On Friday 02 March 2007 16:46, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> I am pulling this way out of the back of my head, and Peter might be a
> better one to ask but I seem to recall that you can set the closing
> bracket requirement in the stylesheet itself.
XML should require the closing tag. Is it possible th
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have added to the developer's FAQ that we don't want
> non-BSD-compatible licensed patches:
How frequently is this actually a problem?
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---(end of broadcast)---
T
On 3/2/07, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 3/2/07, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There is also odbc-bench which I was thinking about automating.
>
> Yep, OpenLink's ODBC Bench is pretty good for both TPC-A and TPC-C.
I haven't ported it yet
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 3/2/07, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There is also odbc-bench which I was thinking about automating.
>
> Yep, OpenLink's ODBC Bench is pretty good for both TPC-A and TPC-C.
I haven't ported it yet but I like the fact that it has stored
procedures abili
On 3/2/07, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is also odbc-bench which I was thinking about automating.
Yep, OpenLink's ODBC Bench is pretty good for both TPC-A and TPC-C.
Unfortunately their JDBCBench needs a lot of work.
--
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 3/2/07, Mark Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Just wanted to share some information I was pointed to in case no one
>> has heard:
>
> Yep, tpcc-uva is pretty good. I've played with it for over a year now.
>
> The only issue with it is that it currently has a 128 war
On 3/2/07, Mark Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just wanted to share some information I was pointed to in case no one has heard:
Yep, tpcc-uva is pretty good. I've played with it for over a year now.
The only issue with it is that it currently has a 128 warehouse limit.
--
Jonah H. Harris, S
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> I have added to the developer's FAQ that we don't want
> >>> non-BSD-compatible licensed patches:
> >>>
> >>> PostgreSQL is licensed under a BSD license. By posting a patch
> >>> to the
Hi all,
Just wanted to share some information I was pointed to in case no one has heard:
The kit can be found here:
http://www.infor.uva.es/~diego/tpcc-uva.html
The SIGMOD paper is here:
http://www.sigmod.org/sigmod/record/issues/0612/p06-article-llanos.pdf
Mark
---(en
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 10:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> How much testing of this patch's concurrent behavior has been done?
>>> I'm wondering if any other locking thinkos are in there ...
>> This version of HOT is being developed from scratch, with as
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 10:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > How much testing of this patch's concurrent behavior has been done?
> > I'm wondering if any other locking thinkos are in there ...
>
> This version of HOT is being developed from scratch, with as much
> feedback from t
I will rework this before application to use LOG level.
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.
---
Hello,
Josh Berkus wrote:
Folks,
I'm chasing a rumor that someone is working on integrating PostgreSQL with
the SELinux security framework. Anyone know anything about this?
I'm currently working on integration PostgreSQL with SELinux security framework.
It was named as SE-PostgreSQL.
Thank
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 11:26:23 +0100,
"Florian G. Pflug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But just postponing nextval() until after the uniqueness checks
only decreases the *probability* of non-monotonic values, and
*does not* preven them. Consindert two transactions
A: beg
Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 1. In src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c, change DefineRelation as
>> follows:
>> * After the first call to heap_create_with_catalog, construct and
>> do another call to for the array type.
>
> I'm still not happy about the idea
Jeff,
> PS: Did you happen to get my patch for testing (sent off-list)? If
> testing will take a while, that's OK, I'd just like to know whether to
> expect the results before feature freeze.
I'm not sure. We have a bunch to patches in our queue to test, and the
benchmark guys don't really expe
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 15:49 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jeff,
>
> > Right now they are just constants defined in a header, but a GUC might
> > make sense. I'd like to know which version is more acceptable when I
> > submit my final patch.
>
> As much as I hate the thought of more GUCs, until we h
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. In src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c, change DefineRelation as
> follows:
> * After the first call to heap_create_with_catalog, construct and
> do another call to for the array type.
I'm still not happy about the idea of doing this for every
Jeff,
> Right now they are just constants defined in a header, but a GUC might
> make sense. I'd like to know which version is more acceptable when I
> submit my final patch.
As much as I hate the thought of more GUCs, until we have a solid
performance profile for synch scan we probably need the
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Some committers are using DocBook installations that seem quite lax
>>> about closing tags :-(, so they fail to see this type of breakage.
>
>> Yep. What should I upgrade, and to what version?
