Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I don't believe your changes are necessary. The static-inline change was obsoleted by a recent fix, per discussion. But the rpath changes seem possibly useful (or maybe my thoughts are just colored by the fact that I'm currently trying to persuade OpenS

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIME

2002-11-06 Thread Thomas Lockhart
... In the long run, seems like it would be a good idea for type TIME WITHOUT TIME ZONE's input converter to accept and ignore a timezone field, just as type TIMESTAMP WITHOUT TIME ZONE does: ... Thomas, what do you think --- was this behavior deliberate or an oversight? The behavior was delib

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.

2002-11-06 Thread Billy G. Allie
Tom Lane wrote: > "Billy G. Allie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Here is the error messages generated during the compile: > > > cc -K pentium_pro,host,inline,loop_unroll -I../../../../src/include > > -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/local/ssl/include -c -o tuplesort.o tuplesort. > c > > UX:acomp: E

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
"Billy G. Allie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Here is the error messages generated during the compile: > cc -K pentium_pro,host,inline,loop_unroll -I../../../../src/include > -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/local/ssl/include -c -o tuplesort.o tuplesort.c > UX:acomp: ERROR: "tuplesort.c", line 1854:

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
I said: >> It's interesting that bison 1.28's output is sufficiently different to >> cause a problem, but we are not going to worry about supporting use of >> old bisons. Well, it turned out to be reasonably easy to fix this, so I did. It seems that bison 1.28 generates a .h file that cannot be i

Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches

2002-11-06 Thread Neil Conway
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > CREATE SEQUENCE syntax changes: did we decide whether SQL99's notion of > a sequence is close enough to ours that migrating to their syntax would > be a good idea, and not just a source of confusion? I seem to recall > some doubts being voiced about this (by

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Just to clarify, do the tarballs for /contrib/seg have the pre-processed > bison output, or are people required to have more current bisons to > compile the code? AFAIK we do not provide prebuilt bison or flex output for any of the contrib modules.

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.

2002-11-06 Thread Larry Rosenman
We already have success messages from Olivier Prenant for 7.3B4 on 8.0.0, and me for 7.1.3. I don't believe your changes are necessary. --On Wednesday, November 06, 2002 22:57:26 -0500 "Billy G. Allie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I am including a set of 4 small patches that enable PostgreSQL

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Steve Howe
Hello Bruce, Thursday, November 7, 2002, 12:56:57 AM, you wrote: BM> I have thrown out the idea and some felt that if we could get PITR and BM> Win32, that would be enough for a release, even if we could get it done BM> in a month or two. BM> However, I see your point that releasing too often ca

Re: [HACKERS] Outstanding patches

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I will be applying outstanding 7.4 patches on Friday: > http:/momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches2 > If anyone wants those rejected/modified, please let me know. array upper/lower bound: missing doc updates, otherwise seems okay. \pset pager

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Laurette Cisneros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > bison --version > > GNU Bison version 1.28 > > > Should I update it? > > Yes. > > It's interesting that bison 1.28's output is sufficiently different to > cause a problem, but we are not going to worry about supporting use of >

Re: [HACKERS] protocol change in 7.4

2002-11-06 Thread Satoshi Nagayasu
"Ross J. Reedstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Because the postgres backend must detect a type of incomming connection > > (from the client app or the master). > > > > If it is comming from the client, the backend relays the queries to the > > slaves (act as the master). > > > > But if it i

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Do I have to install the CVS version of Bison to get the new compile to > work? No, you can use their current release, 1.75. (Reportedly 1.50 works too, but I never tried it.) regards, tom lane -

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I am fine with this because it only touches unixware-specific stuff, > except the change to Tom's inline function: > [static] inline Datum > myFunctionCall2(FmgrInfo *flinfo, Datum arg1, Datum arg2) > Tom will have to comment on that. That change wou

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
Justin Clift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Whilst having a regular 4-6 month cycle (er... when was the last time > THAT happened?) is alright, we should get the *Windows* native version > out to the world ASAP. We don't have a Windows native version, and it sounds like it'll be awhile before we ha

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
> Laurette Cisneros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > bison --version > > GNU Bison version 1.28 > > > Should I update it? > > Yes. > > It's interesting that bison 1.28's output is sufficiently different to > cause a problem, but we are not going to worry about supporting use of > old bisons. Do I h

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
Laurette Cisneros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > bison --version > GNU Bison version 1.28 > Should I update it? Yes. It's interesting that bison 1.28's output is sufficiently different to cause a problem, but we are not going to worry about supporting use of old bisons. r

Re: [HACKERS] Datetime type dropped from v7.3 ?

