Re: [HACKERS] Recent buildfarm failures involving statement_timeout

2008-04-28 Thread Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: pgbfprod=# select sysname, snapshot from build_status_log where branch = 'HEAD' and log_stage = 'check.log' and log_text ~ $$\+ ERROR: canceling statement due to statement timeout$$; sysname | snapshot

Re: [HACKERS] MERGE Specification

2008-04-28 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 09:10 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: I'm now happy that we can get a spec-compliant end result by always forcing NOT MATCHED rules to occur before MATCHED rules, when we have at least one unique index. ... and raise an ERROR when there is no

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update: * Allow adding enumerated values to an existing

2008-04-28 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas OSB SD
I don't understand this if it's calling option 2 the monolithic implementation. I was intending that the values be permanent tokens if you like, so that ZERO rewriting would be required for any types of modification. So I don't see where locking comes in. I don't want rewriting either. I

Re: [HACKERS] MERGE Specification

2008-04-28 Thread Marko Kreen
On 4/25/08, Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 24 April 2008 23:40, Tom Lane wrote: Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps a better option would be to implement Merge per spec, and then implement a replace into command for the oltp scenario. This way you

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed patch - psql wraps at window width

2008-04-28 Thread Gregory Stark
Bryce Nesbitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Unless they are in the habit of doing: # COLUMNS=$COLUMNS ls -C |cat Some of us are actually in the habit of doing that because it's easier to use the standard interface than remembering the different command-line option for each command. I quite often

Re: [HACKERS] MERGE Specification

2008-04-28 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 11:57 +0300, Marko Kreen wrote: On 4/25/08, Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 24 April 2008 23:40, Tom Lane wrote: Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps a better option would be to implement Merge per spec, and then implement a

[HACKERS] SRF in SFRM_ValuePerCall mode

2008-04-28 Thread dv @ nabble
Hi all, I am working on implementation of custom C SRF for our team. The SRF uses SFRM_ValuePerCall mode. I know that sometimes even in SFRM_ValuePerCall mode all the rows returned from SRF are materialized (for performing JOINs, for example). But it looks like even in cases when SELECT is very

Re: [HACKERS] SRF in SFRM_ValuePerCall mode

2008-04-28 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
dv @ nabble wrote: I am working on implementation of custom C SRF for our team. The SRF uses SFRM_ValuePerCall mode. I know that sometimes even in SFRM_ValuePerCall mode all the rows returned from SRF are materialized (for performing JOINs, for example). Yep, they are unfortunately always

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update: * Allow adding enumerated values to an existing

2008-04-28 Thread Tom Dunstan
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Zeugswetter Andreas OSB SD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think you are not considering existing btree indexes here (for the reordering case) ? You're quite right, I had not considered existing indexes. There's no easy way to deal with that other than rebuilding

Re: [HACKERS] we don't have a bugzilla

2008-04-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Shane Ambler wrote: Andrew Sullivan wrote: Maybe because there's a perfectly functional archive link in the mail headers? And because there's an RFC that tells us how such headers are supposed to work? As a lot of people use gui apps, (I do seem to recall that mail cli shows the full

[HACKERS] PQexecPrepared with cursor to fetch single results

2008-04-28 Thread Maurizio Oristanio
if you need a scrollable cursor for a prepared statement (to fetch single rows from huge result sets) while still being able to execute statements on the same connection you can do it this way: PGresult* res = PQprepare( con, statement1, declare cu1 scroll cursor with hold for select * from table

Re: [HACKERS] pgstat SRF?

2008-04-28 Thread Magnus Hagander
Magnus Hagander wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: While looking over the statistics-for-functions patch (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-03/msg00300.php), I came back to a thought I've had before - why do we keep one function per

Re: [HACKERS] SRF in SFRM_ValuePerCall mode

2008-04-28 Thread Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: dv @ nabble wrote: I am working on implementation of custom C SRF for our team. The SRF uses SFRM_ValuePerCall mode. I know that sometimes even in SFRM_ValuePerCall mode all the rows returned from SRF are materialized (for performing JOINs, for

Re: [HACKERS] we don't have a bugzilla

2008-04-28 Thread Andrew Sullivan
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 11:58:01AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: So the proper thing to do is complain to the writer of the GUI app so that it has an option for showing the list headers, perhaps adding a menu entry when they are found. At least in the case of Thunderbird, you already have an

