Anyone have anything outstanding that prevents me rolling a Beta2 and
announcing it this weekend? Tom? Vadim? Peter?
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: [EMAIL PROTECTED] secondary:
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
* The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001229 14:11] wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
FreeBSD has a freely available library called 'libedit' that could
be shipped with postgresql, it's under the BSD license.
Yes
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Lamar Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How different is the feature set?
I was going to ask the same thing. If it's an exact replacement then
OK, but I do not want to put up with non-Emacs-compatible keybindings,
to mention just one likely issue.
be adding a whole 79k to the 6meg distribution:
ls -lt /tmp/libedit.tar.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 scrappy wheel 79025 Dec 29 20:38 /tmp/libedit.tar.gz
and providing all the functionality that ppl who don't have libreadline
already installed don't get ...
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My understanding (from the recent discussion) is that Postgresql
has certain dependancies on libreadline and won't compile/work
without it,
Then you're working from a misconception.
I think the
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
* The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001229 17:06] wrote:
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My understanding (from the recent discussion) is that Postgresql
has certain dependancies
On Sat, 30 Dec 2000, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The Hermit Hacker writes:
Actually, IMHO, the pro to moving to libedit is that we could include it
as part of the distribution and make history a *standard* feature
History already is a standard feature, you just need to have readline
Morning ...
Just to let ppl know what I'm using as milestones for beta
releases:
beta2 - vadim finishes WAL stuff he's currently working on
beta3 - vadim incorporates LAZY extension to VACUUM
beta4 - a week later to clean out any bugs as a result of beta3
beta5 - first release
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
beta2 - vadim finishes WAL stuff he's currently working on
I think the TOAST-table-vacuuming issue is a "must fix for beta2", also.
I'm on it now...
Agreed ... that list wasn't a "beta2
, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:04:16 -0400 (AST)
From: The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [HACKERS] Future beta releases ...
Morning ...
Just to let ppl know what I'm using as milestones for beta
releases:
beta2
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Dan wrote:
I've committed contrib/rserv/ which provides replication capabilities to
PostgreSQL. The code was developed by Vadim, with some script and
wrapper support from myself.
[snip]
- Thomas
How does this jive with www.erserver.com?
On Mon, 18 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Bierman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just now I went to http://www.postgresql.org/mhonarc/pgsql-hackers/
typed 'foo' in the search field, and I get a dialog a few seconds later:
"The attempt to load:"Accessing URL:
On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, Peter Bierman wrote:
At 3:16 PM -0500 12/16/00, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Here is the list of features in 7.1.
New Darwin/Mac OSX port (Bruce Hartzler)
Not to be a snob, but I probably did 80% of this.
(BTW- tons of stuff at www.postgresql.org is busted. Searching
sorry, meant to respond to the original and deleted it too fast ...
Tom, if the difference between 7.0 and 7.1 is such that there is a
performance decrease, *please* apply the fix ... with the boon that OUTER
JOINs will provide, would hate to see us with a performance hit reducing
that impact
beta1 was very low key ... it was announced here on the list as "its
packaged, try it out" ... there was no big hype about this one, but there
will be for beta2, which will most likely be after Vadim gets those vacuum
fixes in place, and Tom gets those planner fixes ...
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000,
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, bpalmer wrote:
Yes, postgresql requires vacuum quite often otherwise queries and
updates start taking ungodly amounts of time to complete. If you're
having problems because vacuum locks up your tables for too long
you might want to check out:
But why? I don't
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
All in all it's a synchronization and communication problem, but it's a
real problem, as history shows.
There is nothing stopping Marc from running the docs generation
explicitly just before release. The group permissions in my docs build
area
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Basically Vadim left it up to me to campaign for acceptance of this
work and he said he wouldn't have a problem bringing it in as long
as it was ok with the rest of the development team.
So can we get a
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Mikheev, Vadim wrote:
If Vadim isn't sufficiently confident of it to commit it
on his own authority, I'm inclined to leave it out of 7.1.
My concern is mostly schedule. We are well into beta cycle
now and this seems like way too critical (not to say
Go for it Vadim ... it is only a couple of days in, and I know there are
several places I could personally use it ...
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
If there are no objections then I'm ready to add changes to 7.1.
Else, I'll produce patches for 7.1 just after release and
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
"Mikheev, Vadim" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If there are no objections then I'm ready to add changes to 7.1.
Else, I'll produce patches for 7.1 just after release and incorporate
changes into 7.2.
I'd vote for the second choice. I do not think we
one thing I've found to get around this is for any query that doesn't
appear to use the index properly, just do:
SET ENABLE_SEQSCAN=OFF;
query
SET ENABLE_SEQSCAN=ON;
that way for those queries that do work right, ou haven't forced it a
different route ..