>
> I dunno --- I ju
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Some committers are using DocBook installations that seem quite lax
>> about closing tags :-(, so they fail to see this type of breakage.
> Yep. What should I upgrade, and to what version?
I dunno --- I just use what ships with Fedor
Folks,
I'd like to take the TODO item that reads, "Add support for arrays of
complex types," but before I start patching, I'd like to see whether
what I'm about to do makes any sense:
1. In src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c, change DefineRelation as
follows:
* After the first call to heap_cr
Tom Lane wrote:
> Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > CVS HEAD doc won't compile due to broken mark up. Please someone
> > commit following patches if they are appropreate.
>
> Done.
>
> > Also please do not commit broken sgml files without trying to compile
> > them.
>
> Some committe
Folks,
I'm chasing a rumor that someone is working on integrating PostgreSQL with
the SELinux security framework. Anyone know anything about this?
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you ch
Is there any consensus about whether to include these two parameters as
GUCs or constants if my patch is to be accepted?
(1) sync_scan_threshold: Use synchronized scanning for tables greater
than this many pages; smaller tables will not be affected.
(2) sync_scan_offset: Start a new scan this man
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I would like to suggest that we retire some of the old Visual C++ build
> infrastructure. Specifically, all the makefiles for VC++ 6.0 *except* libpq.
>
> There is a point for keeping libpq - if you want to build a static
> version, it's easier if you can use the
Simon Riggs escribió:
> On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 18:37 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian escribió:
> > > Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > > CLUSTER does not need changes for HOT, as things stand currently, mainly
> > > > because its MVCC behaviour is broken.
> > > --
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 11:26:23 +0100,
"Florian G. Pflug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But just postponing nextval() until after the uniqueness checks
> only decreases the *probability* of non-monotonic values, and
> *does not* preven them. Consindert two transactions
>
> A: begin ;
> B: Beg
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 18:37 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian escribió:
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > CLUSTER does not need changes for HOT, as things stand currently, mainly
> > > because its MVCC behaviour is broken.
> >
> >
> > That's oddly disco
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
On Thursday 01 March 2007 11:57, Tom Lane wrote:
Darcy Buskermolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I'm observing high CPU usage (95%) of a 2.6GHz opteron by the stats
collector on an 8.2.3 box investigation has lead me to belive that the
stats file is
Pavel Stehule wrote:
From: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] proposal: only superuser can change
customized_options Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 11:40:10 -0500
"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
On Thursday 01 March 2007 11:57, Tom Lane wrote:
> Darcy Buskermolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm observing high CPU usage (95%) of a 2.6GHz opteron by the stats
> > collector on an 8.2.3 box investigation has lead me to belive that the
> > stats file is written a lot more often that once e
David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 10:52:14AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Unfortunately we (the community) will not have WITH/RECURSIVE for 8.3.
>> However I have spoken with a Alexey and Alvaro and Command Prompt has
>> decided to make WITH/RECURSIVE a priority for 8
Bruce Momjian escribió:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 22:35 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> > > Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > > > On 3/1/07, Pavan Deolasee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > > seems pretty solid except for one possible problem...at one point when
> > > > I dr
Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Just for curiosity, I would like to ask you why you need to modify
> pgbench. pgbench can accept custom SQL scripts...
>
> P.S. HOT seems to be one of the greatest enhancements since PostgreSQL
> was born!
Yep, I share your enthusiasm.
--
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED
Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote:
> >>> accounts 157895 (initial size) 49284 (increase)
> >>> accounts_pkey 19709 (initial size) 19705 (increase)
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Just to clarify, the relation size and increase is in number
> >> of blocks.
> >
> > The n
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 22:35 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> > Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > > On 3/1/07, Pavan Deolasee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > > seems pretty solid except for one possible problem...at one point when
> > > I dropped then later added the index on 'a
Josh,
If the new FTS will be accepted I'd like to see phppgadmin, pgadmin3
support for nice FTS configuration. In that case I could be a mentor.
In principle, I have candidate for phppgadmin work.
Oleg
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, Josh Berkus wrote:
All,
Well, there were 30+ posts on the Google SoC
David Fetter wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 10:52:14AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hello,
Unfortunately we (the community) will not have WITH/RECURSIVE for 8.3.
However I have spoken with a Alexey and Alvaro and Command Prompt has
decided to make WITH/RECURSIVE a priority for 8.4.