Re: [HACKERS] Recent buildfarm failures involving statement_timeout

2008-04-28 Thread Tom Lane
Stefan Kaltenbrunner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: sysname | snapshot |branch -+-+--- lionfish | 2007-04-19 09:30:27 | REL8_2_STABLE lionfish | 2007-05-29 23:30:07 | REL8_1_STABLE lionfish | 2007-09-22 23:30:07 | REL8_1_STABLE lionfish

[HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] Removing typename from A_Const (was: Empty arrays with ARRAY[])

2008-04-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Brendan Jurd escribió: Here's my attempt to remove the typename field from A_Const. There were a few places (notably flatten_set_variable_args() in guc.c, and typenameTypeMod() in parse_type.c) where the code expected to see an A_Const with a typename, and I had to adjust for an A_Const

Re: [HACKERS] we don't have a bugzilla

2008-04-28 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Dunstan) writes: Raphaël Jacquot wrote: would seem like a good idea, no ? http://www.murrayc.com/blog/permalink/2008/04/25/postgresql-has-no-bugzilla/ Before you come trolling on this (or any other) subject, please read the voluminous debates that have taken place

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Removing typename from A_Const (was: Empty arrays with ARRAY[])

2008-04-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Brendan Jurd escribió: Here's my attempt to remove the typename field from A_Const. There were a few places (notably flatten_set_variable_args() in guc.c, and typenameTypeMod() in parse_type.c) where the code expected to see an A_Const with a

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Removing typename from A_Const (was: Empty arrays with ARRAY[])

2008-04-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane escribió: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Brendan Jurd escribi�: Here's my attempt to remove the typename field from A_Const. There were a few places (notably flatten_set_variable_args() in guc.c, and typenameTypeMod() in parse_type.c) where the code expected to see an

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Removing typename from A_Const (was: Empty arrays with ARRAY[])

2008-04-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane escribió: They're logically different things, and after I get done putting a parse location field into A_Const, they'll still be physically different too. Aha. Are you working from Brendan's patch? I was going to commit it. Sure, go ahead.

Re: [HACKERS] we don't have a bugzilla

2008-04-28 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Chris Browne wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Dunstan) writes: Raphaël Jacquot wrote: would seem like a good idea, no ? http://www.murrayc.com/blog/permalink/2008/04/25/postgresql-has-no-bugzilla/ Before you come trolling on this (or any other) subject, please read the

Re: [HACKERS] we don't have a bugzilla

2008-04-28 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:55:18AM -0400, Chris Browne wrote: Yes, it is certainly fair to observe that there have been voluminous debates. But it will take a whole lot of trolling around in the archives to figure out the shape of the *conclusions* of those debates. As one of those confused,

[HACKERS] Protection from SQL injection

2008-04-28 Thread Thomas Mueller
Hi, As you know, SQL injection is the main security problem of databases today. I think I found a solution: 'disabling literals'. Or you may call it 'enforcing the use of parameterized statements'. This means that SQL statements with embedded user input are rejected at runtime. My solution goes

Re: [HACKERS] Protection from SQL injection

2008-04-28 Thread Josh Berkus
Thomas, What do you think about it? Do you think it makes sense to implement this security feature in PostgreSQL as well? If not why not? Does PostgreSQL have another solution or plan to solve the SQL injection problem? Have you seen Meredith's libdejector?

Re: [HACKERS] Protection from SQL injection

2008-04-28 Thread Stephen Frost
* Thomas Mueller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: As you know, SQL injection is the main security problem of databases today. I think there's a fallacy there- it's the main security problem of applications (particularly those on the web) today. It hasn't got much at all to do with the database's

[HACKERS] WANTED: VACUUM SUMMARY

2008-04-28 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Hello, I would like to write a patch that provides the command: VACUUM SUMMARY This was discussed briefly here: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2007-10/msg00165.php I know there are other plans for 8.4 but I was wondering if those plans appear to be happening or not? I don't

Re: [HACKERS] WANTED: VACUUM SUMMARY

2008-04-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Joshua D. Drake wrote: I know there are other plans for 8.4 but I was wondering if those plans appear to be happening or not? I don't want to waste people's time on the patch but if we aren't going to change the FSM stuff for 8.4, I as a DBA would find VACUUM SUMMARY useful. I think it would

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Removing typename from A_Const (was: Empty arrays with ARRAY[])

2008-04-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Alvaro Herrera escribió: Tom Lane escribió: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane escribió: They're logically different things, and after I get done putting a parse location field into A_Const, they'll still be physically different too. Aha. Are you working from