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, mlw wrote:
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
should be easily testable though, no?
What makes you think that?
Alfred could volunteer to move to v7.1? *grin*
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:19:56 -0400 (AST)
From: The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Oleg Bartunov [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
'pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Martin A. Marques wrote:
On Thursday 07 December 2000 16:48, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
Okay, since I haven't gotten word back on where to find the docs for v7.1,
it still contains those for v7.0, but I just put up beta1 tarballs in the
/pub/dev directory ... can someone
On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Martin A. Marques wrote:
On Sunday 03 December 2000 04:00, Vadim Mikheev wrote:
There is risk here. It isn't so much in the fact that PostgreSQL, Inc
is doing a couple of modest closed-source things with the code. After
all, the PG community has long acknowleged
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
At 11:59 PM 12/3/00 -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
the sanctity of the *core* server is *always*
foremost in our minds, no matter what other projects we are working on ...
What happens if financially things aren't entirely rosy with your
company
On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, Junfeng Zhang wrote:
Hello all,
I am new to postgreSQL. When I read the documents, I find out the
Postmaster daemon actual spawns a new backend server process to serve
a new client request. Why not use threads instead? Is that just for a
historical reason, or some
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
A recent example of non-sinister change in another area is the work done
to release 7.0.3. This is a release which would not have happened in
previous cycles, since we are so close to beta on 7.1. But GB paid Tom
Lane to work on it as part of *their*
if we were to do this in steps, I beliee that one of the major problems
irght now is that we have global variables up the wazoo ... my
'thread-awareness' is limited, as I've yet to use them, so excuse my
ignorance ... if we got patches that cleaned up the code in stages, moving
towards a cleaner
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Adam Haberlach wrote:
In any case, can we create pgsql-politics so we don't have to go over
this issue every three months? Can we create pgsql-benchmarks while we
are at it, to take care of the other thread that keeps popping up?
no skin off my back:
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
I *am* one of those volunteers
Yes, I well remember you screwing up PG 7.0 just before beta, without bothering
to test your code, and leaving on vacation.
You were irresponsible then, and you're being irresponsible now.
Okay, so let me get this
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Hannu Krosing wrote:
The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
I *am* one of those volunteers
Yes, I well remember you screwing up PG 7.0 just before beta, without bothering
to test your code, and leaving on vacation.
You were
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, mlw wrote:
Hannu Krosing wrote:
I know this is a borderline rant, and I am sorry, but I think it is very
important that the integrity of open source be preserved at 100% because
it is a very slippery slope, and we are all surrounded by the temptation
cheat the
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Gary MacDougall wrote:
If you write a program which stands on its own, takes no work from
uncompensated parties, then you have the unambiguous right to do what
ever you want.
Thats a given.
okay, then now I'm confused ... neither SePICK or erServer are derived
from
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
If this is the impression that someone gave, I am shocked ... Thomas
himself has already posted stating that it was a scheduale slip on his
part.
Actually, Thomas said:
Thomas Hmm. What has kept replication from happening in the past? It
Message -
From: "The Hermit Hacker" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Gary MacDougall" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "mlw" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "Hannu Krosing" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "Thomas
Lockhart" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "Don Baccus"
[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
On Sun, Dec 03, 2000 at 08:53:08PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Gary MacDougall wrote:
If you write a program which stands on its own, takes no work from
uncompensated parties, then you have the unambiguous right
v7.1 should improve crash recovery for situations like this ... you'll
still have to do a recovery of the data on corruption of this magnitude,
but at least with the WAL stuff that Vadim is producing, you'll be able to
recover up until the point that the power cable was pulled out of the wall
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
At 07:02 PM 11/30/00 -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
v7.1 should improve crash recovery for situations like this ... you'll
still have to do a recovery of the data on corruption of this magnitude,
but at least with the WAL stuff that Vadim
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Nathan Myers wrote:
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 07:47:08PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
At 07:02 PM 11/30/00 -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
v7.1 should improve crash recovery for situations like this ... you'll
still
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Nathan Myers wrote:
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 07:02:01PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
v7.1 should improve crash recovery ...
... with the WAL stuff that Vadim is producing, you'll be able to
recover up until the point that the power cable was pulled out
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, xuyifeng wrote:
you are complete wrong, if I don't like PG, I'll never go here or talk
anything about PG, I don't care it. I just want PG can be improved
quickly, for me crash recover is very urgent problem, otherewise PG is
forced to stay on my desktop machine, We'll
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Hannu Krosing wrote:
xuyifeng wrote:
I just noticed this conversation so I have not followed all of it,
but you seem to have strange priorities
I just want PG can be improved quickly, for me crash recover is very urgent
problem,
Crash avoidance is usually
On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Well, yes. Why isn't it?