Any cha
On 2007-03-02, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On 2007-03-02, Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I think these are actual bugs. If you happened to provide a large enough
>>> datum
>>> to the gist code it would cause the same problem
Couple notes:
(1) Upsert is not just a desire of MySQL users. I just spec'd a major
proprietary-database replacement project at a fortune 500 where they want an
Upsert and are unhappy that PostgreSQL doesn't have it. Unfortunately, they
don't want to spring for development funds :-(
(2) Doin
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 10:52:14AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Unfortunately we (the community) will not have WITH/RECURSIVE for 8.3.
> However I have spoken with a Alexey and Alvaro and Command Prompt has
> decided to make WITH/RECURSIVE a priority for 8.4.
Any chance we can get
Tom Lane wrote:
Bricklen Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-05/thrd5.php#00497
There is a thread there entitled "Adding MERGE to the TODO list"
The more interesting discussion is the one that got it taken off TODO again,
from Nov 2005. Try t
On Thursday 01 March 2007 17:35, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >>> Hitting a file system quota limit is likely to bring you down pretty
> >>> hard, isn't it?
> >>
> >> Yes, and likely corrupt the database.
> >
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I have added to the developer's FAQ that we don't want
non-BSD-compatible licensed patches:
PostgreSQL is licensed under a BSD license. By posting a patch
to the public PostgreSQL mailling lists, you are giving the Postg
Hello,
Unfortunately we (the community) will not have WITH/RECURSIVE for 8.3.
However I have spoken with a Alexey and Alvaro and Command Prompt has
decided to make WITH/RECURSIVE a priority for 8.4.
Our current goals are to spend time over the next couple of months
determining a roadmap of h
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I have added to the developer's FAQ that we don't want
> > non-BSD-compatible licensed patches:
> >
> > PostgreSQL is licensed under a BSD license. By posting a patch
> > to the public PostgreSQL mailling lists, you are giving the PostgreS
Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 2007-03-02, Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think these are actual bugs. If you happened to provide a large enough
>> datum
>> to the gist code it would cause the same problem I'm seeing. The packed
>> varlena patch just makes it ea
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 15:07:06 +0100,
"Florian G. Pflug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> select * from t1, (delete from t2 returning t2.t1_id) where t1.id =
> t2.t1_id limit 1 ;
>
> I for my part couldn't even say what I'd expect that query to do.
I would expect it to delete all rows from t2
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 13:19 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Seems like we should try to locate a row first, then INSERT if we cannot
> > find one. That's slower on INSERT but more balanced overall
>
> Except it still has the race condition.
I'm not saying it
On 2007-03-02, Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think these are actual bugs. If you happened to provide a large enough datum
> to the gist code it would cause the same problem I'm seeing. The packed
> varlena patch just makes it easier to trigger.
Are you taking into account the fact t
Bricklen Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-05/thrd5.php#00497
> There is a thread there entitled "Adding MERGE to the TODO list"
The more interesting discussion is the one that got it taken off TODO again,
from Nov 2005. Try these threads:
ht
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have added to the developer's FAQ that we don't want
> non-BSD-compatible licensed patches:
>
> PostgreSQL is licensed under a BSD license. By posting a patch
> to the public PostgreSQL mailling lists, you are giving the PostgreSQL
> Global Development Group t
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 15:45 +0100, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
> I'm looking forward to any kind of suggestions, ideas, or
> critism - I'd like my proposal to be as detailed as
> possible before I submit it to SoC, so that if
> I get a chance to work on it, I can be reasonable sure
> that people here
Simon Riggs wrote:
I'm a bit surprised the TODO didn't mention the MERGE statement, which
is the SQL:2003 syntax for specifying this as an atomic statement.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-05/thrd5.php#00497
There is a thread there entitled "Adding MERGE to the TODO list"
--
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Seems like we should try to locate a row first, then INSERT if we cannot
> find one. That's slower on INSERT but more balanced overall
Except it still has the race condition.
> I'm a bit surprised the TODO didn't mention the MERGE statement, which
> is
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 15:41 +, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> My instinct would be to follow your first strategy, i.e. detect which
> >> path is needed rather than try one and then if it fails do the other.