Re: [HACKERS] Protection from SQL injection

2008-04-28 Thread PFC
As you know, SQL injection is the main security problem of databases today. I think I found a solution: 'disabling literals'. Or you may call it 'enforcing the use of parameterized statements'. This means that SQL statements with embedded user input are rejected at runtime. My solution goes

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Removing typename from A_Const (was: Empty arrays with ARRAY[])

2008-04-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I came up with the attached patch. I wasn't envisioning anything anywhere near this invasive. We only need locations on constants in a few contexts, I think. BTW, you broke _equalAConst() ... it was a bad idea anyway to recast it on the assumption that

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Removing typename from A_Const (was: Empty arrays with ARRAY[])

2008-04-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane escribió: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I came up with the attached patch. I wasn't envisioning anything anywhere near this invasive. We only need locations on constants in a few contexts, I think. Aha. OK, I'll commit the original patch and let you deal with the rest

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Removing typename from A_Const (was: Empty arrays with ARRAY[])

2008-04-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hmm, I'm now wondering if the location should be added to Value as well, so that it can be passed down to Const? Just for the record, we don't want it in Const. Parse locations are only useful in the raw grammar output, mainly because they aren't

Re: [HACKERS] WANTED: VACUUM SUMMARY

2008-04-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Joshua D. Drake wrote: I know there are other plans for 8.4 but I was wondering if those plans appear to be happening or not? I don't want to waste people's time on the patch but if we aren't going to change the FSM stuff for 8.4, I as a DBA would find

Re: [HACKERS] Protection from SQL injection

2008-04-28 Thread Brendan Jurd
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 7:00 AM, PFC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have found that the little bit of code posted afterwards did eliminate SQL holes in my PHP applications with zero developer pain, actually it is MORE convenient to use than randomly pasting strings into queries. You just call

Re: [HACKERS] Protection from SQL injection

2008-04-28 Thread Sam Mason
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 08:55:34PM +0200, Thomas Mueller wrote: As you know, SQL injection is the main security problem of databases today. I think I found a solution: 'disabling literals'. I personally think this is wrong, I often have schemas that mean I have to do things like: SELECT

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed patch - psql wraps at window width

2008-04-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Gregory Stark wrote: Bryce Nesbitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Unless they are in the habit of doing: # COLUMNS=$COLUMNS ls -C |cat Some of us are actually in the habit of doing that because it's easier to use the standard interface than remembering the different command-line option for

[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add generate_subscripts, a series-generation function which

2008-04-28 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alvaro Herrera) writes: Add generate_subscripts, a series-generation function which generates an array's subscripts. Why are these marked volatile in pg_proc? Surely they generate the same outputs given the same inputs, and therefore qualify as

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add generate_subscripts, a series-generation function which

2008-04-28 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'll change the four generate_series variants too -- they are marked volatile as well. I don't think the system actually pays much attention to the volatility marking of set-returning functions at the moment, so it wouldn't be too surprising if they were

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed patch - psql wraps at window width

2008-04-28 Thread Gregory Stark
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Gregory Stark wrote: Bryce Nesbitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Unless they are in the habit of doing: # COLUMNS=$COLUMNS ls -C |cat Some of us are actually in the habit of doing that because it's easier to use the standard interface than

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed patch - psql wraps at window width

2008-04-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Gregory Stark wrote: Now, we could get fancy and honor $COLUMNS only in non-interactive mode, but that seems confusing. We could always read COLUMNS early on before readline is initialized and stash the value away in a variable. But... We would only look at COLUMNS if the ioctl for

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed patch - psql wraps at window width

2008-04-28 Thread Gregory Stark
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Gregory Stark wrote: Now, we could get fancy and honor $COLUMNS only in non-interactive mode, but that seems confusing. We could always read COLUMNS early on before readline is initialized and stash the value away in a variable. But... We

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Increase the statement_timeout value used in the prepared_xacts

2008-04-28 Thread Greg Sabino Mullane
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Increase the statement_timeout value used in the prepared_xacts regression test. We have seen some buildfarm failures that seem to be due to this limit being unexpectedly exceeded when the machine is under load. Just as a data point, I

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Increase the statement_timeout value used in the prepared_xacts

2008-04-28 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Increase the statement_timeout value used in the prepared_xacts regression test. We have seen some buildfarm failures that seem to be due to this limit being unexpectedly exceeded when the machine is under load. Just as a data point, I thought I