On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 03:04:49PM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> 1. Create a generic (possibly overloaded) trigger function, bundled
> with PostgreSQL, which sets a field to some value. For example, a
> timestamptz version might set the field to now().
Doesn't the SQL standard GENERATED BY functi
>> The whole "early security" business looks like a mess :-(. I suspect
>> you should rip all that out of the backend and add a step to initdb
>> that fills in those tables.
>
> I also think "early security" codes are ad-hoc. :-(
> Pushing it into initdb seems me a good idea.
> I'll try to consid
Tino Wildenhain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I may be wrong but my feeling is, not to much weirdness in the core
> please :)
+1 ... we have wasted more than enough man-hours trying to get the magic
"serial" type to play nicely. If I had it to do over, we'd never have
put that in at all. The und
David Fetter wrote:
Folks,
A co-worker pointed out to me that MySQL has a feature that, properly
implemented and maybe extended, could be handy, namely what MySQL
calls a "timestamp" field, so here's a proposal:
1. Create a generic (possibly overloaded) trigger function, bundled
with PostgreSQ
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > Added to TODO:
> >
> > * Improve detection of shared memory segments being used by other
> > FreeBSD jails
> >
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00656.php
>
> There's a bit more than that to it -- see
> http://ar
Added to TODO:
* Add database and transaction-level triggers
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00451.php
---
Decibel! wrote:
>
> On Mar 13, 2008, at 5:14 PM, James Mansion wrote:
>
> > James Mans
I am wondering whether people use ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN foo SET NOT
NULL enough to justify concurrency coding.
---
Decibel! wrote:
> This would be very useful for me, and would satisfy the OP's request.
>
> Can we get a
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Right. In fact, I already had that part in fact - see
http://people.planetpostgresql.org/andrew/index.php?/archives/22-Minimal-Update-Trigger.html
What I was waiting for was the part where it gets put in the catalog,
documented, etc.
I ca
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> Right. In fact, I already had that part in fact - see
> http://people.planetpostgresql.org/andrew/index.php?/archives/22-Minimal-Update-Trigger.html
>
> What I was waiting for was the part where it gets put in the catalog,
> documented, etc.
I can probably do that par
Right. In fact, I already had that part in fact - see
http://people.planetpostgresql.org/andrew/index.php?/archives/22-Minimal-Update-Trigger.html
What I was waiting for was the part where it gets put in the catalog,
documented, etc.
cheers
andrew
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrot
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> Not that I know of. I never saw Gurjeet's completed code.
This is Gurjeet's code, but it is not complete.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00668.php
---
>
> cheers
Not that I know of. I never saw Gurjeet's completed code.
cheers
andrew
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Is there a version of this patch ready for application?
---
Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Andrew
Is there a version of this patch ready for application?
---
Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar
Tom, are you intending to remove this part of the sort code?
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> There are several places in tuplesort.c (and perhaps elsewhere) where
> we explicitly work around limitations of various platforms' qsort()
>
Folks,
A co-worker pointed out to me that MySQL has a feature that, properly
implemented and maybe extended, could be handy, namely what MySQL
calls a "timestamp" field, so here's a proposal:
1. Create a generic (possibly overloaded) trigger function, bundled
with PostgreSQL, which sets a field
Folks,
When I do CREATE TABLE foo(LIKE bar INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS), it doesn't
include foreign key constraints (8.3.1). I believe this is surprising
behavior, but maybe not a bug, so I'd like to propose another bit of
syntactic sugar, namely
LIKE [INCLUDING FOREIGN KEYS]
which would do what
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On Wed, 7 May 2008 16:41:56 -0400 (EDT)
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > > Seems we should have a web site that shows our CVS logs in an
> > > > easily-readable form.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Have yo
Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Alex Hunsaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Sure but if patch submitters are also sticking them in the wiki
> > maybe this is a non issue? We could also adopt the seemingly
> > standard [PATCH] subject tag so you can filter easily for
> > patches...
>
> Hm, I wonder
and thus spake [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.05.07 @ 16:23]:
> Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 11:18:48 -0400
> From: Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > If you want an email and web-based tracking system, RT is wonderful
> > (http://bestpractical.com/rt/)...
>
> STOP!
Sorry for biting... I just couldn't re
"Alex Hunsaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sure but if patch submitters are also sticking them in the wiki maybe
> this is a non issue? We could also adopt the seemingly standard
> [PATCH] subject tag so you can filter easily for patches...
Hm, I wonder how hard it would be to make a perl sc
On Wed, 7 May 2008 16:41:56 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > Seems we should have a web site that shows our CVS logs in an
> > > easily-readable form.
> > >
> >
> > Have you looked at the web output on http://git.postgresql.org? I
> > find this
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > Seems we should have a web site that shows our CVS logs in an
> > easily-readable form.
