Re: [HACKERS] CLUSTER, REINDEX, VACUUM in read only transaction?

2008-10-15 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 19:18 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Tom Lane wrote: So I was looking for other omissions in utility.c, and I noticed that check_xact_readonly() doesn't reject CLUSTER, REINDEX, or VACUUM. Now the notion of read only that we're trying to enforce is pretty weak (I

[HACKERS] Column level triggers

2008-10-15 Thread Laurent Wandrebeck
Hi, According to the documentation ( http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/sql-createtrigger.html ), the feaure SQL allows triggers to fire on updates to specific columns (e.g., AFTER UPDATE OF col1, col2) is missing. After a bit of research, I found that this feature was in the TODO

Re: [HACKERS] Bogus attribute-number range checks in spi.c

2008-10-15 Thread Gregory Stark
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * tupdesc has more columns than the tuple does. This is possible after ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN, for example. The correct interpretation in this situation is that the extra columns

Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches

2008-10-15 Thread KaiGai Kohei
Bruce Momjian wrote: I think we could use row-level access control to prevent people from seeing databases they should not see in pg_database. The row-level database ACL which I submitted yesterdat does not allow to assign ACLs to tuples within system catalogs (like pg_database), because it is

Re: [HACKERS] Cross-column statistics revisited

2008-10-15 Thread Gregory Stark
Joshua Tolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've been interested in what it would take to start tracking cross-column statistics. A review of the mailing lists as linked from the TODO item on the subject [1] suggests the following concerns: 1) What information exactly would be tracked? 2) How

Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches

2008-10-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
KaiGai Kohei wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: I think we could use row-level access control to prevent people from seeing databases they should not see in pg_database. The row-level database ACL which I submitted yesterdat does not allow to assign ACLs to tuples within system catalogs (like

Re: [HACKERS] Problem to get the tuple of a table

2008-10-15 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Zhe He napsal(a): I'm currently implement a new operation in Postgres. If I want to get all tuples of a single attribute table to create an array defined by myself, how can I do that? Look into heapam.c and pgstattuple contrib module is good example. Zdenek -- Zdenek Kotala

[HACKERS] array_length()

2008-10-15 Thread Decibel!
ISTM it'd be useful to have an array_length function (since I just wrote one for work ;), so here's a patch. Note that I don't have the docs toolchain setup, so I wasn't able to test the doc patches. array_length.patch Description: Binary data -- Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database

Re: [HACKERS] contrib/pg_stat_statements

2008-10-15 Thread Decibel!
On Oct 11, 2008, at 4:05 AM, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: I'd like to submit pg_stat_statements contrib module, that counts up incoming statements in shared memory and summarizes the result as a view. It is just a statements-version of pg_stat_user_functions. Awesome! I attach WIP version of

Re: [HACKERS] Is autovacuum too noisy about orphan temp tables?

2008-10-15 Thread Decibel!
On Oct 14, 2008, at 4:04 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Tom Lane wrote: ITAGAKI Takahiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Standard DBAs are blind to LOG level messages. Indeed, which is why I'm not too concerned about Heikki's complaint. Well, if the disk fills up due to excessive LOG entries, they

Re: [HACKERS] How is random_page_cost=4 ok?

2008-10-15 Thread Decibel!
On Oct 10, 2008, at 7:41 PM, Nikolas Everett wrote: In any case your experience doesn't match mine. On a machine with a sizable raid controller setting random_page_cost higher does generate, as expected, plans with more bitmap heap scans which are in fact faster. We're running postgres

Re: [HACKERS] Column level triggers

2008-10-15 Thread Decibel!
On Oct 15, 2008, at 3:21 AM, Laurent Wandrebeck wrote: According to the documentation ( http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/sql-createtrigger.html ), the feaure SQL allows triggers to fire on updates to specific columns (e.g., AFTER UPDATE OF col1, col2) is missing. After a bit of

Re: [HACKERS] Bogus attribute-number range checks in spi.c

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [ pokes around ... ] The difference between correct and incorrect behavior here is that it is correct for SPI_getvalue and SPI_getbinval to return NULL for added columns, but they are incorrect to also set SPI_result

Re: [HACKERS] Is autovacuum too noisy about orphan temp tables?

