Hi.
How can I pass or set the value of pset variable for an regression test?
The code with ioctl was copied from print_aligned_text function, which has
a long history.
43ee2282 (Bruce Momjian 2008-05-16 16:59:05 + 680)
if (ioctl(fileno(stdout), TIOCGWINSZ, screen_size) != -1)
On 04/09/2014 01:18 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 04/08/2014 05:57 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Well, let me see if I understand the situation correctly:
* jsonb_ops supports more operators
* jsonb_hash_ops produces smaller,
Hi All,
I tried to use pointer to array to fetch results of a query. The test case
test_select.pgc is attached. Changes specific to one's environment are
needed before that test can be tried. Otherwise, you may try file
pointer_to_struct.pgc in the patch attached, by putting it ecpg/test
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Rajeev rastogi
rajeev.rast...@huawei.comwrote:
Though autonomous transaction uses mixed approach of sub-transaction as
well as main
transaction, transaction state of autonomous transaction is handled
independently.
Whenever I was asked to have a look at
On 04/09/2014 08:44 AM, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Rajeev rastogi
rajeev.rast...@huawei.com mailto:rajeev.rast...@huawei.com wrote:
Though autonomous transaction uses mixed approach of
sub-transaction as well as main
transaction, transaction state of
On 04/09/2014 02:44 PM, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Rajeev rastogi
rajeev.rast...@huawei.com mailto:rajeev.rast...@huawei.com wrote:
Though autonomous transaction uses mixed approach of sub-transaction
as well as main
transaction, transaction state
On 04/09/2014 09:55 AM, Hannu Krosing wrote:
This would be greatly simplified if we can accept the restriction that
there is only single
snapshot per backend (not per transaction). To me this seems a
completely sensible restriction.
Huh? In Read committed mode, every query within a transaction
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
As the code stands, you don't have a choice on any of those things. The
decisions have been made by us, PostgreSQL developers. The only choice you
have is between jsonb_ops and jsonb_hash_ops, with a strange
Hi all
While working on something else I just noticed that there's no PQconnect
variant that can consume the output from PQconninfoParse(...), i.e. an
array of PQconninfoOption* .
This would be a nice-to-have for times when you want to pass a connstr,
modify it, and then connect with the
2014-04-09 Dilip kumar dilip.ku...@huawei.com:
I would like to propose a New merge join algorithm for optimizing non ‘=’
operators. (‘’, ‘=’, ‘’, ‘=’)
Do you have a real-world example use case of such joins, to offset the
extra planner time that will likely have to be paid (even for queries
On 8 April 2014 21:48, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
On Apr7, 2014, at 17:41 , Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com wrote:
I've just finished reading through all the other patches, and they all
look OK to me. It's mostly straightforward stuff, so despite the size
it's hopefully all
On 04/09/2014 10:40 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
As the code stands, you don't have a choice on any of those things. The
decisions have been made by us, PostgreSQL developers. The only choice you
have is between
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 01:02:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Well, that's sorta my concern. I mean, right now we've got people
saying what the heck is a replica identity?. But, if the logical
decoding stuff becomes popular, as I hope it will, that's
Thank you, this done the job.All the best
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Firing-trigger-if-only-tp5798484p5799344.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 02:08:25PM -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, done. One less thing to worry about when committing!
Also one less thing to cause headaches with etags and similar tools.
It always drove me nuts that I
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
I didn't say that. On the contrary, I think the shotgun approach jsonb_ops
and jsonb_hash_ops take is too broad. It should be possible to specify what
to index in a more detailed fashion.
It is - use an
On 21 March 2014 14:22, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
That seems to work fairly well. On the few tests I could run on my
laptop - I've done this during a flight - it's a small performance win
in all cases I could test. While saving a fair amount of memory.
We've got to the stage
As part of the ALTER TABLE lock reductions we've now agreed that
reloptions should have a lock level associated with them, so we can
take appropriate lock levels.
Attached patch will be applied at start of 9.5 dev cycle, so that any
new relopt authors are aware that lock levels are needed for any
On 2014-04-09 05:34:42 -0400, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 21 March 2014 14:22, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
That seems to work fairly well. On the few tests I could run on my
laptop - I've done this during a flight - it's a small performance win
in all cases I could test. While
Thanks Ashutosh,
both patches committed and backported to the whole 9.* series.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL
On 09 April 2014 13:31, Nicolas Barbier Wrote
Do you have a real-world example use case of such joins, to offset the
extra planner time that will likely have to be paid (even for queries
for which the functionality ends up not being used)?
