[HACKERS] Old interfaces directory in CVS tree?

2005-11-04 Thread jtv
A libpqxx user just informed me that the anonymous CVS repository at anoncvs.postgresql.org still contained a 2002 version of libpqxx in the interfaces directory. I checked it out and otherwise it seems to be the current source tree--at least I found an 8.1 version number somewhere. Could someone

Re: [HACKERS] Its a first!! We are on scheduale ...

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 'k, 8.1.0 is bundled ... Seems like it's time to cut the REL 8.1 branch? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your

Re: [HACKERS] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Greg Stark
"Otto Hirr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Trivia... > I heard a story many years ago that landed a programmer in prison... > He worked on the program that calculated interest that was to be > deposited into an account. Instead of rounding or truncating the > amount beyond what the bank wanted to u

Re: [HACKERS] PG 8.1 supported platforms list: IRIX is MIA

2005-11-04 Thread Qingqing Zhou
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > Can anyone test 8.1RC1 on IRIX? > On a separate matter, I did a simple regression (--enable-cassert) of cvs tip on SunOS 5.8, seems no problem. I found the only thing related in our document is that "SunOS 4 is not supported in 2001". Shall we add somethin

Re: [HACKERS] Possible problem with pg_reload_conf() and view pg_settings

2005-11-04 Thread Qingqing Zhou
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Tony Caduto wrote: > > hmm, I waited for at least 1 minute after doing the reload and it was > never updated. It seemed at the time that the only way to get a updated > pg_settings view was to actually restart the server. I plan on doing > some more testing on Saturday. > Di

Re: [HACKERS] Possible problem with pg_reload_conf() and view pg_settings

2005-11-04 Thread Tony Caduto
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Qingqing Zhou wrote: test=# LOG: received SIGHUP, reloading configuration files test=# select setting from pg_settings where name = 'constraint_exclusion'; setting - off (1 row) test=# select setting from pg_settings where name = 'constraint_exclusion'; s

[HACKERS] Its a first!! We are on scheduale ...

2005-11-04 Thread Marc G. Fournier
'k, 8.1.0 is bundled ... this is effectively RC2, so *please* look it over, test it and make sure that we haven't missed anything ... official release is on Tuesday the 8th, the intervening time is meant to allow Dave time to get the Windows binary/installer ready, Devrim to get RPMs, Magnus

Re: [HACKERS] postgresql-8.1RC1 on Solaris 10, amd64x2

2005-11-04 Thread Qingqing Zhou
"Cedric Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > > I tried to stop postgress using: 'su - postgres -c "pg_ctl stop -swm > fast"' > but that function never returns. Even kill -9 couldn't stop the process. > If repeatable, can you strace (maybe not called this in Solaris) what postgres is doing? Rega

Re: [HACKERS] Possible problem with pg_reload_conf() and view pg_settings

2005-11-04 Thread Qingqing Zhou
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > > Hmm, some delay in the signal being recognized in our Win32 signal > implementation? Why would that be? > I believe this is a disease for all platforms, not only Windows. This is because the signals are asynchoronized. Think when you returned from kill(

Re: [HACKERS] Possible problem with pg_reload_conf() and view pg_settings

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Qingqing Zhou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I repeated Tony's result (Win32): Hmm, some delay in the signal being recognized in our Win32 signal implementation? Why would that be? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--

Re: [HACKERS] Seeing context switch storm with 10/13 snapshot of

2005-11-04 Thread Robert Creager
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 17:35:31 -0400 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Robert Creager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Interesting. 7.4.1 is worse for this test, as two jump up to 130k. But, my > > app runs fine against 7.4.1... > > > Would it still be helpful to try and pull together a test c

Re: [HACKERS] Possible problem with pg_reload_conf() and view

2005-11-04 Thread Qingqing Zhou
> > What's the delay? 1s? 5? 10? > Delay is the time difference we kill a signal and the time we really process it. We kill at once, but only process it at proper idle time. In my test, the delay is 2 seconds or so. I am looking into the problem - not sure the exact details now though ... Regar

Re: [HACKERS] Possible problem with pg_reload_conf() and view pg_settings

2005-11-04 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Qingqing Zhou wrote: test=# LOG: received SIGHUP, reloading configuration files test=# select setting from pg_settings where name = 'constraint_exclusion'; setting - off (1 row) test=# select setting from pg_settings where name = 'constraint_exclusion'; setting - on (1 row)

Re: [HACKERS] Possible problem with pg_reload_conf() and view pg_settings

2005-11-04 Thread Qingqing Zhou
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Tony Caduto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> However I was under the impression that if I did a pg_reload_conf(), the >> pg_settings view would be updated at that time, but that does not seem to >> happen. I repeated Tony's r

Re: [HACKERS] Crash during elog.c...

