On R, 2005-06-10 at 12:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As the number of tuples between CTID_INDEX_MIN and CTID_INDEX_MAX is
finite, they must be added in finite time, by which time the index will
be up-to-date and usable for querie planner. (i.e. (1) is
This avoids the risk of creating any serious backwards-compatibility
issues: if there's anyone out there who does need SnapshotNow reads,
they just have to be sure to open the LO in read-write mode to have
fully backward compatible operation.
Comments, objections?
If you feel like it, feel
Either you're misunderstanding what reindex database does (it reindexes
only the system catalogs), or you're misunderstanding what reindexdb does
OK, I was taking the face value here.
I consider this a bug, or at least a badly thought out name. I can't
understand that someone approved
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 06:57:24PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Heikki,
I took a closer look at the JTA spec and saw that the Xid, which is
translated to a gid in the jdbc driver, consists of a format identifier
(32-bit int), a branch qualifier
Hi Josh,
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 02:25:11PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
O.K. This makes sens to me. Otherwise I'd like to see quotas per
tablespace. As far as I got it, a tablespace may grow in size untile the
volume is full. Here a grace quota might be usefull as well. Let's say a
5%
On 6/11/05, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
It matches with the format in the JTA spec, but the JTA spec also mentions
the OCI CCR format
The OSI CCR format, which appears to refer to ISO/IEC 9805-1.
ISO/IEC 9805-1:1998
15-12-1998
Information technology - Open Systems Interconnection - Protocol
Kaare Rasmussen wrote:
Either you're misunderstanding what reindex database does (it reindexes
only the system catalogs), or you're misunderstanding what reindexdb does
OK, I was taking the face value here.
I consider this a bug, or at least a badly thought out name. I can't
--On Freitag, Juni 10, 2005 21:20:33 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wouldn't
ALTER [OBJECT] RENAME TO [schema.][name]
be a better?
After all, this is essentially a rename operation,
so maybe it is better to extend existing syntax...
I don't think it's a good idea to merge two different
Tom Lane wrote:
Hmm. Maybe we need something more like a lint check for tables, ie
run through and look for visibly corrupt data, such as obviously
impossible lengths for varlena fields.
Come to think of it, didn't someone already write something close to
this a few years ago?
Sounds like
On 6/10/2005 3:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
pgbench: I see repeated complaints on -performance about how
pgbench results are misleading. Why are we shipping it with
PostgreSQL then?
It's handy to have *some* simple concurrent-behavior test included,
even if it's not something we put a lot of
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On R, 2005-06-10 at 12:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Have you forgotten Zeno's paradox? I don't see a
reason to assume the indexer can *ever* catch up --- it's entirely
likely that adding a new unindexed row is faster than adding an index
entry for it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yann Michel
Sent: 11 June 2005 09:49
To: Josh Berkus
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] User Quota Implementation
What do we need:
- Extension of the CREATE TABLESPACE
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
Kaare Rasmussen wrote:
I consider this a bug, or at least a badly thought out name. I can't
understand that someone approved 'reindex database' to mean 'reindex the
system tables of a database'.
Agreed.
It's always bothered me too. How about
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 05:36:34PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
What do we need:
- Extension of the CREATE TABLESPACE command:
CREATE TABLESPACE tablespacename
[ OWNER username ]
[ SIZE integerK | M | G | T ]
LOCATION 'directory'
- Extension of
On Sat, 11 Jun 2005, Jochem van Dieten wrote:
The OSI CCR format, which appears to refer to ISO/IEC 9805-1.
ISO/IEC 9805-1:1998
15-12-1998
Information technology - Open Systems Interconnection - Protocol for
the Commitment, Concurrency and Recovery service element: Protocol
specification
This
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us writes:
Kaare Rasmussen wrote:
I consider this a bug, or at least a badly thought out name. I can't
understand that someone approved 'reindex database' to mean 'reindex the
system tables of a database'.
Agreed.
It's always
I've sent this again as it hadn't appeared on the list in over 4 hours;
hopefully it isn't posted twice :).
Anyway, on to the main topic...
I've spent some time looking at my user/group quota patch and have
decided to start a new one for 8.x and need some decisions made:
- When to check quota
- Who has permissions to set the user's quota per tablespace, the
superuser and the tablespace owner?
It would be nice if this were nestable, that is, if the sysadmin could
carve out a tablespace for a user then the user could carve that into
seperately quotated sub tables..
The idea being, a
18 matches
Mail list logo