I guess there might be queries that join on “values
Thanks a lot Michael.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Michael Meskes mes...@postgresql.orgwrote:
Thanks Ashutosh,
both patches committed and backported to the whole 9.* series.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently not. However, I'm fairly sure this is a step toward
addressing the complaints previously raised, even if there may be some
details people still want changed, so I've gone ahead and committed
it.
Few
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 5:34 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
We've got to the stage now that saving this much memory is essential,
so this patch is a must-have.
The patch does all I would expect and no more, so approach and details
look good to me.
Performance? Discussed many
On 2014-04-09 08:22:15 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 5:34 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
We've got to the stage now that saving this much memory is essential,
so this patch is a must-have.
The patch does all I would expect and no more, so approach and
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.comwrote:
I've tried to reproduce problems around this (when I wrote this), but
it's really hard to construct cases that need more than 8 pins. I've
tested performance for those cases by simply not using the array, and
while
On 2014-04-09 18:13:29 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.comwrote:
I've tried to reproduce problems around this (when I wrote this), but
it's really hard to construct cases that need more than 8 pins. I've
tested performance for
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I've tried to reproduce problems around this (when I wrote this), but
it's really hard to construct cases that need more than 8 pins. I've
tested performance for those cases by simply not using the array, and
while the
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Well, that's sorta my concern. I mean, right now we've got people
saying what the heck is a replica identity?. But, if the logical
decoding stuff becomes popular, as I hope it will,
On 2014-04-09 09:17:59 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I've tried to reproduce problems around this (when I wrote this), but
it's really hard to construct cases that need more than 8 pins. I've
tested performance for
Dilip kumar dilip.ku...@huawei.com writes:
On 09 April 2014 13:31, Nicolas Barbier Wrote
Do you have a real-world example use case of such joins, to offset the
extra planner time that will likely have to be paid (even for queries
for which the functionality ends up not being used)?
I think
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-04-09 09:17:59 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I've tried to reproduce problems around this (when I wrote this), but
it's really hard to
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2014-04-09 18:13:29 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
An orthogonal issue I noted is that we never check for overflow in the ref
count itself. While I understand overflowing int32 counter will take a
large number of pins on the same buffer, it can
On 2014-04-09 10:09:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
The resource managers are interesting to bring up in this context.
That mechanism didn't exist when PrivateRefCount was invented.
Is there a way we could lay off the work onto the resource managers?
(I don't see one right at the moment, but I'm
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
It's not unreasonable to argue that we just shouldn't optimize for
several pins held by the same backend for the same and always touch the
global count.
NAK. That would be a killer because of increased contention for buffer
headers. The code is
On 2014-04-09 10:26:25 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
It's not unreasonable to argue that we just shouldn't optimize for
several pins held by the same backend for the same and always touch the
global count.
NAK.
Note I didn't implement it because I
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Prabakaran, Vaishnavi
vaishna...@fast.au.fujitsu.com wrote:
Hi all,
Following the discussion in message id -
cahgqgwffmor4ecugwhzpaapyqbsekdg66vmj1rvej6z-ega...@mail.gmail.com , I
have developed the patch which gives option to user to exclude pg_log
Magnus Hagander wrote:
While pg_log is definitely the most common one being the default on many
platforms, we'll still be missing other ones. Should we really hardcode it,
or should we somehow derive it from the settings for log_directory instead?
As a more general discussion, is this
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.comwrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
While pg_log is definitely the most common one being the default on many
platforms, we'll still be missing other ones. Should we really hardcode
it,
or should we somehow derive it from
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com
wrote:
The ship has cleatly sailed to add parameterized opclasses to 9.4, but
let's keep it in mind when we decide on the defaults.
In the absence of parameterizable opclasses, it would be much more
flexible to have
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp writes:
Oops! I found a bug in this patch. The previous v8 patch missed
the case that build_index_pathkeys() could build a partial
pathkeys from the index tlist.
TBH I think that's barely the tip of the iceberg of cases where this
patch will
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
I didn't say that. On the contrary, I think the shotgun approach
jsonb_ops
and jsonb_hash_ops take is too broad. It should be possible
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.comwrote:
So it'd be an array, and by default you'd have something like:
basebackup_skip_path = $log_directory
?
Maybe use it to skip backup labels by default as well.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:37 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
Both of the operator classes are actually much less flexible than I'd like.