> >
> > The very firs
I have added to the developer's FAQ that we don't want
non-BSD-compatible licensed patches:
PostgreSQL is licensed under a BSD license. By posting a patch
to the public PostgreSQL mailling lists, you are giving the PostgreSQL
Global Development Group the non-revokable right to distrib
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 10:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> How much testing of this patch's concurrent behavior has been done?
> I'm wondering if any other locking thinkos are in there ...
This version of HOT is being developed from scratch, with as much
feedback from the community as possible. The ide
On 3/2/07, Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just for curiosity, I would like to ask you why you need to modify
pgbench. pgbench can accept custom SQL scripts...
Oh yes, there was no real need to modify pgbench.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
I have a problem getting packed varlenas to work with GIST indexes. Namely,
the GIST code doesn't call pg_detoast_datum() enough. Instead of using the
DatumGetFoo() macros it uses DatumGetPointer() and calls PG_DETOAST_DATUM only
when it thinks it'll be necessary.
I've temporarily made the packed
Gregory Stark wrote:
"Florian G. Pflug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
INSERT INTO table (a,b,c) VALUES (1,2,3) ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE c=c+1;
This allow to make an insert, and if the key is already there to modify the
value depending on the current one.
May this could be generalized to a generic
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
My instinct would be to follow your first strategy, i.e. detect which
path is needed rather than try one and then if it fails do the other.
The very first thing you need to think about is how to solve the race
condition problem, ie, tw
On 3/2/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Pavan Deolasee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - Another problem with the current HOT patch is that it generates
> tuple level fragmentation while reusing LP_DELETEd items when
> the new tuple is of smaller size than the original one. Heikki
>
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My instinct would be to follow your first strategy, i.e. detect which
> path is needed rather than try one and then if it fails do the other.
The very first thing you need to think about is how to solve the race
condition problem, ie, two backends conc
"Pavan Deolasee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - Another problem with the current HOT patch is that it generates
> tuple level fragmentation while reusing LP_DELETEd items when
> the new tuple is of smaller size than the original one. Heikki
> supported using best-fit strategy to reduce the f
"Florian G. Pflug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> INSERT INTO table (a,b,c) VALUES (1,2,3) ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE c=c+1;
>>> This allow to make an insert, and if the key is already there to modify the
>>> value depending on the current one.
>
> May this could be generalized to a generic " on do
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Jonathan Scher wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to work on TODO item:
> Add REPLACE or UPSERT command that does UPDATE, or on failure, INSERT
could you please tell me if I'm going in the right way?
There are some different syntaxes possible, but MySQL has an
interesting one here:
Jonathan Scher wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to work on TODO item:
> Add REPLACE or UPSERT command that does UPDATE, or on failure, INSERT
could you please tell me if I'm going in the right way?
There are some different syntaxes possible, but MySQL has an
interesting one here:
http://dev.mysql.com/
Hello,
I'd like to work on TODO item:
> Add REPLACE or UPSERT command that does UPDATE, or on failure, INSERT
could you please tell me if I'm going in the right way?
There are some different syntaxes possible, but MySQL has an interesting
one here:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/inser
On 3/2/07, Vishal Arora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am getting a following error while make install for xlogdump -
For some reason, Diogo kept his already-built code in there, so you
need to do a make clean && make install
--
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324
Enterpris
Hi All,
The version 4.0 of HOT patch is very close to the state where
we can start considering it for testing for correctness as well
as benchmarking, if there is sufficient interest to give it a
chance for 8.3
I have very little clue about what community thinks about
HOT and the patch, but I a
I am getting a following error while make install for xlogdump -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] xlogdump]# make install
gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing xlogdump.o
.../../src/port/sprompt.o ../../src/backend/utils/h
That's lock upgrading, which opens you up to deadlocks. If another
process grabs a lock after your update exclusive, you're not going to
be able to upgrade it.
OK I got the point.
Is it possible to create a new table-level lock mode that says "OK, now
I'm on share level, but soon I will u
Hi
Does anyone has an idea how xlogdump works with Windows installation of
Postgres.
I have postgres 8.2.x installed on my windows PC.
How do we install it on Linux box with existing postgres 8.2.x installation
Thanks
Vishal
_
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeremy Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On several occasions I have wanted to input integers in hexadecimal rather
> > than in decimal in PostgreSQL. I notice that there is a to_hex function,
> > but there is not (AFAIK) a way to provide an integer in he
76 matches
Mail list logo