> >
>
> Have you looked at the web output on http://git.postgresql.org? I find this
> very useful for this kind of thing,and if it fits what we need, we shouldn't
> build another s
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > David Fetter wrote:
> > > This would make it a little tougher on me as far as maintaining the
> > > patches section of the PostgreSQL Weekly News, but I'll deal with it
> > > if I need to :)
> >
>
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
> > This would make it a little tougher on me as far as maintaining the
> > patches section of the PostgreSQL Weekly News, but I'll deal with it
> > if I need to :)
>
> Yes, it is going to make scoopi
David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 12:20:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Matthew T. O'connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Patches are an integral part of the conversation about
> > > development, I think trying to split them up is awkward at best.
> > > Do people really still thin
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Matthew T. O'connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Patches are an integral part of the conversation about development, I
>> think trying to split them up is awkward at best. Do people really
>> still think that the potential for larger messages is real
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 12:20:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Matthew T. O'connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Patches are an integral part of the conversation about
> > development, I think trying to split them up is awkward at best.
> > Do people really still think that the potential for large
Tom Lane wrote:
> Personally I'd be fine with abandoning -patches and just using -hackers.
> We could try it for awhile, anyway, and go back if it seems worse.
I'd be good with that. The split never made much sense for me.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To
Andrew, Marc,
FWIW, I support and think important the row- and column- level access
controls this seems to be proposing, at least in principle. Whether
that's a support that will extend to 2x overhead on everything is
rather a different matter. Also, I am more than prepared to trade
away some
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 7 mai 08 à 16:26, Tom Lane a écrit :
I'm starting to think that we should just make ALTER VIEW be an alias
for ALTER TABLE (rather than a separate node type as now), and then
list
in the ALTER VIEW reference page all of the ALTER TABLE variants
Looks like this commit fest is going very well. The wiki is full of
activity, and there are lots of active committers.
--
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can
* Alex Hunsaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080507 11:38]:
> A big part of my problem with the split is if there is a discussion
> taking place on -hackers I want to be able to reply to the discussion
> and say "well, here is what I was thinking". Sending it to -patches
> first waiting for it to hit th
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 1:54 AM, Matthew T. O'connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Patches are an integral part of the conversation about development,
I'd go further than that. Patches ARE conversation about development,
they are just in C rather than English.
Having one list for the parts of t
"Matthew T. O'connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Patches are an integral part of the conversation about development, I
> think trying to split them up is awkward at best. Do people really
> still think that the potential for larger messages is really a problem?
Personally I'd be fine with
In a digest for Tue, 2008-05-06 at 22:57 -0300, Tom Lane wrote:
...[discussion of SE-PostgreSQL patch deleted]...
> (And of course the next question after that is why we should want to
> depend on SELinux at all, rather than implementing row filtering
> in the framework of SQL permissions...)
I wo
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
A big part of my problem with the split is if there is a discussion
taking place on -hackers I want to be able to reply to the discussion
and say "well, here is what I was thinking". Sending it to -patches
first waiting for it to hit the archive so I can link to it in my
rep
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> A big part of my problem with the split is if there is a discussion
> taking place on -hackers I want to be able to reply to the discussion
> and say "well, here is what I was thinking". Sending it to -patches
> first waiting for it to hit the archive so I can link to it in
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> > Plus it seems awkward to move a discussion thats taking place on
> > -hackers over to patches... Granted I could post to patches first,
> > wait an hour then send an email to hackers/reviewer and
Stephen Frost wrote:
* Magnus Hagander ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
What?! Did you just propose a patch tracker? Bruce? Hmm. I think I need
to get a new email client, because this one clearly corrupts the emails
I receive ;)
If you want an email and web-based tracking system, RT is won
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
In fact I
would argue -patches should go away so we dont have that split.
+1I think the main argument for the split is to keep the "large"
patch emails off the hackers list, but I don't think that limit is so
high that it's a problem. People have to gzip their patche
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> > Right, I was assuming once the patch was uploaded it would be to our
> > infrastructure and would be permanent.
>
> Heck, I dont think patch submitters really care. And Ill do whatever
> is in the dev faq.
> But Its a heck of a lot easier (for me) just to send them in e
* Magnus Hagander ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> What?! Did you just propose a patch tracker? Bruce? Hmm. I think I need
> to get a new email client, because this one clearly corrupts the emails
> I receive ;)
If you want an email and web-based tracking system, RT is wonderful
(http://bestpractical.
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Folks, can we avoid posting an email to both hackers and patches
> > lists? I understand why people do it, but it is best avoided, I
> > think. If you feel the need to keep patch discussion on hackers,
> > please post just the patch to patches and
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brendan Jurd wrote:
> > On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > I think it would be helpful for us to provide an infrastructure where
>
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Folks, can we avoid posting an email to both hackers and patches
> lists? I understand why people do it, but it is best avoided, I
> think. If you feel the need to keep patch discussion on hackers,
> please post just the patch to patches and a summary to hackers.