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > My client (same one with the slru.c issue) has had 3 of these in the > past day... > (gdb) print *str > $39 = {data = 0x848030 "2005-11-04 00:01:02 EST|2005-11-04 00:00:08 > EST|216.187.113.78(39476)|didit|", len = 76, > maxlen = 256, cursor = 0} Um

Re: [HACKERS] Assert failure found in 8.1RC1

2005-11-04 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Jim C. Nasby wrote: On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 05:26:25PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Well, for things like race conditions I don't know that you can create reproducable test cases. My point was that this bug was exposed by databases with workloads that involved very high tran

Re: [HACKERS] Possible problem with pg_reload_conf() and view pg_settings

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
Tony Caduto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > However I was under the impression that if I did a pg_reload_conf(), the > pg_settings view would be updated at that time, but that does not seem to > happen. It works for me ... regression=# select setting from pg_settings where name = 'constraint_exc

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On 11/4/05, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: [snip] > : ICU does not use UCS-2. UCS-2 is a subset of UTF-16. UCS-2 does not > : support surrogates, and UTF-16 does support surrogates. This means > : that UCS-2 only supports UTF-16's Base Multilingual Plane (BMP). The > : notion of UCS-2 is deprecated

Re: [HACKERS] Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches

2005-11-04 Thread Mark Wong
On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 18:29:09 + Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 08:03 -0800, Mark Wong wrote: > > On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 07:32:32 + > > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Concerned about the awful checkpointing. Can you bump wal_buffers to > > > 8192 ju

Re: [HACKERS] Seeing context switch storm with 10/13 snapshot of

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Creager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I have a Perl script, a Perl module and a 1Mb database (from pg_dump > -F c). Are you interested at this time in receiving this? Sure. Please send it off-list, of course. > An upgrade to RC2 might occur when RC2 comes out, unless there would > be gre

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 02:58:05PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > The correct question to ask is something like "Does it support non-bmp > characters?" or "Does it really support UTF-16 or just UCS2?" > > UTF-16 is (now) a variable width encoding which is a strict superset > of UCS2 which allows

[HACKERS] Possible problem with pg_reload_conf() and view pg_settings

2005-11-04 Thread Tony Caduto
Hi, I have been playing around with pg_reload_conf() and the pg_settings view. I understand that the pg_settings view, if updated, applies to the current session only. However I was under the impression that if I did a pg_reload_conf(), the pg_settings view would be updated at that time, but th

Re: [HACKERS] Assert failure found in 8.1RC1

2005-11-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 05:26:25PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >Well, for things like race conditions I don't know that you can create > >reproducable test cases. My point was that this bug was exposed by > >databases with workloads that involved very high transaction rates. I > >know in the cas

Re: [HACKERS] Assert failure found in 8.1RC1

2005-11-04 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Jim C. Nasby wrote: On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:35:10PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Could something like that be added to regression, or maybe as a seperate test case for the buildfarm? If you don't have a self-contained, reproducible test

Re: [HACKERS] PG 8.1 supported platforms list

2005-11-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Chris Browne wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes: > > The 8.1 supported-platforms list is looking pretty good, I think -- we > > don't have updates for every single combination of OS and hardware, > > but we have updates for every OS and at least one instance of all > > supported CPU types

Re: [HACKERS] Crash during elog.c...

2005-11-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:34:35PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 02:45:41PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > The backtrace: > > > > Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. > > > > (gdb) bt

Re: [HACKERS] Assert failure found in 8.1RC1

2005-11-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:35:10PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Could something like that be added to regression, or maybe as a seperate > > test case for the buildfarm? > > If you don't have a self-contained, reproducible test case, it's a bit > pointles

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:30:27PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 10:32:03AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I'd feel a lot happier about this if we could keep the dynamic range > >> up to, say, 10^512 so that it's still true that NUMERIC

Re: [HACKERS] Exclusive lock for database rename

2005-11-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 07:40:15PM -, Andrew - Supernews wrote: > On 2005-11-03, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> Someone wanted to rename a database while someone else was running a > >> rather long pg_dump, so the rename had to wait, and everyone el

Re: [HACKERS] Crash during elog.c...