2002-11-06 Thread Steve Howe
Hello Tom, Thursday, November 7, 2002, 1:17:00 AM, you wrote: TL> Steve Howe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Just wondering if the datetime type was dropped on purpose from >> PostgreSQL 7.3 ? TL> Yes. Ad-hoc name translations in the parser create bogosities with TL> respect to schemas --- I for

Re: [HACKERS] Datetime type dropped from v7.3 ?

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
Steve Howe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Just wondering if the datetime type was dropped on purpose from > PostgreSQL 7.3 ? Yes. Ad-hoc name translations in the parser create bogosities with respect to schemas --- I forget the details, but it was either drop "datetime" or make it a reserved keywo

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Justin Clift
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > What do others want, a regular 4-6 month cycle or a shorter one? Whilst having a regular 4-6 month cycle (er... when was the last time THAT happened?) is alright, we should get the *Windows* native version out to the world ASAP. This (and secondly PITR) will greatly enh

[HACKERS] Datetime type dropped from v7.3 ?

2002-11-06 Thread Steve Howe
Hello all, Just wondering if the datetime type was dropped on purpose from PostgreSQL 7.3 ? This is not an issue of course, I'll be using timestamp, but it's weird having that dropped. --- -- On PostgreSQL 7.2: --- howe=# select version();

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
unixware for an example of how to do this. > > After applying these patches, PostgreSQL successfully compiled on OpenUnix 8 > and it passed all the regression tests. > Content-Description: ou8.patch.20021106 [ Attachment, skipping... ] > | Billy G. Allie|

Re: [HACKERS] RC1 on Friday?

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > News to me ... > > On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Are we still on schedule for RC1 on Friday? I am asking. We almost got to RC1 last Friday, so I figured we could do RC1 this Friday. The changes between betas is minimal. -- Bruce Momjian

[HACKERS] PostgreSQL supported platform report and a patch.

2002-11-06 Thread Billy G. Allie
I am including a set of 4 small patches that enable PostgreSQL 7.3b3 to build successfully on OpenUnix 8.0. These same patches should also work for UnixWare 7.x. I will confirm that tomorrow (Nov 7, 2002). Here is an explanation of the patches: 1. An update of the FAQ_SCO file. 2. This patch r

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Neil Conway wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I have talked to Jan, and PeerDirect wants to submit a complete working > > Win32 patch, rather than the piece-by-piece merged patch I was working > > on. > > Is there a reason you're doing the actual merging with CVS? ISTM it > mi

Re: [HACKERS] RC1 on Friday?

2002-11-06 Thread Marc G. Fournier
News to me ... On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Are we still on schedule for RC1 on Friday? > > -- > Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road > +

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Neil Conway
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I have talked to Jan, and PeerDirect wants to submit a complete working > Win32 patch, rather than the piece-by-piece merged patch I was working > on. Is there a reason you're doing the actual merging with CVS? ISTM it might be more straight-forward to j

[HACKERS] Too late for translation updates?

2002-11-06 Thread Serguei Mokhov
Hi, Can I still send in translation patches so that they get into 7.4 or is it too late already? If it's not late, what would be the 'deadline' then? Thanks, -- Serguei A. Mokhov ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives

[HACKERS] Outstanding patches

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
I will be applying outstanding 7.4 patches on Friday: http:/momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches2 If anyone wants those rejected/modified, please let me know. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 +

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 08:20:16PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Let me map out the calendar. I think we are very close on the > > point-in-time recovery patch. I am hoping to get that in during > > November, and I _was_ hoping for the Win32 port too, so we could have

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 08:20:16PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Let me map out the calendar. I think we are very close on the > point-in-time recovery patch. I am hoping to get that in during > November, and I _was_ hoping for the Win32 port too, so we could have > another two months of develop

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Oh, I see it now, I think there was a change on November 1st to rule generation, but I can't see how that would cause your problem. If you 'patch -R' the attached patch, does it fix the problem? --- Bruce Momjian wrote: >

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
I think bison 1.75 will fix it. I am just not sure why earlier releases fail that way. --- Laurette Cisneros wrote: > bison --version > GNU Bison version 1.28 > > Should I update it? > > This just started with 7.3b4. > >

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Laurette Cisneros
bison --version GNU Bison version 1.28 Should I update it? This just started with 7.3b4. Thanks, L. On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Wow, that is strange. I have bison 1.75 here and it compiles fine. > What version of bison do you have? > > bison --version > > --

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
pgman wrote: > I have copies of Peer Direct's (Jan's company) port of PostgreSQL to > Win32, and SRA's port to Win32, and permission to generate a merged > patch that can be applied to 7.4. > > Now that 7.3 is almost complete, I am going to start work on that. I > will post patches that deal with

Re: [HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Wow, that is strange. I have bison 1.75 here and it compiles fine. What version of bison do you have? bison --version --- Laurette Cisneros wrote: > > I saw this when compiling 7.3b4 as well and also with 7.3b5 >

