Re: [HACKERS] Why not keeping positions in GIN?

2007-05-28 Thread Oleg Bartunov
Hitoshi, there is no problem to write n-gram dictionary for tsearch2 ! The problem is in how to define word boundary. Oleg On Sat, 26 May 2007, Hitoshi Harada wrote: FYI, Tatsuo uses tsearch2 for indexing japanese documents. But I agree, n-gram index would be more universal for asian

[HACKERS] What is the maximum encoding-conversion growth rate, anyway?

2007-05-28 Thread Tom Lane
I just rearranged the code in mbutils.c a little bit to make it more robust if conversion of an over-length string is attempted, and noted this comment: /* * When converting strings between different encodings, we assume that space * for converted result is 4-to-1 growth in the worst case. The

[HACKERS] libedit-preferred by default

2007-05-28 Thread Neil Conway
If both libedit and libreadline are available, we currently default to linking against libreadline, unless the --with-libedit-preferred configure option is used. Why do we default to preferring GNU readline over libedit? libedit is clearly preferable for license reasons. You could make the

Re: [HACKERS] libedit-preferred by default

2007-05-28 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If both libedit and libreadline are available, we currently default to linking against libreadline, unless the --with-libedit-preferred configure option is used. Why do we default to preferring GNU readline over libedit? readline has much more

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reviewers Guide to Deferred Transactions/TransactionGuarantee

2007-05-28 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 16:09 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: I'll make the agreed changes by next Wed/Thurs. I am actively working on this now, after some delays because of other calls on my time. The suggested changes have needed more rework than I estimated, touching most lines of the patch, but I

Re: Do we need a TODO? (was Re: [HACKERS] Concurrently updating an updatable view)

2007-05-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Added to TODO: * Fix self-referential UPDATEs seeing inconsistent row versions in read-committed mode http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-05/msg00507.php --- Richard Huxton wrote: Florian G. Pflug

[HACKERS] TOAST usage setting

2007-05-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
bruce wrote: * Re: [HACKERS] Modifying TOAST thresholds /Tom Lane/ At this point it seems nothing will be done about this issue for 8.3. I'm not sure anyone has an idea how to test it. TPCC isn't really useful because it has a fixed size (500 byte) string buffer. Perhaps if we

Re: [HACKERS] What is the maximum encoding-conversion growth rate, anyway?

2007-05-28 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
I just rearranged the code in mbutils.c a little bit to make it more robust if conversion of an over-length string is attempted, and noted this comment: /* * When converting strings between different encodings, we assume that space * for converted result is 4-to-1 growth in the worst

Re: [HACKERS] TOAST usage setting

2007-05-28 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Momjian) writes: The results are here: http://momjian.us/expire/TOAST/ I'll take a look and see if there's anything further it makes sense for me to try testing. Thanks for following up so quickly; what with the cold I have had, I haven't yet gotten back to the

Re: [HACKERS] What is the maximum encoding-conversion growth rate, anyway?

2007-05-28 Thread Tom Lane
Tatsuo Ishii [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm afraid we have to mke it larger, rather than smaller for 8.3. For example 0x82f5 in SHIFT_JIS_2004 (new in 8.3) becomes *pair* of 3 bytes UTF_8 (0x00e3818b and 0x00e3829a). See util/mb/Unicode/shift_jis_2004_to_utf8_combined.map for more details. So

Re: [HACKERS] Fixing insecure security definer functions

2007-05-28 Thread Stephen Frost
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I would like to fix this for 8.3. I don't have a patch yet but want to get buy-in on a design before feature freeze. I propose the following, fully-backward-compatible design: [...] Comments? In talking w/ Jeff Davis on IRC today, another thought

Re: [HACKERS] Fixing insecure security definer functions

2007-05-28 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It would be useful to have a function which could be passed a relative (to the caller's search path) object name and would return the fully qualified name of that object. In this way, functions could be written which take relative arguments from the

Re: [HACKERS] What is the maximum encoding-conversion growth rate, anyway?

2007-05-28 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
Can we add a column to pg_conversion which represents the growth rate? This would reduce the rate for most encodings much smaller than 6. We need to do something, but the pg_conversion catalog seems a bad place to put the info --- don't we have places that need to be able to do

Re: [HACKERS] Fixing insecure security definer functions

2007-05-28 Thread Stephen Frost
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It would be useful to have a function which could be passed a relative (to the caller's search path) object name and would return the fully qualified name of that object. In this way, functions could be written

Re: [HACKERS] Fixing insecure security definer functions

2007-05-28 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The 'special' bit here is that pg_getfullpath() would work relative to the caller's search_path even inside of a function which has its 'PATH' set. Eeek. *Which* caller's search_path? The string you're handed might've come from multiple levels up.

Re: [HACKERS] Fixing insecure security definer functions

2007-05-28 Thread Stephen Frost
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The 'special' bit here is that pg_getfullpath() would work relative to the caller's search_path even inside of a function which has its 'PATH' set. Eeek. *Which* caller's search_path? The string you're handed

Re: [HACKERS] What is the maximum encoding-conversion growth rate, anyway?

2007-05-28 Thread Michael Fuhr
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 10:23:42PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Tatsuo Ishii [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm afraid we have to mke it larger, rather than smaller for 8.3. For example 0x82f5 in SHIFT_JIS_2004 (new in 8.3) becomes *pair* of 3 bytes UTF_8 (0x00e3818b and 0x00e3829a). See

Re: [HACKERS] What is the maximum encoding-conversion growth rate, anyway?

2007-05-28 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 10:23:42PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Tatsuo Ishii [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm afraid we have to mke it larger, rather than smaller for 8.3. For example 0x82f5 in SHIFT_JIS_2004 (new in 8.3) becomes *pair* of 3 bytes UTF_8 (0x00e3818b and 0x00e3829a). See