2005-11-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Jim C. Nasby wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 02:45:41PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The backtrace: > > > Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. > > > (gdb) bt > > > #0 0x003b8946fb20 in strlen () from /lib64/tls/libc.so.6 > > > #

Re: [HACKERS] Assert failure found in 8.1RC1

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Could something like that be added to regression, or maybe as a seperate > test case for the buildfarm? If you don't have a self-contained, reproducible test case, it's a bit pointless to suggest adding the nonexistent test case to the regression suite.

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 10:32:03AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'd feel a lot happier about this if we could keep the dynamic range >> up to, say, 10^512 so that it's still true that NUMERIC can be a >> universal parse-time representation. That would also

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 10:32:03AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I'd feel a lot happier about this if we could keep the dynamic range > up to, say, 10^512 so that it's still true that NUMERIC can be a > universal parse-time representation. That would also make it even > more unlikely that anyone would

Re: [HACKERS] Assert failure found in 8.1RC1

2005-11-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 06:45:21PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Creager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Ran with both for an hour with no problem, where I could produce the ASSERT > > failure within minutes for the non patched version. > > Great. I'll go ahead and commit the smaller fix into H

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 04:07:41PM +0100, Marcus Engene wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > >On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 11:13 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > >>Simon Riggs wrote: > >> > >>>On PostgreSQL, CHAR(12) is a bpchar datatype with all instantiations of > >>>that datatype having a 4 byte varlena hea

Re: [HACKERS] roundoff problem in time datatype

2005-11-04 Thread Gurjeet Singh
On 10/13/05, Josh Berkus wrote: > Tom, > > > I think my preference is to allow '24:00:00' (but not anything larger) > > as a valid input value of the time datatypes. This for two reasons: > > * existing dump files may contain such values > > * it's consistent with allowing, eg, '12:13

Re: [HACKERS] Crash during elog.c...

2005-11-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 02:45:41PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The backtrace: > > Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. > > (gdb) bt > > #0 0x003b8946fb20 in strlen () from /lib64/tls/libc.so.6 > > #1 0x003b894428dc in vfprintf

Re: [HACKERS] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: "Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: That works, I tried ctrl-c various ways including from within \i copy. Problem solved! Good. I've applied the patch in both HEAD and 8.0 branches. Since we're very nearly ready to wrap 8.1, would someone with access to a

Re: [HACKERS] [OT] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Kevin Grittner
No, the IEEE formats can not store .1 exactly. How close it comes depends on the rest of the number. For single and double precision, respectively, the IEEE representations fall at about: 0.10001490116119384765625 0.155511151231257827021181583404541015625 Libraries must do s

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
Martijn van Oosterhout writes: > Yeah, and while one way of removing that dependance is to use ICU, that > library wants everything in UTF-16. Really? Can't it do UCS4 (UTF-32)? There's a nontrivial population of our users that isn't satisfied with UTF-16 anyway, so if that really is a restrict

Re: [HACKERS] [OT] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Otto Hirr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Most notably, the IEEE rep, either single or double, most certainly > has the ability to store the EXACT value for 0.1. Oh really? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: d

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On 11/4/05, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Martijn van Oosterhout writes: > > Yeah, and while one way of removing that dependance is to use ICU, that > > library wants everything in UTF-16. > > Really? Can't it do UCS4 (UTF-32)? There's a nontrivial population > of our users that isn't sa

Re: [HACKERS] Crash during elog.c...

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The backtrace: > Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. > (gdb) bt > #0 0x003b8946fb20 in strlen () from /lib64/tls/libc.so.6 > #1 0x003b894428dc in vfprintf () from /lib64/tls/libc.so.6 > #2 0x003b89461ba4 in vsnprintf ()

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On 11/4/05, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > Yeah, and while one way of removing that dependance is to use ICU, that > library wants everything in UTF-16. So we replace "copying to add NULL > to string" with "converting UTF-8 to UTF-16 on each call. Ugh! The > argument for UTF-16 is that if you're

Re: [HACKERS] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Otto Hirr
> What's happening here is that the multiplication, being > floating point, > has some accumulated error such that when you multiply it by 100 and > convert it to an int, it hits the cutoff. Trivia... I heard a story many years ago that landed a programmer in prison... He worked on the program t

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Dann Corbit
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:pgsql-hackers- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Magnus Hagander > Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 10:31 AM > To: Tom Lane; Merlin Moncure > Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PER

Re: [HACKERS] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Csaba Nagy
Cristian, I bet it's related to some rounding issue and the fact that floating formats are approximative even for small integers. Probably 12 ands up being slightly less in floating format (something like 11.999...), and the cast to integer is truncating it. Not 100% sure though... read up on your

[HACKERS] Crash during elog.c...

