Re: [HACKERS] Giving up multiple postmaster + RPM issue

2006-11-12 Thread Paul Lindner
On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 05:56:03PM +0200, Devrim GUNDUZ wrote: Hello, As some of you already know, I have been working on multiple postmaster + RPM issue for some time. We are approaching 8.2.0, and I still could not complete this. Also, I'm having problems with my eyes which prevents

Re: [HACKERS] Giving up multiple postmaster + RPM issue

2006-11-12 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 01:27:26AM -0800, Paul Lindner wrote: My solution was to create RPMs with the version number embedded in the name. Thus for 7.4.13 and 8.1.5 I have: postgres7.4-13-1_fc6.x86_64.rpm postgres8.1-5-1_fc6.x86_64.rpm Everything goes into /usr/local/pg7.4 and

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] WIP 2 interpreters for plperl

2006-11-12 Thread Andrew Dunstan
[moving to -hackers] I wrote: I have made some progress with what I think is needed to have two interpreters for plperl. This is a lot harder than the pltcl case for two reasons: 1. there are no restrictions on having 2 tcl interpreters, and 2. tcl does not need to save and restore

Re: [HACKERS] Frequent Update Project: Design Overview of HOTUpdates

2006-11-12 Thread Robert Treat
On Friday 10 November 2006 08:53, Simon Riggs wrote: On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 12:32 +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote: 4. although at first it might seem so I see no advantage for vacuum with overflow No need to VACUUM the indexes, which is the most expensive part. The more indexes you

[HACKERS] error compiling 8.2 in debian sarge

2006-11-12 Thread Jaime Casanova
Hi... i'm using debian sarge and when trying to compile 8.2beta3 got this fail... gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing -g -Wno-error -L../../../../src/port -Wl,-rpath,'/usr/local/pgsql/pgsql/lib' preproc.o type.o ecpg.o ecpg_keywords.o

Re: [HACKERS] Giving up multiple postmaster + RPM issue

2006-11-12 Thread Devrim GUNDUZ
Hi, On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 01:27 -0800, Paul Lindner wrote: Everything goes into /usr/local/pg7.4 and /usr/local/pg8.1, init scripts are /etc/init.d/postgres8.1, /etc/init.d/postgres7.4 /usr/local is not the right place for a database server, per Linux FSH. spec file(s) available on request.

Re: [HACKERS] error compiling 8.2 in debian sarge

2006-11-12 Thread Chris Mair
i'm using debian sarge and when trying to compile 8.2beta3 got this fail... Just checked: no problems here on a stock 3.1. What ./configure switches did you use? Bye, Chris. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

Re: [HACKERS] error compiling 8.2 in debian sarge

2006-11-12 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 02:31:24PM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: Hi... i'm using debian sarge and when trying to compile 8.2beta3 got this fail... snip /usr/lib/libc_nonshared.a(elf-init.oS)(.text.__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx+0x0): In function `__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx': : multiple definition of

Re: [HACKERS] error compiling 8.2 in debian sarge

2006-11-12 Thread Jaime Casanova
On 11/12/06, Chris Mair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i'm using debian sarge and when trying to compile 8.2beta3 got this fail... Just checked: no problems here on a stock 3.1. What ./configure switches did you use? ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/pgsql/pgsql --enable-debug--enable-cassert

Re: [HACKERS] error compiling 8.2 in debian sarge

2006-11-12 Thread Jaime Casanova
On 11/12/06, Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org wrote: On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 02:31:24PM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: Hi... i'm using debian sarge and when trying to compile 8.2beta3 got this fail... snip /usr/lib/libc_nonshared.a(elf-init.oS)(.text.__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx+0x0): In

Re: [HACKERS] error compiling 8.2 in debian sarge

2006-11-12 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 04:06:03PM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: /usr/lib/libc_nonshared.a(elf-init.oS)(.text.__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx+0x0): In function `__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx': : multiple definition of `__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx' I had that error once and it was caused by a dodgy version of

Re: [HACKERS] error compiling 8.2 in debian sarge

2006-11-12 Thread Jaime Casanova
On 11/12/06, Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org wrote: On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 04:06:03PM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: /usr/lib/libc_nonshared.a(elf-init.oS)(.text.__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx+0x0): In function `__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx': : multiple definition of `__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx' I

Re: [HACKERS] [JDBC] server process (PID 1188) exited with exit code

2006-11-12 Thread Oliver Jowett
Tom Lane wrote: Dave Cramer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is a server bug, I will post to hackers for you, it has little to do with JDBC, however the ? can't be a column in a prepared statement I cannot reproduce any problem using what I think is equivalent in libpq: I thought we got

Re: [HACKERS] Frequent Update Project: Design Overview ofHOTUpdates

2006-11-12 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 13:01 -0500, Robert Treat wrote: On Friday 10 November 2006 08:53, Simon Riggs wrote: On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 12:32 +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote: 4. although at first it might seem so I see no advantage for vacuum with overflow No need to VACUUM the

Re: [HACKERS] error compiling 8.2 in debian sarge

2006-11-12 Thread Chris Mair
i'm using debian sarge and when trying to compile 8.2beta3 got this fail... Just checked: no problems here on a stock 3.1. What ./configure switches did you use? ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/pgsql/pgsql --enable-debug--enable-cassert --enable-depend Again, no problem here.

Re: [HACKERS] error compiling 8.2 in debian sarge

2006-11-12 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 10:31:17PM +0100, Chris Mair wrote: Again, no problem here. Some version infos are below. Ok, here's a long shot: the error involves /usr/lib/libc_nonshared.a which is supplied by libc6-dev. Does the dev package you have match the actual C library. (bit hard to see how

Re: [HACKERS] Frequent Update Project: Design Overview ofHOTUpdates

2006-11-12 Thread Robert Treat
On Sunday 12 November 2006 16:23, Simon Riggs wrote: On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 13:01 -0500, Robert Treat wrote: On Friday 10 November 2006 08:53, Simon Riggs wrote: On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 12:32 +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote: 4. although at first it might seem so I see no advantage

Re: [HACKERS] adminpack and pg_catalog

2006-11-12 Thread Robert Treat
On Monday 06 November 2006 13:12, Simon Riggs wrote: On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 09:02 +, Dave Page wrote: Neil Conway wrote: On Fri, 2006-10-20 at 22:59 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Nothing except initdb should add objects in pg_catalog. AFAICS, adminpack doesn't have any special

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] [BUGS] BUG #2704: pg_class.relchecks overflow

2006-11-12 Thread Toru SHIMOGAKI
Tom Lane wrote: While there's not anything wrong with this proposed patch in itself, I have to admit that I don't see the point. The points are: 1. It is just unpleasant to leave the overflow. 2. It is not easy for users to understand what they should do when they encounter the error