Firstly, they index everything. In many cases, that's not what you want, so
you end up with much larger indexes than necessary. Secondly,
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:27 AM, Ian Barwick i...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 08/04/14 18:22, Ian Barwick wrote:
As it was kind of annoying not to have this when playing around with
event triggers.
This also tightens up the existing tab completion for ALTER TRIGGER,
which contained redundant
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:37 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
Both of the operator classes are actually much less flexible than I'd like.
Maybe we should make *neither* of these the default opclass, and give
*neither* the name
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Not sure if this is exactly the right way to do it, but I agree that
something along those lines is a good idea. I also think, maybe even
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 09:27:11AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Well, that's sorta my concern. I mean, right now we've got people
saying what the heck is a replica identity?. But, if
On 2014-04-09 11:42:32 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 09:27:11AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Well, that's sorta my concern. I mean, right now we've got people
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Few Observations:
1. One new warning has been introduced in code.
1src\backend\port\win32_shmem.c(295): warning C4013:
'dsm_set_control_handle' undefined; assuming extern returning int
Attached patch fixes this
On 2014-04-09 11:50:33 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
One question:
1. I have seen that initdb still creates pg_dynshmem, is it required
after your latest changes?
It's only used now if dynamic_shared_memory_type = mmap. I know
Andres was never a huge fan of the mmap implementation, so we
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:24 AM, Rajeev rastogi
rajeev.rast...@huawei.com wrote:
Deadlock Detection:
I'm not sure how this would work out internally
In order to resolve deadlock, two member variable will be created in the
structure PROLOCK:
Bitmask for lock types currently held by
Tom Lane wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:37 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
Both of the operator classes are actually much less flexible than I'd like.
Maybe we should make *neither* of these the default opclass, and give
*neither* the name json_ops.
+1. I was
Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I just created sections in the SGML manual chapters about GIST, GIN, and
SP-GIST to hold documentation about the standard opclasses provided for
them:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
One other point here is that non-default opclasses can't be used in
UNIQUE/PRIMARY KEY/EXCLUDE constraints, because there's no place to
specify an opclass name in those syntaxes. UNIQUE/PRIMARY KEY don't
matter here since these
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/gist-builtin-opclasses.html
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/gin-builtin-opclasses.html
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:24 AM, Rajeev rastogi
rajeev.rast...@huawei.com wrote:
Now when we grant the lock to particular transaction, depending on type of
transaction, bit
Mask will be set for either holdMaskByAutoTx or holdMaskByNormalTx.
Similar
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Committed with some additional documentation work. Thanks for
submitting this!
Thank you for committing. I had not thought of using different structure
for the index. It works faster with my test case, too.
I am sending rebased version of the consistent operator
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Maybe we should make *neither* of these the default opclass, and give
*neither* the name json_ops.
There's definitely something to be said for that. Default opclasses are
sensible when there's basically only one behavior
On 2014-04-05 00:21:47 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-01-15 21:13:18 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The attached patch will probably fail to apply because of the pg_proc
changes. So if you want to try it out, look into the header for the Git
hash it was based off. I'll produce a
How can I pass or set the value of pset variable for an regression test?
I just wrote some tests using \pset columns to control the output.
Having figured out what the point of the patch is I'm pretty happy
with the functionality. It definitely is something I would appreciate
having.
One thing
Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com writes:
OK, I'm marking this ready for committer attention, on the
understanding that that doesn't include the invtrans_minmax patch.
I've started to look at this patch set. After rereading the thread,
I'm thinking that it's a mistake to just add the
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Maybe we should make *neither* of these the default opclass, and give
*neither* the name json_ops.
There's definitely something to be said for that. Default opclasses are
sensible when there's basically only one behavior
According to Joshua Drake on IRC, there is a DDOS in progress against a
customer in the same network as the buildfarm. As a consequence, you
may experience slowness, or inability to connect while they deal with it.
--
Vik
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
I wrote:
... an invertible aggregate may require a more
complex transition state data structure --- in particular, if you're
forced to go from a pass-by-value to a pass-by-reference data type, right
there you are going to take a big hit in aggregate performance, and there
is no way for the
Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com writes:
On 10 March 2014 03:36, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I've found an issue with updatable security barrier views. Locking is
being pushed down into the subquery. Locking is thus applied before
user-supplied quals are, so we potentially
On Apr9, 2014, at 21:35 , Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
As a quick check, I compared aggregation performance in HEAD, non-assert
builds, with and without --disable-float8-byval on a 64-bit machine.