2005-11-04 Thread Jim C. Nasby
My client (same one with the slru.c issue) has had 3 of these in the past day... The backtrace: Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. (gdb) bt #0 0x003b8946fb20 in strlen () from /lib64/tls/libc.so.6 #1 0x003b894428dc in vfprintf () from /lib64/tls/libc.so.6 #2 0x00

Re: [HACKERS] [OT] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Otto Hirr
Lets start with an agreed upon expert, Knuth. The art of computer programming. Vol2,Seminumerical Algorithms.Ed2. pg682: Precision: The number of digits in a representation. pg212: Section: Accuracy of floating point numbers. "A rough (but reasonably useful) way to express the behavior of floating

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 01:54:04PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > I read "the backend is by and large an ASCII, null-terminated-string > > engine" with "we use UTF-8 [for varlena strings?]" as, a lot of the > > code assumes varlena strings are '\0' terminated, and an assumpt

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > I read "the backend is by and large an ASCII, null-terminated-string > engine" with "we use UTF-8 [for varlena strings?]" as, a lot of the > code assumes varlena strings are '\0' terminated, and an assumption > on my part, that the varlena strings are not stored in the b

Re: [HACKERS] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That works, I tried ctrl-c various ways including from within \i copy. > Problem solved! Good. I've applied the patch in both HEAD and 8.0 branches. Since we're very nearly ready to wrap 8.1, would someone with access to a Windows machine please dou

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Magnus Hagander
> >> AFAICS it is appropriate to move the sigsetjmp and > >> setup_cancel_handler calls in front of the per-line loop inside > >> MainLoop --- can anyone see a reason not to? > > > hm. mainloop is re-entrant, right? That means each \i > would reset the > > handler...what is downside to keepin

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread mark
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:13:29PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 08:38:38AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 09:17:43PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Actually, the real reason we use UTF-8 and not any of the > > > sorta-fixed-size represent

Re: [HACKERS] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Merlin Moncure
> void > setup_cancel_handler(void) > { > + static bool done = false; > + > + if (!done) > SetConsoleCtrlHandler(consoleHandler, TRUE); > + done = true; > } > That works, I tried ctrl-c various ways including from within \i copy. Problem solved! Merlin --

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 08:38:38AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 09:17:43PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > Actually, the real reason we use UTF-8 and not any of the > > sorta-fixed-size representations of Unicode is that the backend is by > > and large an ASCII, null-termina

Re: [HACKERS] Constraint exclusion description bug?

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I really haven't read up much on the constraint exclusion feature, but > this description in guc.c really doesn't want to make me use it. :) > "This prevents table access if the table constraints guarantee that > table access is necessary." > This

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Magnus Hagander
> > I'm inclined to treat this as an outright bug, not just a minor > certainly... > > > performance issue, because it implies that a sufficiently long psql > > script would probably crash a Windows machine. > > actually, it's worse than that, it's more of a dos on the > whole system, as window

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
David Fetter wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 01:01:20PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > "Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Nailed it. > > > > > problem is in mainloop.c -> setup_cancel_handler. Apparently you > > > can have multiple handlers and windows keeps track of them all, > > >

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 01:01:20PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'm inclined to treat this as an outright bug, not just a minor >> performance issue, because it implies that a sufficiently long psql >> script would probably crash a Windows machine. > Ouch.

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> AFAICS it is appropriate to move the sigsetjmp and >> setup_cancel_handler >> calls in front of the per-line loop inside MainLoop --- can anyone see >> a reason not to? > hm. mainloop is re-entrant, right? That means each \i would reset the > handle

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > "Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Nailed it. > > > problem is in mainloop.c -> setup_cancel_handler. Apparently you can > > have multiple handlers and windows keeps track of them all, even if they > > do the same thing. Keeping track of so many system handles wou

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread David Fetter
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 01:01:20PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Nailed it. > > > problem is in mainloop.c -> setup_cancel_handler. Apparently you > > can have multiple handlers and windows keeps track of them all, > > even if they do the same thing. K

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Merlin Moncure
> "Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Nailed it. > > > problem is in mainloop.c -> setup_cancel_handler. Apparently you can > > have multiple handlers and windows keeps track of them all, even if they > > do the same thing. Keeping track of so many system handles would > > naturally

Re: [HACKERS] PG 8.1 supported platforms list

2005-11-04 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes: > The 8.1 supported-platforms list is looking pretty good, I think -- we > don't have updates for every single combination of OS and hardware, > but we have updates for every OS and at least one instance of all > supported CPU types. Not to pester overly... AI

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] insert performance for win32