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Decibel! [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since this is something that's not supposed to happen, making it a WARNING might be appropriate too... Uh, the complaint was that the message is too noisy, not that it isn't noisy enough. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT
The user running initdb (or the postmaster) needs SeCreateGlobalPrivilege - which is something we cannot really start Why not ? Doesn't the pg installer already tweak the permissions of the installation user. On XP you can connect to session 0, so that is an alternative on XP. telling

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Dave Page wrote: The reason it should be in the Global namespace is that shmem is one part of detecting an existing postmaster. Especially in situations where the db is started by hand, the protection against duplicate startup is important. Yeah, as Magnus reminded me. IMNSHO we

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Dave Page wrote: The reason it should be in the Global namespace is that shmem is one part of detecting an existing postmaster. Especially in situations where the db is started by hand, the protection against duplicate startup is important. Yeah, as Magnus

Re: [HACKERS] Annoying error messages in _dosmaperr

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
ITAGAKI Takahiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Can we supress this annoying message? It seems to come from _dosmaperr, but the error postmaster.pid is not found is a *normal* situation in pg_resetxlog. - open(%s/postmaster.pid, O_RDONLY, 0) - pgwin32_open() - _dosmaperr()

Re: [HACKERS] Cross-column statistics revisited

2008-10-15 Thread Joshua Tolley
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 7:51 AM, Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joshua Tolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've been interested in what it would take to start tracking cross-column statistics. A review of the mailing lists as linked from the TODO item on the subject [1] suggests the

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum and reloptions

2008-10-15 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: What did I already do? I refactored reloptions.c to support multiple options. I tried to follow up the same way GUC do (of course, it is much simpler). I'm thinking about removing (replacing?) StdRdOptions 'cause we need a different struct to store

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Andrew Dunstan wrote: I have verified that it does indeed work. Underneath the hood it uses the native call LockFileEx() see win32io.c in Perl source. I suggest we should switch from this flaky use of Global namespace to having the postmaster acquire an explicit lock on a file in the

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have verified that it does indeed work. Underneath the hood it uses the native call LockFileEx() see win32io.c in Perl source. I suggest we should switch from this flaky use of Global namespace to having the postmaster acquire an explicit lock on a

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: I have verified that it does indeed work. Underneath the hood it uses the native call LockFileEx() see win32io.c in Perl source. I suggest we should switch from this flaky use of Global namespace to having the postmaster acquire an explicit

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have verified that it does indeed work. Underneath the hood it uses the native call LockFileEx() see win32io.c in Perl source. I suggest we should switch from this flaky use of Global namespace to having the postmaster acquire an

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Andrew Chernow
Tom Lane wrote: Does fork/exec preserve lock ownership on Windows? Not to my knowledge. On windows, there is only CreateProcess (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms682425.aspx). That doesn't resemble the behavior of fork or exec at all. Basically, there is no fork, windows

[HACKERS] IPv6 issue on Win32

2008-10-15 Thread MUHAMMAD ASIF
Hi, I am facing issue compiling latest postgresql-8.3.4 code on windows .I installed Visual Studio 2005 Express and Microsoft windows SDK latest v6.1 on windows XP (SP2) as described by http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/install-win32-full.html and trying to build postgresql-8.3.4,

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: That can only be a solution if postmaster child processes will inherit the lock. I don't think so, no. But we could have the children explicitly acquire a shared lock, so if the postmaster at startup tried to grab an exclusive lock

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: Does fork/exec preserve lock ownership on Windows? Not to my knowledge. On windows, there is only CreateProcess (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms682425.aspx). That doesn't resemble the behavior of fork or exec at all.