>
> Or b
>>> Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dimitri Fontaine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> My 8.3.1 installation psql \h only gives me:
>> Syntax:
>> ALTER VIEW name RENAME TO newname
>
> You're not the first person to think that ALTER VIEW covers
everything
> that can be done to a view.
>
> I'm
Dimitri Fontaine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My 8.3.1 installation psql \h only gives me:
> Syntax:
> ALTER VIEW name RENAME TO newname
You're not the first person to think that ALTER VIEW covers everything
that can be done to a view.
I'm starting to think that we should just make ALTER VIEW be
Brendan Jurd wrote:
> On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I think it would be helpful for us to provide an infrastructure where
> > > people who don't run their own servers to store their patches at a
> > > stab
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > It looks pretty good from here. I have an output of about 50 million
> > lines, and the only FATAL stuff is the "terminating due to admin
> > command". All other errors look consistent with things like the
> > backend that creates a table gets kille
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think it would be helpful for us to provide an infrastructure where
> > people who don't run their own servers to store their patches at a
> > stable URL where they can keep upd
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think it would be helpful for us to provide an infrastructure where
> > people who don't run their own servers to store their patches at a
> > stable URL where they can keep updating the content. I did that with
> > the psql wrap pa
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> It looks pretty good from here. I have an output of about 50 million
> lines, and the only FATAL stuff is the "terminating due to admin
> command". All other errors look consistent with things like the backend
> that creates a table gets killed, so anybody trying to access
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it would be helpful for us to provide an infrastructure where
> people who don't run their own servers to store their patches at a
> stable URL where they can keep updating the content. I did that with
> the psql wrap patch and it helped me.
Act
Folks, can we avoid posting an email to both hackers and patches lists?
I understand why people do it, but it is best avoided, I think. If you
feel the need to keep patch discussion on hackers, please post just the
patch to patches and a summary to hackers.
Or better yet, have a URL to the patc
KaiGai Kohei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> * It does not come close to passing the regression tests. I saw a lot of
>> ! ERROR: unrecognized node type: 903
>> which suggests that something's been screwed up about parse analysis
>> (903 = T_A_Const, which shouldn't get further t
It looks pretty good from here. I have an output of about 50 million
lines, and the only FATAL stuff is the "terminating due to admin
command". All other errors look consistent with things like the backend
that creates a table gets killed, so anybody trying to access that
table later will fail with
It seems there is strange behaviour coming from trying to apply complex
Rules to the MERGE statement.
My proposal from here is to allow MERGE to work with Rules, but only
when the Rules are equivalent to simply updatable views. This would
restrict MERGE somewhat, yet be entirely compatible with
"Alex Hunsaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Currently this loops through all the constraints for a relation (old
> behavior of MergeAttributesIntoExisting)... Do you think its worth
> adding a non-unique index to speed this up?
No. If we were to refactor pg_constraint as I mentioned earlier,
th
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 12:01:21AM -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> It may be the case that clean row and column filtering at the SQL layer are
> pre-requisites for a clean SELinux implementation, where the only
> difference is that the permission checks are handled by asking SELinux
> instead of loo
Magnus, others, how is the SIGTERM testing going?
---
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> bruce wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > >> The closest thing I can think of
* Andrew Dunstan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm not sure where we go from here. Your GSOC student has disappeared,
>> right? Is anyone else willing to take up the patch and work on it?
>
> No, he has not disappeared at all. He is going to work on fixing issues
> and getting
Greg,
Not sure whether you're working on this or not?
If so, what do you think of the slightly modified syntax I proposed?
I'm fairly keen on getting this patch completed fairly early on in the
8.4 cycle because it allows a new class of concurrent test case. I think
many people will be happy to
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The other alternative is to convert tabs to spaces on output. Can't
> > remember why we didn't do that.
>
> Yeah. The idea I had was to invent a parameter specifying the
Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
Le 7 mai 08 à 07:52, Tom Lane a écrit :
Dimitri Fontaine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Could we consider ALTER VIEW ALTER COLUMN ... SET DEFAULT ...;?
We could if we hadn't already done it five or so years ago.
Or am I missing what you need here?
My 8.3.1 installation
Le mercredi 07 mai 2008, Dimitri Fontaine a écrit :
> Ok, I've been quite bad at explaining the case, let's retry.
Thanks a lot to the OP on #postgresqlfr (nickname renchap), who is providing
attached test case, where you'll see how we hacked our way into
information_schema to have the insert ru
Tom Lane wrote:
> After that, and a whole bunch of foolery with manually putting the right
> security labels on files (because the contrib module is unhelpful for
> test installations with nonstandard PREFIXes), I managed to get a
> version that worked well enough to test. What I found out:
I'll
66 matches
Mail list logo