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Nailed it. > problem is in mainloop.c -> setup_cancel_handler. Apparently you can > have multiple handlers and windows keeps track of them all, even if they > do the same thing. Keeping track of so many system handles would > naturally slow the whol

Re: [HACKERS][OT] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Kevin Grittner
I think the crucial point is that the common IEEE floating point formats are unable to store an EXACT representation of common decimal fractions (such as .1) -- they can only store an APPROXIMATION. >>> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Csaba Nagy wrote: > [snip] > > > Floating points numb

Re: [HACKERS] [OT] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 18:30:56 +0100, Csaba Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [snip] > > Floating points numbers are accurate but not precise. > > OK, now this one beats me... what's the difference between "accurate" > and "exact" ? I thought both mean something like "correct", but precise > r

[HACKERS] Constraint exclusion description bug?

2005-11-04 Thread Peter Eisentraut
I really haven't read up much on the constraint exclusion feature, but this description in guc.c really doesn't want to make me use it. :) "This prevents table access if the table constraints guarantee that table access is necessary." This is a typo, right? -- Peter Eisentraut http://develope

Re: [HACKERS] PG 8.1 supported platforms list: IRIX is MIA

2005-11-04 Thread Kevin Grittner
I don't know if this fills in any of the gaps, but... We passed regression tests with 8.1RC1 on dual hyperthreaded Xeon systems. One had SUSE 9.3 Professional; the other had Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (Service Pack 1). Both had 8 GB RAM and six disk drives set up as RAID 5. Configure

Re: [HACKERS][OT] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Csaba Nagy wrote: > [snip] > > > Floating points numbers are accurate but not precise. > > OK, now this one beats me... what's the difference between "accurate" > and "exact" ? I thought both mean something like "correct", but > precise refers to some action and accurate applies to a situation or >

Re: [HACKERS][OT] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Csaba Nagy
[snip] > Floating points numbers are accurate but not precise. OK, now this one beats me... what's the difference between "accurate" and "exact" ? I thought both mean something like "correct", but precise refers to some action and accurate applies to a situation or description... I'm actually cur

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

2005-11-04 Thread mark
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 09:17:43PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Gregory Maxwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Another way to look at this is in the context of compression: With > > unicode, characters are really 32bit values... But only a small range > > of these values is common. So we store and wo

Re: [HACKERS] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Cristian Prieto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Datum > repeat_item(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS) > { > int num_times; > num_times = PG_GETARG_FLOAT8(0) * 100; > PG_RETURN_INT32(num_times); > } > # Create or replace function test(float) returns integer as 'test.so' > language 'c' st

Re: [HACKERS] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 10:16:50AM -0600, Cristian Prieto wrote: > Hello, I'm using PostgreSQL 8.0.4 in Fedora Core 3, right now I'm learning a > little about the postgresql internals and the way some kind of SPs could be > written in c language; I found something really weird and I cannot explain

Re: [HACKERS] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Classic behaviour, which has nothing to do with postgres. Try the program below to see the same effect. You probably should be using a rounding function to see what you seem to expect. cheers andrew #include main() { double x[] = { 0.1, 0.11, 0.12, 0.13, 0.14, 0.15 }; int i,n; for (i=0

Re: [HACKERS] postgresql-8.1RC1 on Solaris 10, amd64x2

2005-11-04 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Cedric Berger wrote: I tried to stop postgress using: 'su - postgres -c "pg_ctl stop -swm fast"' but that function never returns. Even kill -9 couldn't stop the process. This looks like a Solaris bug firstly, but I thought I'd mention it. Yeah, that sounds like it's stuck in the kernel.

[HACKERS] PG 8.1 supported platforms list: IRIX is MIA

2005-11-04 Thread Tom Lane
The 8.1 supported-platforms list is looking pretty good, I think -- we don't have updates for every single combination of OS and hardware, but we have updates for every OS and at least one instance of all supported CPU types. Except IRIX. There's been no port report since Robert Bruccoleri confir

[HACKERS] somebody could explain this?

2005-11-04 Thread Cristian Prieto
Hello, I'm using PostgreSQL 8.0.4 in Fedora Core 3, right now I'm learning a little about the postgresql internals and the way some kind of SPs could be written in c language; I found something really weird and I cannot explain to me this behavior: #include "postgres.h" #include "fmgr.h" PG_FUNCT

[HACKERS] postgresql-8.1RC1 on Solaris 10, amd64x2

2005-11-04 Thread Cedric Berger
./configure --without-readline Everything compiled fine, and all tests passed on "make check". However, when I looked at my server this morning, one of the four postmaster process was taking all CPU on one of my core (no db was created, the postmaster should have been totally idle) load average