On Oct 5, 2006, at 9:30 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
With func oid I can get all other info later, without it, I need estimate
which functions are in stack track.
Why do you need the OID to know exactly what function something is? What's
wrong with schema.function(args)?
--
oid is simply
Jim Nasby wrote:
It would be nice to denote types/aliases that are and aren't ANSI. A
number are marked in the docs, but it would be good to add the info
to that summary table.
Right under the table this sentence appears:
Compatibility: The following types (or spellings thereof) are
On Oct 05 03:34, Tom Lane wrote:
Volkan YAZICI [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I allocate a new memory context via
oldmcxt = AllocSetContextCreate(TopMemoryContext, ...)
persistent_mcxt = CurrentMemoryContext;
ITYM
persistent_mcxt = AllocSetContextCreate(TopMemoryContext,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
After over a year of problems (old site
http://developer.osdl.org/markw/postgrescvs/) I have resumed producing
daily results of dbt-2 against PostgreSQL CVS code with results here:
http://dbt.osdl.org/dbt2.html
This is good
Hi, Tom,
Tom Lane wrote:
One issue is what to do with procedural languages and large objects,
which don't have any associated schema. If we treat them as being
outside all schemas, we'd have semantics like this: dump the PLs and
blobs unless one or more --schema switches appeared. Is that
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Hi there,
I'm looking into strange locking, which happens on WinXP SP2
SMP machine running 8.1.4 with stats_row_level=on. This is
the only combination (# of cpu and stats_row_level) which has
problem - SMP + stats_row_level.
The same test runs fine
I'm looking into strange locking, which happens on WinXP SP2 SMP
machine running 8.1.4 with stats_row_level=on. This is the only
combination (# of cpu and stats_row_level) which has problem -
SMP +
stats_row_level.
The same test runs fine with one cpu (restarted machine with
Tom Lane wrote:
Kris Jurka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Testing out the new pg_dump exclusion switches I've found that excluding a
table means that no functions or types will be dumped. Excluding one
table shouldn't exclude these objects.
I tend to agree ... will see if I can make it happen.
Richard Huxton wrote:
Is there a reason why pg_dump can't do the --list/--use-list flags
like pg_restore, or is it just a matter of round tuits?
The major reason for having those features as I understand it was to
help overcome dependency difficulties in dumps, which are now largely a
Martijn van Oosterhout napsal(a):
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 04:39:22PM -0400, Mark Woodward wrote:
Indeed. The main issue for me is that the dumping and replication
setups require at least 2x the space of one db. That's 2x the
hardware which equals 2x $$$. If there were some tool which modified
Volkan YAZICI [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Oct 05 03:34, Tom Lane wrote:
Volkan YAZICI [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How can I store the persistent_mcxt in a persistent place that I'll be
able to reach it in my next getting invoked?
Make it a static variable.
I had thought some kind of
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, ISTM that a similar facility for fine grained control could
fairly easily be built into pg_dump.
Yeah ... later.
The way I envision it is that the schema-related switches are fine for
selecting things at the level of whole schemas, and the
Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why do you need the OID to know exactly what function something is? What's
wrong with schema.function(args)?
oid is simply unique. I can take source code, args and all without parsing.
It's only one difference. I unlike parsing.
That isn't an
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, ISTM that a similar facility for fine grained control could
fairly easily be built into pg_dump.
Yeah ... later.
The way I envision it is that the schema-related switches are fine for
selecting things at the level of
unsubscribe
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Markus Schaber
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 3:34 AM
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types
Hi, Tom,
Tom Lane wrote:
One
Great, it's nice to see that this might get rolled into one of the next
releases. Thanks,
Graham.
Tom Lane wrote:
Michael Glaesemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Considering how late it is in the cycle, perhaps the change in
behavior should come in 8.3.
Yeah, there's not really
On Oct 6, 2006, at 1:47 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
On Oct 5, 2006, at 9:30 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
With func oid I can get all other info later, without it, I need
estimate which functions are in stack track.
Why do you need the OID to know exactly what function something
is? What's wrong
Kris Jurka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Testing out the new pg_dump exclusion switches I've found that excluding a
table means that no functions or types will be dumped. Excluding one
table shouldn't exclude these objects.
I've been chewing on this a bit and find that the existing patch has
Didn't the stats communication process get redone for 8.2?
Or atleast some time-out related stuff.
Since the problem seems to be related to stats_row_level being on, I
wonder if the problem might be in that sub-system. I am guessing that
vacuum is pushing some more stats through, which might
[Snip explanations]
Comments?
Would it be reasonable to include one more switch: 'include
dependencies' ?
That would work like this:
* first consider all to be included objects (possibly limited by the
include switches);
* if dependencies are included, add all dependent objects, plus
Tom Lane wrote:
Lastly, as long as we're questioning the premises of this patch,
I wonder about the choice to use regex pattern matching rules.