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Magnus Hagander
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: Does fork/exec preserve lock ownership on Windows? Not to my knowledge. On windows, there is only CreateProcess (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms682425.aspx). That doesn't resemble the behavior of fork

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Andrew Chernow
Magnus Hagander wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: Does fork/exec preserve lock ownership on Windows? Not to my knowledge. On windows, there is only CreateProcess (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms682425.aspx). That doesn't resemble

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Be careful. From LockFileEx docs: However, the time it takes for the operating system to unlock these locks depends upon available system resources. Therefore, it is recommended that your process explicitly unlock all files it has locked when it

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Andrew Chernow
Tom Lane wrote: Hmm. Now that you mention it, didn't we solve a similar problem by exploiting the behavior where CreateProcess creates a process but doesn't start it running? I'm envisioning * Create child process in suspended state * Assign it ownership of a lock (can we do

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Dave Page
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The user running initdb (or the postmaster) needs SeCreateGlobalPrivilege - which is something we cannot really start Why not ? Doesn't the pg installer already tweak the permissions of the installation

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Be careful. From LockFileEx docs: However, the time it takes for the operating system to unlock these locks depends upon available system resources. Therefore, it is recommended that your process explicitly unlock all files it has

[HACKERS] WIP : change tablespace for a database

2008-10-15 Thread Guillaume Lelarge
Hi, I'm currently working on a patch for the TODO item : Allow databases to be moved to different tablespaces I already changed the syntax, added some code to move the relations of the specific database to the target tablespace. It works. But I have three issues I would like to discuss. To

[HACKERS] Cross-column statistics revisited

2008-10-15 Thread Joshua Tolley
I've been interested in what it would take to start tracking cross-column statistics. A review of the mailing lists as linked from the TODO item on the subject [1] suggests the following concerns: 1) What information exactly would be tracked? 2) How would it be kept from exploding in size? 3) For

Re: [HACKERS] The Axe list

2008-10-15 Thread Ian Caulfield
2008/10/14 Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Monday 13 October 2008 04:53:44 Markus Wanner wrote: Having reviewed the last commit fest's intagg patch as well, I thought we agreed that a more general functionality is wanted for core. But as long as we don't have that, I'd like intagg to

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Robert Haas
Obviously that wasn't the intent of the above, but I guess it is the net effect. Either way, I don't think it's a huge problem, it just means that PG may not be able to restart for a few seconds until the OS has time to clean-up the locks. Seconds? Try log off and log on again, and if that

Re: [HACKERS] WIP : change tablespace for a database

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Guillaume Lelarge [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: To get the list of relations to move, the user needs to be connected to the database. Why? If what you are doing is changing the database's default tablespace (which IMHO is what such a command ought to do) then all you have to do is bulk-copy the

[HACKERS] SlruPhysicalReadPage

2008-10-15 Thread Simon Riggs
SlruPhysicalReadPage() succeeds InRecovery if the file does not exist. BUT, if the file exists but is wrong size then it will still fail even InRecovery. This seems inconsistent. Why is the first page OK to be created, but any other pages after that cause failure? ISTM the first page is nothing

[HACKERS] Statistic Estimation in PostgreSQL

2008-10-15 Thread rahulg
I am facing problem in tracing in what events the selectivity histogram in pg_statistic is stored/updated. I went through the code in src/backend/commands/analyze.c and got to see the code computing the histogram but when I tried to trace the caller of analyze_rel or compute_index_stats, I find

Re: [HACKERS] 8.3 .4 + Vista + MingW + initdb = ACCESS_DENIED

2008-10-15 Thread Andrew Chernow
Andrew Chernow wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Hmm. Now that you mention it, didn't we solve a similar problem by exploiting the behavior where CreateProcess creates a process but doesn't start it running? I'm envisioning * Create child process in suspended state * Assign it ownership of a

Re: [HACKERS] SlruPhysicalReadPage

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This seems inconsistent. Why is the first page OK to be created, but any other pages after that cause failure? ISTM the first page is nothing special. It's special on the writing side, I'm not sure why the reading side wouldn't treat it specially too.

