> Just FYI, it's going to be difficult to replace the name of the feature in
> the PR docs at this point; I already have 11 translations. What's *wrong*
> with "Load Distributed Checkpoint", which is what we've been calling it
> for 6 months?
>
Are you saying the PR was 'string freezed' befor
Oleg Bartunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> in
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/textsearch-dictionaries.html#TEXTSEARCH-THESAURUS
> I think
> ALTER TEXT SEARCH CONFIGURATION russian
> ADD MAPPING FOR asciiword, asciihword, hword_asciipart WITH
> thesaurus_simple;
> should be
> A
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Josh Berkus wrote:
What's *wrong* with "Load Distributed Checkpoint", which is what we've
been calling it for 6 months?
One issue was that "distributed" has some association with distributed
computing, which isn't actually the case. "Spread" is also more
descriptive of
Josh Berkus wrote:
> All,
>
> Just FYI, it's going to be difficult to replace the name of the feature in
> the PR docs at this point; I already have 11 translations. What's *wrong*
> with "Load Distributed Checkpoint", which is what we've been calling it
> for 6 months?
There was nothing *wro
"Josh Berkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Markus,
>
>> > Parallel Query
>>
>> Uh.. this only makes sense in a distributed database, no? I've thought
>> about parallel querying on top of Postgres-R. Does it make sense
>> implementing some form of parallel querying apart from the distribution
>> o
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 07:07:57PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> Enforcing uniqueness with a global index has a number of disadvantages.
This is why I was trying to talk about "constraints" rather than global
indexes. Just because we happen to implement them that way today does not
mean that suc
Simon Riggs wrote:
> We could check this just as the server comes up and then re-create it if
> necessary. So we have one less step in the process to remember. Existing
> scripts which perform this automatically will not need changing.
Oh please yes
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresq
All,
Just FYI, it's going to be difficult to replace the name of the feature in
the PR docs at this point; I already have 11 translations. What's *wrong*
with "Load Distributed Checkpoint", which is what we've been calling it
for 6 months?
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:28:58 +
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We could check this just as the server comes up and then re-create it
> if necessary. So we have one less step in the process to remember.
> Existing scripts which perform thi
During recovery procedures, there is a step that says
"If you didn't archive pg_xlog/ at all, then recreate it, and be sure to
recreate the subdirectory pg_xlog/archive_status/ as well."
If you forget to do this, you may not realise until the recovering
server comes up and tries writing to the di
From: Dann Corbit
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 5:58 PM
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Current code for function j2date does not have the
same correct dynamic range as older code.
> It may not matter to the PostgreSQL group, since nothing goes
> wrong until the year is 1,465,002 or
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Greenplum as well as other Real Life stuff.
For those of us here who have no idea what you are talking about can
you define what "Real Life" is like?
Joshua D. Drake
- --
The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/
Sales
Nikolay Grebnev wrote:
Good Day,
I recently posted a message here
(http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00340.php)
that the trigger does not work as it should from time to time. Now the
trigger works on C, before It was on TCL and it had the same problem.
As the trigger w
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 08:26:16PM +0100, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
> >>Isn't Gavin Sherry working on this? Haven't read anything from him
> >>lately...
> >
> >Me neither. Swallowed by Greenplum and France.
>
> Hm.. good for him, I guess!
Yes, I'm around -- just extremely busy with a big releas
Here is our updated PGparam extension to the libpq api:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00356.php
We have a patch implementing the following which we are cleaning up. We
are also kicking around some ideas for arrays and possibly composite
types which we may consider if
Good Day,
I recently posted a message here (
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00340.php) that the
trigger does not work as it should from time to time. Now the trigger works
on C, before It was on TCL and it had the same problem.
As the trigger works all right in 99.999 % ca
On Dec 12, 2007 11:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > test
>
> Does anybody see any value in having [EMAIL PROTECTED] be an alias
> for pgsql-hackers?
No, but I see some mild irritation in having to modify my rules to tag a
second address with the pgsql
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> test
Does anybody see any value in having [EMAIL PROTECTED] be an alias
for pgsql-hackers?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.flickr.com/photos/alvherre/
"Postgres is bloatware by design: it was built to house
PhD theses." (Joey Hellerstein, SIGMOD ann
Hi Josh,
Josh Berkus wrote:
Sure. Imagine you have a 5TB database on a machine with 8 cores and only one
concurrent user. You'd like to have 1 core doing I/O, and say 4-5 cores
dividing the scan and join processing into 4-5 chunks.
Ah, right, thank for enlightenment. Heck, I'm definitely to
Simon,
> Who was working on it?
Zdenec and Dhanaraj from Sun, and someone from EDB (I'm not sure who, maybe
Korry?). Unfortunately, both companies have shifted staff around and we need
to re-start work.
