Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] ALTER SCHEMA ... SET TABLESPACE

2004-08-21 Thread Philip Warner
At 06:07 AM 21/08/2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: I am inclined to agree. ALTER INDEX is an operation that will happen quite often, One argument for doing it in this release is pg_dump/restore. Do we want pg_dump to dump the CREATE SCHEMA followed by ALTER SCHEMA? Or will the SET DEFAULT TABLESPACE w

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba.conf and IP-MASK

2004-08-21 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > >We have an IP-MASK column in pg_hba.conf. Now that we are using CIDR > >addresses by default, should we remove the column label? > > > > > > > I would mark it optional. We could do that, but we could use the space if we removed it. One other

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba.conf and IP-MASK

2004-08-21 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Bruce Momjian wrote: We have an IP-MASK column in pg_hba.conf. Now that we are using CIDR addresses by default, should we remove the column label? I would mark it optional. We still support the a netmask value if they don't use CIDR format, but now that the default is CIDR, it seems we should

[HACKERS] pg_hba.conf and IP-MASK

2004-08-21 Thread Bruce Momjian
We have an IP-MASK column in pg_hba.conf. Now that we are using CIDR addresses by default, should we remove the column label? We still support the a netmask value if they don't use CIDR format, but now that the default is CIDR, it seems we should remove the column label. -- Bruce Momjian

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0 Open Items

2004-08-21 Thread Jeff Davis
On Sat, 2004-08-21 at 11:26, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > No, not at all. A nonfunctional catalog entry gets in the way of the > > user replacing the function, should he wish to do that. > > Yea, but I would call the odds of that "pretty negligible". What if they're trying to rest

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0 Open Items

2004-08-21 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Okay, I don't want to force an initdb just for this either. But if we > >> do one for other reasons, it's toast. > > > I don't see why an initdb is required: if we want to remove it, we can > > replace the functio

Re: [HACKERS] Installing PostgreSQL in a Unix Platform

2004-08-21 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Hello, If you are compiling from source then the postgresql startup script does not get installed. You can use pg_ctl in /usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_ctl to start postgresql. Alternatively you can install the startup script from the contrib directory startscripts/linux Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake Eyin

[HACKERS] Installing PostgreSQL in a Unix Platform

2004-08-21 Thread Eyinagho Newton
It has been impossible to install PostgreSQL, an open source software, from my SUSE 8.0 . Although it tells you its been installed, each time i try to start it using SysV-Init Editor, i get the following message: starting/etc/init.d/postgresql"" starting postgreSQL /etc/init.d/postgresql.checkpr

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0 Open Items

2004-08-21 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Okay, I don't want to force an initdb just for this either. But if we >> do one for other reasons, it's toast. > I don't see why an initdb is required: if we want to remove it, we can > replace the function's implementation with elog(E

Re: [HACKERS] repeatable system index corruption on 7.4.2 (SOLVED)

2004-08-21 Thread Joe Conway
Joe Conway wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: Joe Conway writes I'm seeing the following errors after a few hours of fairly aggressive bulk load of a database running on Postgres 7.4.2: When I say aggressive, I mean up to 6 simultaneous COPY processes. It is different from the issue Tom solved the other da

Re: [HACKERS] postgres uptime

2004-08-21 Thread Gaetano Mendola
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tom Lane wrote: | Gaetano Mendola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | |>>I think we should just call gettimeofday() at postmaster start and store |>>it somewhere. | | |>Isn't the shared memory a good place ? | | | Depends. Do you want to reset it during a ba

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba.conf and Solaris

2004-08-21 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Bruce Momjian said: > I didn't like the Solaris bug mention in pg_hba.conf. It seemed like > the wrong place: > > + # Note: On some Solaris systems, an IP-MASK of 255.255.255.255 is > known not to work. + # The corresponding CIDR-MASK of /32 does work. > > I have removed it. Should we put somethi