conway
On Sat, 2002-03-16 at 09:01, mlw wrote: On a web site, a few specific queries get executed, unchanged, repeatedly. Think about an ecommerce site, most of the time it is just a handful of basic queries. These basic queries are usually against pretty large product tables. A caching mechanism

Re: [HACKERS] psql and output from \?

2002-03-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
Patch applied. Thanks. --- Ian Barwick wrote: On Thursday 14 March 2002 22:40, Bruce Momjian wrote: I guess some of these weren't introduces by you, but if someone is going to fix this, he might as well take

Re: [HACKERS] Again, sorry, caching.

2002-03-18 Thread Greg Copeland
On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 20:35, Neil Conway wrote: [snip] My impression (I could be wrong) is that LISTEN/NOTIFY doesn't get the press that it deserves. If this model isn't widely used because of some deficiencies in the LISTEN/NOTIFY implementation, IMHO our time would be better spent fixing

Re: [HACKERS] Time zone questions

2002-03-18 Thread Thomas Lockhart
australia=# select '2002-03-18 00:00:00' at time zone 'Australia/Sydney'; ERROR: Time zone 'australia/sydney' not recognized australia=# set time zone 'Australia/Sydney'; SET VARIABLE australia=# select '2002-03-18 00:00:00'; ?column? - 2002-03-18 00:00:00 Why

[HACKERS] Broken code in gram.y

2002-03-18 Thread Fernando Nasser
The OWNER production rules added to DROP DATABASE: DropdbStmt: DROP DATABASE database_name { DropdbStmt *n = makeNode(DropdbStmt); n-dbname = $3;