Of course, if hackers other than those from EDB & Sun want to attack the
problem, the mor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:07:57 +
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I seem to be the only one saying global indexes are bad, so if people
> that want them can do the math and honestly say they want them, then I
> will listen.
global indexes a
On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 11:22 -0500, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 12:14:43PM +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote:
> > Uniqueness is currently perfectly practical, when the unique index
> > contains
> > the column[s] that is/are used in a non overlapping partitioning scheme.
>
On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 10:48 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> > The requirement was, anyway, that we be able to read old versions of
> > "archived" rows. IIRC there was an implementation choice, whether we would
> > _never_ allow such rows to be SET READ WRITE or whether they'd be
> > immed
Markus,
> > Parallel Query
>
> Uh.. this only makes sense in a distributed database, no? I've thought
> about parallel querying on top of Postgres-R. Does it make sense
> implementing some form of parallel querying apart from the distribution
> or replication engine?
Sure. Imagine you have a 5TB
Andrew,
> The requirement was, anyway, that we be able to read old versions of
> "archived" rows. IIRC there was an implementation choice, whether we would
> _never_ allow such rows to be SET READ WRITE or whether they'd be
> immediately upgraded to the present format on SET READ WRITE.
Well, in
Hi,
Josh Berkus wrote:
Here's the other VLDB features we're missing:
Parallel Query
Uh.. this only makes sense in a distributed database, no? I've thought
about parallel querying on top of Postgres-R. Does it make sense
implementing some form of parallel querying apart from the distribution
test
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 12:58:11PM +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote:
> Wouldn't one very substantial requirement of such storage be to
> have it independent of db version, or even db product? Keeping
> old hardware and software around can be quite expensive.
This was one of the explicit req
Hello
documentation fix.
result of convert_to is bytea, not text.
Regards
Pavel Stehule
*** ./src/sgml/func.sgml.orig 2007-12-12 17:18:55.0 +0100
--- ./src/sgml/func.sgml 2007-12-12 17:19:56.0 +0100
***
*** 1386,1392
convert_to(string text,
de
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 12:14:43PM +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote:
> Uniqueness is currently perfectly practical, when the unique index
> contains
> the column[s] that is/are used in a non overlapping partitioning scheme.
Well, yes, assuming you have no bugs. Part of the reason I want th
On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 15:31 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Simon, we should start a VLDB-Postgres developer wiki page.
http://developer.postgresql.org/index.php/DataWarehousing
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
---(end of broadcast)---
Consider a situation where there's an index on and we're processing a
where clause like:
WHERE x IN (1,2,3,4,5) AND y IN ('A','B','C','D')
Assuming we use the index we loop through doing an index lookup for every
combination of the two (generated) arrays. Except if I understand
ExecIndexAdvan
Hi,
How hard/generally useful would it be to allow the target of a foreign
key to be on a set of columns where only a subset of them actually have
a unique constraint. For example:
CREATE TABLE base (
id INTEGER NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
type INTEGER NOT NULL
);
CREATE TABLE type1in
> Getting partitioning/read-only right will allow 70+TB of that to be on
> tape or similar, which with compression can be reduced to maybe 20TB?
I
> don't want to promise any particular compression ratio, but it will
make
> a substantial difference, as I'm sure you realise.
Wouldn't one very subst
> There are a number of nasty
> limitations for partitions currently (not the least of which is that
real
> uniqueness guarantees are impractical),
Just to add an other opinion to this statement, because it imho sounds
overly
pessimistic:
Uniqueness is currently perfectly practical, when the un
Bruce,
in
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/textsearch-dictionaries.html#TEXTSEARCH-THESAURUS
I think
ALTER TEXT SEARCH CONFIGURATION russian
ADD MAPPING FOR asciiword, asciihword, hword_asciipart WITH
thesaurus_simple;
should be
ALTER TEXT SEARCH CONFIGURATION russian
ALTE
Hi,
Le mercredi 12 décembre 2007, Josh Berkus a écrit :
> > I'm curious what you feel is missing that pgloader doesn't fill that
> > requirement: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgloader/
>
> Because pgloader is implemented in middleware, it carries a very high
> overhead if you have bad rows. As
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 12:30:50AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Trevor Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On 12/11/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I dunno anything about how to fix the real problem (what's winsock error
> >> 10004?),
>
> > WSAEINTR, "A blocking operation was interru
Simon,
> Use Case: VLDB with tons of (now) read only data, some not. Data needs
> to be accessible, but data itself is rarely touched, allowing storage
> costs to be minimised via a "storage hierarchy" of progressively cheaper
> storage.
There's actually 2 cases to optimize for:
1) write-once-rea
On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 20:30 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Simon,
>
> > Use Case: VLDB with tons of (now) read only data, some not. Data needs
> > to be accessible, but data itself is rarely touched, allowing storage
> > costs to be minimised via a "storage hierarchy" of progressively cheaper
> > sto
40 matches
Mail list logo