The problem with regex is that to be upward-compatible with the old
exact-match switch definitions, a switch value that doesn't contain
any regex
Csaba Nagy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Would it be reasonable to include one more switch: 'include
dependencies' ?
We are two months past feature freeze ... adding entirely new features
to pg_dump is *not* on the table for 8.2. What we need to do at the
moment is make sure that the features
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
... Or we could
import the rather ad-hoc shell-wildcard-like rules used by psql's \d
stuff. None of these are especially attractive :-(
1. regexes, please.
One argument that occurs to me for importing the psql code is that it's
Agreed we need to push out the back branch releases. Let me know what I
can do to help.
--
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
---(end of
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 08:46:14 -0400,
Obe, Regina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure this is the right group to ask this. I see that the 8.2
notes say all SQL:2003 statistical functions are implemented in 8.2, but
I couldn't find a listing for those anywhere I looked.
For those who
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Agreed we need to push out the back branch releases. Let me know what I
can do to help.
Making up the release notes is the only large bit of work ... do you
want to do that?
FYI to the rest of you: we're planning back-branch releases before 8.2
final,
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Agreed we need to push out the back branch releases. Let me know what I
can do to help.
Making up the release notes is the only large bit of work ... do you
want to do that?
Sure, and stamping. How far back do you want to go?
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sure, and stamping. How far back do you want to go?
We might as well go back to 7.3 --- I saw Teodor back-patched some of
his contrib/ltree fixes that far.
regards, tom lane
---(end of
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Agreed we need to push out the back branch releases. Let me know what I
can do to help.
Making up the release notes is the only large bit of work ... do you
want to do that?
FYI to the rest of you: we're planning
Oleg Bartunov oleg@sai.msu.su writes:
We, probably, have one patch for 8.1 stable branch which seems
helped with locking on SMP Windows setup. I'm currently testing it and
it looks good.
Cool, what's the patch?
regards, tom lane
---(end of
I saw you did a round of message-style policing today. Are we ready to
declare a string freeze, and/or call for translation work? Given the
relatively quiet situation for bug reports, I'm thinking that the
message translation work may be the critical path for getting 8.2 out.
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
Oleg Bartunov oleg@sai.msu.su writes:
We, probably, have one patch for 8.1 stable branch which seems
helped with locking on SMP Windows setup. I'm currently testing it and
it looks good.
Cool, what's the patch?
Unfortunately, after several hours of
Column | Type | Modifiers
+---+---
c | character(20) |
decibel=# select c, c || ('x'::char) from c;
c | ?column?
--+--
x| xx
I would think that c || 'x' would result in 'x
Jim C. Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would think that c || 'x' would result in 'xx',
but it doesn't
We did it that way up through 7.3, but changed because we concluded the
behavior was inconsistent. The behavior of char(N) these days is that
the padding spaces are not
Greetings,
The array_accum example aggregate in the user documentation works
reasonably on small data sets but doesn't work too hot on large ones.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/xaggr.html
Normally I wouldn't care particularly much but it turns out that PL/R
uses arrays for
Tom Lane wrote:
I saw you did a round of message-style policing today. Are we ready
to declare a string freeze, and/or call for translation work?
Yes, we are ready. Everyone was very disciplined this time around. :)
I need to do some maintenance on the translations repository tomorrow,
but
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 11:54:51 -0400,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem with regex is that to be upward-compatible with the old
exact-match switch definitions, a switch value that doesn't contain
any regex special characters is treated as an equality condition not
a pattern,
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Long story short, I set out to build a faster array_accum. Much to my
suprise and delight, we already *had* one. accumArrayResult() and
makeArrayResult()/construct_md_array() appear to do a fantastic job.
I've created a couple of 'glue'
Peter,
Yes, we are ready. Everyone was very disciplined this time around. :)
I need to do some maintenance on the translations repository tomorrow,
but we are pretty much ready to accept new translations now.
I'd really like to get the Japanese translations merged with the main
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Long story short, I set out to build a faster array_accum. Much to my
suprise and delight, we already *had* one. accumArrayResult() and
makeArrayResult()/construct_md_array() appear to do a fantastic job.
* Stephen Frost ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
For comparison, the new functions run with:
time psql -c select aaccum(generate_series) from
generate_series(1,100); /dev/null
4.24s real 0.34s user 0.06s system
Compared to:
time psql -c select
Jonah,
It's been two weeks, and I haven't seen anything, either here or on
pg_foundry. Is this project derailed?
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The existing patch's behavior is that the rightmost switch wins, ie, if an
object's name matches more than one pattern then it is included or excluded
according to the rightmost switch it matches. This is, erm, poorly
documented, but it seems like useful
I have added links from the 8.2 release notes into our documentation.
If people have additions/changes, please let me know.
--
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
It looks like it should work to have just one polymorphic aggregate
definition, eg, array_accum(anyelement) returns anyarray.
I was hoping to do that, but since it's an aggregate the ffunc format is
pre-defined to
45 matches
Mail list logo