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Steve Howe
Hello Bruce, Wednesday, November 6, 2002, 8:33:32 PM, you wrote: BM> Steve Howe wrote: >> Hello Bruce, >> >> Wednesday, November 6, 2002, 3:19:35 AM, you wrote: >> >> BM> I have copies of Peer Direct's (Jan's company) port of PostgreSQL to >> BM> Win32, and SRA's port to Win32, and permission t

[HACKERS] 7.3b5 contrib compile problem

2002-11-06 Thread Laurette Cisneros
I saw this when compiling 7.3b4 as well and also with 7.3b5 cd contrib make ... make[1]: Leaving directory `/nfs/visor/u/software/postgres/postgresql-7.3b5/contrib/rtree_gist' make[1]: Entering directory `/nfs/visor/u/software/postgres/postgresql-7.3b5/contrib/seg' sed 's,MODULE_PATHNAME,$libdir/

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Steve Howe wrote: > Hello Bruce, > > Wednesday, November 6, 2002, 3:19:35 AM, you wrote: > > BM> I have copies of Peer Direct's (Jan's company) port of PostgreSQL to > BM> Win32, and SRA's port to Win32, and permission to generate a merged > BM> patch that can be applied to 7.4. > > BM> Now that

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Steve Howe
Hello Bruce, Wednesday, November 6, 2002, 3:19:35 AM, you wrote: BM> I have copies of Peer Direct's (Jan's company) port of PostgreSQL to BM> Win32, and SRA's port to Win32, and permission to generate a merged BM> patch that can be applied to 7.4. BM> Now that 7.3 is almost complete, I am going

Re: [HACKERS] PL/Perl and Perl 5.8

2002-11-06 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane writes: > I'm guessing that what we need to do is -D_GNU_SOURCE somewhere in the > Makefiles; the $64 question is exactly where (can we restrict it to > src/pl/plperl?) and what conditions should cause the Makefiles to add > it? Do we want a configure test? The simplest choice would be

[HACKERS] problem building pg 7.3 beta 3 on solaris 8 -m64

2002-11-06 Thread alex avriette
make[2]: Entering directory `/data/aja96/postgresql-7.3b3/src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs' make[3]: Entering directory `/data/aja96/postgresql-7.3b3/src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs/ ascii_and_mic' gcc -shared -h libascii_and_mic.so.0 ascii_and_mic.o -L../../../../../../src/port

Re: [HACKERS] Stability problems

2002-11-06 Thread scott.marlowe
I would recommend checking your memory (look for memtest86 online somewhere. Good tool.) Anytime a machine seems to act flakely there's a better than even chance it has a bad bit of memory in it. On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Nicolas VERGER wrote: > Hi, > I have strange stability problems. > I can't ac

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Jan Wieck wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > Jan Wieck writes: > > > > > > > To Hannu: the Windows port we did here depends on MS VC++ features like > > > > the ability to specify in the project to substitute header files. I > > > > don't know much about MingW and

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Jan Wieck wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > Here is a list of patch areas that I will address with the Win32 port: > > > > fork/exec > > loop rename test > > handle \r in COPY > > copydir for cp -r > > backslash tests > > rmdir not recursive for

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Jan Wieck
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Here is a list of patch areas that I will address with the Win32 port: > > fork/exec > loop rename test > handle \r in COPY > copydir for cp -r > backslash tests > rmdir not recursive for rm -r > shared memory could

[HACKERS] Final Beta ... Hopefully?

2002-11-06 Thread Marc G. Fournier
Peter updated the man.tar.gz file for me, and I got Bruce to tag it as beta5 just so that there was no confusion ... Sizes all look right, in comparison to past betas ... can a few ppl download and take a peak at this one ... if all goes well, this should be the last beta, with RC1 out next week

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Jan Wieck
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Jan Wieck writes: > > > > > To Hannu: the Windows port we did here depends on MS VC++ features like > > > the ability to specify in the project to substitute header files. I > > > don't know much about MingW and if you can do things like that wi

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Here is a list of patch areas that I will address with the Win32 port: fork/exec loop rename test handle \r in COPY copydir for cp -r backslash tests rmdir not recursive for rm -r shared memory could map to new address in exec child c

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Jan Wieck writes: > > > To Hannu: the Windows port we did here depends on MS VC++ features like > > the ability to specify in the project to substitute header files. I > > don't know much about MingW and if you can do things like that with it. > > Before long someone wil

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Joe Conway [mailto:mail@;joeconway.com] > Sent: 06 November 2002 16:16 > To: Bruce Momjian > Cc: Jan Wieck; Hannu Krosing; PostgreSQL-development; Tatsuo Ishii > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port > > > > Bruce, I can compile on VC++ (VS .Net) for you. Let

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Justin Clift
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Jan Wieck writes: > > > To Hannu: the Windows port we did here depends on MS VC++ features like > > the ability to specify in the project to substitute header files. I > > don't know much about MingW and if you can do things like that with it. > > Before long someone

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Jan Wieck writes: > To Hannu: the Windows port we did here depends on MS VC++ features like > the ability to specify in the project to substitute header files. I > don't know much about MingW and if you can do things like that with it. Before long someone will port the Windows port to MinGW, so w

Re: [HACKERS] v7.3Beta4 Tag'd and Packaged ...