Re: [HACKERS] Statistic Estimation in PostgreSQL

2008-10-15 Thread Alvaro Herrera
rahulg escribió: Can anybody tell me in what all events is the pg_statistic table exactly updated? only ANALYZE -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] Statistic Estimation in PostgreSQL

2008-10-15 Thread Jan Urbański
rahulg wrote: I am facing problem in tracing in what events the selectivity histogram in pg_statistic is stored/updated. I went through the code in src/backend/commands/analyze.c and got to see the code computing the histogram but when I tried to trace the caller of analyze_rel or

Re: [HACKERS] Is autovacuum too noisy about orphan temp tables?

2008-10-15 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Decibel! [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since this is something that's not supposed to happen, making it a WARNING might be appropriate too... Uh, the complaint was that the message is too noisy, not that it isn't noisy enough.

Re: [HACKERS] Deriving Recovery Snapshots

2008-10-15 Thread Jeff Davis
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 18:50 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: I've worked out what I think is a workable, efficient process for deriving snapshots during recovery. I will be posting a patch to show how this works tomorrow [Wed 15 Oct], just doing cleanup now. How will this interact with an idea like

Re: [HACKERS] Deriving Recovery Snapshots

2008-10-15 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 12:58 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 18:50 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: I've worked out what I think is a workable, efficient process for deriving snapshots during recovery. I will be posting a patch to show how this works tomorrow [Wed 15 Oct], just

Re: [HACKERS] Is autovacuum too noisy about orphan temp tables?

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A much better solution would be to not print the warning every time. I think the right solution is to do exactly what you rejected upthread, namely adding some kind of stack to track the last time this was printed. I really doubt that the problem is worth

Re: [HACKERS] The Axe list

2008-10-15 Thread Greg Stark
Sorry for top posting - darn phone... 1) as I mentioned when I reviewed the patch in commitfest I don't see the point of the manual memory management. Palloc/realloc has just the same kind of doubling behaviour behind the scenes anyways. Just call realloc before adding every new element.

Re: [HACKERS] Column level triggers

2008-10-15 Thread Laurent Wandrebeck
2008/10/15 Decibel! [EMAIL PROTECTED]: If the patch was submitted back in 2005 and nothing's happened since then I'd say the author probably lost interest, which means that it won't be added until someone else gets interested in it. So I'd suggest either rolling up your sleeves or dangling a

Re: [HACKERS] The Axe list

2008-10-15 Thread Ian Caulfield
2008/10/15 Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sorry for top posting - darn phone... 1) as I mentioned when I reviewed the patch in commitfest I don't see the point of the manual memory management. Palloc/realloc has just the same kind of doubling behaviour behind the scenes anyways. Just call

Re: [HACKERS] The Axe list

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Come to think of it though... Do we require creators of new aggregates own the state transition function? If not we have a problem... No, but they are required to have permission to call it. So you could restrict the transition function to superusers if

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum and reloptions

2008-10-15 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Alvaro Herrera escreveu: Maybe we could add a category bitmask for which each option would be valid. The category tests are fine, that's why I introduced relopt_gen.kind but I'm not using it yet. I'll try to refactor it to use bitmask (some options could be used to both -- fillfactor) and to

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum and reloptions

2008-10-15 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: Alvaro Herrera escreveu: Maybe we could add a category bitmask for which each option would be valid. The category tests are fine, that's why I introduced relopt_gen.kind but I'm not using it yet. Ah, right, I hadn't noticed the kind stuff, maybe

Re: [HACKERS] Is autovacuum too noisy about orphan temp tables?

