[HACKERS] A big thanks to SuSE

2003-11-17 Thread Daniele Orlandi
Yesterday I was a bit worried... I switched to SuSE just 2 weeks ago... my newly installed databse server was waitinI thought that I would have to wait so much to have RPMs for SuSE and today I see v7.4 compiled for many flavors of SuSE, even for X86-64. Wow :) Thanks :) -- Daniele Orlandi

Re: [HACKERS] 7.4 Wishlist

2002-11-29 Thread Daniele Orlandi
e of an open backend, including aborting open transaction to allow for better connection pooling and reusing, maybe giving the client the ability to switch between users... Bye! -- Daniele Orlandi Planet Srl ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2:

Re: [HACKERS] Optimizer & boolean syntax

2002-11-23 Thread Daniele Orlandi
ye! [1] Eventually including the "var IS TRUE" and "var IS FALSE" (not var IS NOT ...) which already are special syntax cases if I am not wrong. -- Daniele Orlandi Planet Srl ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Re: [HACKERS] Optimizer & boolean syntax

2002-11-21 Thread Daniele Orlandi
Stephan Szabo wrote: On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, Daniele Orlandi wrote: Are those two syntaxes eqivalent ? select * from users where monitored; select * from users where monitored=true; If the answer is yes, the optimimer probably doesn't agree with you :) That depends on the definiti

[HACKERS] Optimizer & boolean syntax

2002-11-21 Thread Daniele Orlandi
a (2 rows) template1=# explain select * from a where a=true; QUERY PLAN -- Index Scan using a_a on a (cost=0.00..2.01 rows=1 width=11) Index Cond: (a = true) (2 rows) Bye! -- Daniele Orlandi Plane

[HACKERS] Client-side merge & string sorting

2002-10-11 Thread Daniele Orlandi
w operator whose behaviour would be always consistent, locale-indepentent... (like the very-first C's strcmp). Which do you think should be the correct approach ? Thanks in advance! Best regards! -- Daniele Orlandi Planet Srl ---(e

Re: [HACKERS] CRCs

2001-01-12 Thread Daniele Orlandi
Nathan Myers wrote: > > It wouldn't help you recover, but you would be able to report that > you cannot recover. While this could help decting hardware problems, you still won't be able to detect some (many) memory errors because the CRC will be calculated on the already corrupted data. Of cour

Re: [HACKERS] PHP and PostgreSQL

2000-12-27 Thread Daniele Orlandi
ear the connections pool. Bye! -- Daniele ------- Daniele Orlandi - Utility Line Italia - http://www.orlandi.com Via Mezzera 29/A - 20030 - Seveso (MI) - Italy ---

Re: [HACKERS] libpq enhancement for multi-process application

2000-12-19 Thread Daniele Orlandi
Sébastien Bonnet wrote: > > Hi all, and mainly postresql developpers, > > I've been reading old posts about the libpq interface related to multi-process > application. The main problem being that after a fork, each process has a DB > connexion, actually the same. If one closes it, the other one

Re: [HACKERS] Why vacuum?

2000-12-14 Thread Daniele Orlandi
Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > If you're talking about vacuum, you really don't want to do this, No, I'm not talking about vacuum as it is intended now, it's only a process that scans tables to find available blocks/tuples. It is virtually optional, if it doesn't run, the database will behave just

Re: AW: [HACKERS] Why vacuum?

2000-12-14 Thread Daniele Orlandi
Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote: > > If the priority is too low you will end up with the same behavior as current, Yes, and it is the intended behaviour. I'd use idle priority for it. > because the cache will be emptied by high priority multiple new rows, > thus writing to the end anyways. Yes, b

Re: [HACKERS] Why vacuum?

2000-12-14 Thread Daniele Orlandi
"Ross J. Reedstrom" wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 12:07:00PM +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote: > > > > The tendency here seems to be towards an improved smgr. > > But, it is currently extremely cheap to calculate where a new row > > needs to be located physically. This task is *a lot* mor

Re: [HACKERS] Why vacuum?

2000-12-14 Thread Daniele Orlandi
"Ross J. Reedstrom" wrote: > > Not to mention the recent thread here about people recovering data that > was accidently deleted, or from damaged db files: the old tuples serve > as redundant backup, in a way. Not a real compelling reason to keep a > non-overwriting smgr, but still a surprise bonu

Re: [HACKERS] Why vacuum?

2000-12-13 Thread Daniele Orlandi
:)) Just my .02 euro :) Bye! -- Daniele Orlandi

Re: [HACKERS] European Datestyle

2000-12-08 Thread Daniele Orlandi
ll, I would have preferred base16 units instead of base10 :) Bye! -- Daniele ----------- Daniele Orlandi - Utility Line Italia - http://www.orlandi.com Via Mezzera 29/A - 20030 - Seveso (MI) - Italy ---

[HACKERS] European Datestyle

2000-12-08 Thread Daniele Orlandi
-e and with "set datestyle" with no change. Context: Postgresql 7.0.3 on RedHat Linux 7.0 - Kernel 2.4.0-test10 - Glibc 2.1.94 and 2.2 Thanks! Bye! -- Daniele Orlandi

Re: AW: [HACKERS] beta testing version

2000-12-08 Thread Daniele Orlandi
p, and given the frequency when CRC would need to reveal an error, I would consider it enought. Bye! -- Daniele ----------- Daniele Orlandi - Utility Line Italia - http://www.orlandi.com Via Mezzera 29/A - 20030 - Seveso (MI) - Italy ---

Re: AW: [HACKERS] beta testing version

2000-12-06 Thread Daniele Orlandi
? Bye! -- Daniele ----------- Daniele Orlandi - Utility Line Italia - http://www.orlandi.com Via Mezzera 29/A - 20030 - Seveso (MI) - Italy ---

Re: AW: [HACKERS] beta testing version

2000-12-06 Thread Daniele Orlandi
s, > anyway? Couldn't you use a CRC ? Anyway... may I suggest adding CRCs to the data ? I just discovered that I had a faulty HD controller and I fear that something could have been written erroneously (this could also help to detect faulty memory, though only in certain cases). Bye! -- Daniele Orlandi Planet Srl