2002-11-06 Thread Mats Lofkvist
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Marc G. Fournier") writes: > On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote: > > > ... > > > to pull in those changes that were made to the REL7_3_STABLE branch ... > > > > Right. > > > > > But, if I did: > > > cvs checkout -rREL7_3_STABLE pgsql > > > What would I use as BR

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joe Conway wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Jan Wieck wrote: > > > >>>Actually, I will be doing all the coding on BSD/OS. I am more merging > >>>patches than actual coding, though. This will guarantee that the > >>>patches will not affect the Unix platforms. I will need help from > >>>others t

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Problem: Referential Integrity Constraints lost

2002-11-06 Thread Stephan Szabo
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Achilleus Mantzios wrote: > > Hi i think a hit a major problem on 7.2.1. > I run 3 systems with postgresql 7.2.1. > Its a redhat 7.1 for development, a redhat 7.3 for production > and a FreeBSD 4.6.1RC2 for testing. > > After long runs (with periodic (daily) vacuum analyze's) >

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Joe Conway
Bruce Momjian wrote: Jan Wieck wrote: Actually, I will be doing all the coding on BSD/OS. I am more merging patches than actual coding, though. This will guarantee that the patches will not affect the Unix platforms. I will need help from others to check the various Win32 compilers. I was w

Re: [HACKERS] a tiny question

2002-11-06 Thread Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro
I supposed it, but I've not seen 7.3. A small patch for low performance on NUMA arquitectures could be the chance of using more than one shared region. Several months away there was a brief talk about low performance on IRIX, it was not real, it's low performance on Origin servers, they use ccNUMA

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Jan Wieck wrote: > > Actually, I will be doing all the coding on BSD/OS. I am more merging > > patches than actual coding, though. This will guarantee that the > > patches will not affect the Unix platforms. I will need help from > > others to check the various Win32 compilers. > > I was wonder

Re: [HACKERS] a tiny question

2002-11-06 Thread Neil Conway
"Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there a way to set more than one shared regions? No, there isn't. Cheers, Neil -- Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Jan Wieck
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Hannu Krosing wrote: > > Bruce Momjian kirjutas K, 06.11.2002 kell 08:19: > > > I have copies of Peer Direct's (Jan's company) port of PostgreSQL to > > > Win32, and SRA's port to Win32, and permission to generate a merged > > > patch that can be applied to 7.4. > > > > Gr

Re: [HACKERS] a tiny question

2002-11-06 Thread Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro
Another "tiny" question: Is there a way to set more than one shared regions? Thanks and regards ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Momjian
Hannu Krosing wrote: > Bruce Momjian kirjutas K, 06.11.2002 kell 08:19: > > I have copies of Peer Direct's (Jan's company) port of PostgreSQL to > > Win32, and SRA's port to Win32, and permission to generate a merged > > patch that can be applied to 7.4. > > Great! > > > Now that 7.3 is almost c

Re: [HACKERS] Stability problems

2002-11-06 Thread Tom Lane
"Nicolas VERGER" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2002-11-05 14:46:44 [5768] FATAL 2: failed to add item with len = 191 > to page 150 (free space 4294967096, nusd 0, noff 0) > template1=# select version(); > PostgreSQL 7.2.1 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC 2.96 Hmm. This looks a lot like t

[HACKERS] Stability problems

2002-11-06 Thread Nicolas VERGER
Hi, I have strange stability problems. I can't access a table (the table is different each time I get the problem, it could be a system table (pg_am), or a user defined one): Can't "select *" the whole table but can "select * limit x offset y", so it appears that only a tuple is in bad status. I ca

[HACKERS] Romanian version of the PostgreSQL "Advocacy and Marketing" site is ready

2002-11-06 Thread Justin Clift
Hi everyone, Thanks to Adrian Maier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, the Romanian translation of the PostgreSQL "Advocacy and Marketing" site is now completed and ready for public use: http://advocacy.postgresql.org/?lang=ro :-) Dutch is presently being worked upon, and will hopefully be ready soon. :) T

Re: [HACKERS] protocol change in 7.4

2002-11-06 Thread Satoshi Nagayasu
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Exactly. When user send the COMMIT command to the master server, the > > master.talks to the slaves to process precommit-vote-commit using the > > 2PC. The 2PC cycle is hidden from user application. User application > > just talks the normal FE/BE pr