2008-10-15 Thread Greg Stark
Can autovacuum just set a flag on the orphaned temp table's pg_class record indicating it's been determined to be an orphan? Then other tools could easily list orphaned tables and offer to delete them. greg On 15 Oct 2008, at 10:52 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Robert Haas [EMAIL

Re: [HACKERS] Is autovacuum too noisy about orphan temp tables?

2008-10-15 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Greg Stark escribió: Can autovacuum just set a flag on the orphaned temp table's pg_class record indicating it's been determined to be an orphan? Then other tools could easily list orphaned tables and offer to delete them. Add a new column to pg_class just for orphan tables? Sure sounds

Re: [HACKERS] SlruPhysicalReadPage

2008-10-15 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 15:13 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This seems inconsistent. Why is the first page OK to be created, but any other pages after that cause failure? ISTM the first page is nothing special. It's special on the writing side, I'm not sure

array_agg (was Re: [HACKERS] The Axe list)

2008-10-15 Thread Ian Caulfield
2008/10/15 Ian Caulfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I started to look at implementing array_agg by making the existing intagg stuff more generic ... and here's what I've come up with. I've currently implemented this as a contrib module to make it quicker to develop/test. The aggregate uses the same

Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches

2008-10-15 Thread KaiGai Kohei
Bruce Momjian wrote: KaiGai Kohei wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: I think we could use row-level access control to prevent people from seeing databases they should not see in pg_database. The row-level database ACL which I submitted yesterdat does not allow to assign ACLs to tuples within system

Re: [HACKERS] contrib/pg_stat_statements

2008-10-15 Thread ITAGAKI Takahiro
Decibel! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How hard would it be to dump this information to a table, or some other more-permanent form of storage? Of course there would need to be some means of cleaning that up over time, but if it's a simple table you can DELETE from, we could put the burden

Re: [HACKERS] contrib/pg_stat_statements

2008-10-15 Thread Alvaro Herrera
ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: We need to avoid using normal UPDATEs to increment counters because it requires row-level exclusive locks and kills concurrency. My idea was modifying heap tuples directly in pages: buffer = ReadBuffer(stats_rel, blknum); LockBuffer(buffer,

Re: [HACKERS] contrib/pg_stat_statements

2008-10-15 Thread ITAGAKI Takahiro
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: My idea was modifying heap tuples directly in pages: heap_inplace_update? It writes WAL. I don't think we need WAL here, and it is enough to write out pages every checkpoints. Regards, --- ITAGAKI Takahiro NTT Open Source

Re: [HACKERS] Annoying error messages in _dosmaperr

2008-10-15 Thread ITAGAKI Takahiro
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's probably not worth the trouble to do that, but maybe we could just have a FRONTEND_DEBUG compile time switch: That would at least leave the code in place if anyone needed the debugging output badly enough to do a custom build. It would be a simplest

[HACKERS] Memory leak on hashed agg rescan

2008-10-15 Thread Neil Conway
I noticed a minor leak in the per-query context when ExecReScanAgg() is called for a hashed aggregate. During rescan, build_hash_table() is called to create a new empty hash table in the aggcontext. However, build_hash_table() also constructs the hash_needed column list in the per-query context,

Re: array_agg (was Re: [HACKERS] The Axe list)

2008-10-15 Thread Robert Haas
I've been taking a look at this as well and came up with a slightly different approach. The attached patch is intended to go in core (not contrib) and uses some array-construction facilities that already exist in core. I'm not sure which approach is better, so I'll throw this out there with

Re: [HACKERS] minimal update

2008-10-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Bruce, did you ever look at completing this? No, it is still in my email box unaddressed. Feel free to work on it; I doubt I can do it for 8.4. --- cheers andrew Andrew Dunstan wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum and reloptions

2008-10-15 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Okay, so I'll let you deal with this for a while yet. A minor suggestion: label the enum members distinctively, i.e. instead of RO_BOOL perhaps use RELOPT_TYPE_BOOL, and RO_HEAP should be RELOPT_KIND_HEAP (note this cannot be a plain enum, each