So this tests replacing a pass-by-val transition datatype with a
pass-by-ref one without
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com writes:
On 10 March 2014 03:36, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I've found an issue with updatable security barrier views. Locking is
being pushed down into the subquery. Locking is thus applied before
On Apr9, 2014, at 20:20 , Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
There was discussion upthread of providing
two separate forward transition functions, but Florian argued that that
would do nothing that you couldn't accomplish with a runtime check in
the forward function. I think that's nonsense
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
So if you wanted user-supplied quals to limit which rows get locked
physically, they would need to be applied before the lower LockRows node.
Right.
To my mind, it's not immediately apparent that that is a
Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org writes:
I was (and still am) not in favour of duplicating the whole quadruple of
(state, initialvalue, transferfunction, finalfunction) because it seems
excessive. In fact, I believed that doing this would probably be grounds for
outright rejection of the patch, on
I noticed that pg_identify_object() gives a bogus answer for the text
search object types: it is failing to schema-qualify the objects. I
guess at the time I thought that those object types were global, not
contained within schemas (as seems reasonable. Who would want to have
different text
Haribabu Kommi wrote:
I modified the autovac_balance_cost function to balance the costs using
the number of running workers, instead
of default vacuum cost parameters.
Just as a heads-up, this patch wasn't part of the commitfest, but I
intend to review it and possibly commit for 9.4. Not
On Apr9, 2014, at 23:17 , Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
On Apr9, 2014, at 21:35 , Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
A quick test says that avg(int4)
is about five percent slower than sum(int4), so that's the kind of hit
we'd be taking on non-windowed aggregations if we do it like this.
On 9 April 2014 22:55, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org writes:
I was (and still am) not in favour of duplicating the whole quadruple of
(state, initialvalue, transferfunction, finalfunction) because it seems
excessive. In fact, I believed that doing this would
On 10/04/14 00:23, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:27 AM, Ian Barwick i...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 08/04/14 18:22, Ian Barwick wrote:
As it was kind of annoying not to have this when playing around with
event triggers.
This also tightens up the existing tab completion for ALTER
On 10 April 2014 01:13, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
Also, the *only* reason that SUM(int2|int4) cannot use int8 as it's
transition type is that it needs to return NULL, not 0, if zero rows
were aggregates. It might seems that it could just use int8 as state
with initial value NULL, but
On Thursday, Apr 10,2014 at 1:15Am, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.comwrote:
So it'd be an array, and by default you'd have something like:
basebackup_skip_path = $log_directory ?
Maybe use it to skip
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
That sounds a bit confused.
It was- I clearly hadn't followed the thread entirely.
The quals aren't getting to see rows they
shouldn't be allowed to see. The issue rather is whether rows that the
user quals would exclude might get locked anyway
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
Interesting. I'm trying to reason out why we don't have it already in
similar situations; we can't *always* flatten a subquery...
I think we do, just nobody's particularly noticed (which further reduces
the urgency of finding a solution, I suppose).
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-04-08 6:27 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com:
So do you want to just print lock time for error'd statements, won't
it better to
do it for non-error'd statements as well or rather I feel it can be more
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
AFAICS, pg_ctl already reports to stderr if stderr is a tty. This whole
issue only comes up when pg_ctl itself is
Hi,
I'm reading xlog.c, and I noticed a comment of
do_pg_abort_backup is typo.
...
10247 * NB: This is only for aborting a non-exclusive backup that
doesn't write
10248 * backup_label. A backup started with pg_stop_backup() needs to be
finished
10249 * with pg_stop_backup().
...
I think A
On 09 April 2014 12:14, Pavan Deolasee Wrote:
Whenever I was asked to have a look at implementing this feature, I always
wondered about the great amount of global state that a backend maintains which
is normally tied to a single top transaction. Since AT will have same
characteristics as a top
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 11:45:59AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
In fact, this C program compiled by gcc on Debian issues no compiler
warnings and returns 'hello', showing that -1 and ~0 compare as equal:
int
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Rajeev rastogi
rajeev.rast...@huawei.comwrote:
On 09 April 2014 12:14, Pavan Deolasee Wrote:
Whenever I was asked to have a look at implementing this feature, I
always wondered about the great amount of global state that a backend
maintains which is
2014-04-10 5:50 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
2014-04-08 6:27 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com:
So do you want to just print lock time for error'd statements, won't
it better to
do
87 matches
Mail list logo