Full text indexing should be just as much a feature as any other key feature in
PG.
With the advent of unlimited file and record lengths in 7.1, this would be a good
time to
include it.
FTI is particularly
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Hannu Krosing wrote:
when trying to do
get -R RedHat-6.x RedHat-7.0 Mandrake-7.x
I got
get RedHat-7.0: server said: Permission denied on server. (Transfer
limits exceeded)
aftre all of RedHat-6.x was retrieved
is there any reason for this ?
Yes, we don't
I'm at Comdex right now, but when I'm around, I'm on channel ...
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
I remeber a few developers used to gather on efnet irc,
there was a lot of instability recently that seems to have
cleared up even more recently.
Are you guys planning on coming
fixed, let mek now if there are any others I've missed ...
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, Larry Rosenman wrote:
Are the @postgresql.org addresses supposed to work?
-Original Message-
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 4:13 PM
To:
After a couple of pre-release tarballs, the PostgreSQL Developers are
proud to announce v7.0.3, our most stable release yet.
There have been *several* fixes in this release, from v7.0.2, but, being a
minor release, there have been *no* changes that will require a
dump/restore to happen ...
On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
* Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001109 18:55] wrote:
I guess the immediate question is do we want to hold up 7.0.3 release
for a fix? This bug is clearly ancient, so I'm not sure it's
appropriate to go through a fire drill to fix it for
On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom, if you can plug this one in the next, say, 48hrs (Saturday night),
Done. Want to generate some new 7.0.3 release-candidate tarballs?
Done, and just forced a sync to ftp.postgresql.org of the new tarballs
If its that easy to fix the regress test so that it passes, can we get it
committed and build a new tarball so that ppl doing regression on v7.0.3
see a clean regress?
On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Pete Forman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The only remaining failure is geometry. The
what version of CVS are you running? when was the last time you did
anything with it?
cvs on hub hasn't been upgraded since Sept 13th, so it isn't an upgrade
issue ... and just tested from work, and I can checkout no probs ...
On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, Michael Meskes wrote:
Here's what I get
I'm tryin to figure out how to speed up udmsearch when run under
postgresql, and am being hit by atrocious performance when using a LIKE
query ... the query looks like:
SELECT ndict.url_id,ndict.intag
FROM ndict,url
WHERE ndict.word_id=1971739852
AND url.rec_id=ndict.url_id
AND
yowch ... removing that one index makes my 'test' search (mvcc) come back
as:
[97366] SQL 0.05s: SELECT ndict.url_id,ndict.intag FROM ndict,url WHERE
ndict.word_id=572517542 AND url.rec_id=ndict.url_id AND (url.url LIKE
'http://www.postgresql.org/%')
vs what we were doing before ... now,
On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, Philip Warner wrote:
At 21:59 5/11/00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Looks like a great kluge to me ;-)
Hmph. I prefer to think of it as a 'user-defined optimizer hint'. ;-}
Except, if we are telling it to get rid of using the index, may as well
get rid of it altogether, as
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, Philip Warner wrote:
At 21:59 5/11/00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Looks like a great kluge to me ;-)
Hmph. I prefer to think of it as a 'user-defined optimizer hint'. ;-}
Except, if we
On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, Philip Warner wrote:
At 23:12 5/11/00 -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
Except, if we are telling it to get rid of using the index, may as well
get rid of it altogether, as updates/inserts would be slowed down by
having to update that too ...
So long as you don't
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am adding a new TODO item:
* Add SET PERFORMANCE_TIPS option to suggest INDEX, VACUUM, VACUUM
ANALYZE, and CLUSTER
Seems we should be able to emit NOTICE messages suggesting performance
In order that we can get a few days of testing on these, make sure the
packaging is right and whatnot, we are holding off on a formal release
until early-mid next week ...
I've just put pre-release tar balls into:
ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/source/v7.0.3
Please take a minute to
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I have talked to GB and they understand their error.
Until the next time? This isn't the first time you've "talked to
them" ...
sorry, the migration this past weekend was to remove all traces of hub.org
from the list addresses ... we built a 'virtual server' that now houses
the postgresql.org mailing lists, so you need to send to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], and it should work ...
please try that and let me know if it works or
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jeff, feel like trying out the True64 install and seeing how it
goes? Worst case, we have to install Redhat from scratch *shrug*
Tom, anything on that machine that you wanna backup? Or its all safe
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Nathan Boeger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
is anyone working on the port of PostgreSQL for Alpha FreeBSD ??
Not that I know about. DEC/Compaq was kind enough to lend the project
an Alpha for testing, but it's running Linux (RedHat 6.2).
We've also got a
On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Yes, sorry about the delay. Also, I will send a report to core about
the summit.
is there a reason why -hackers wouldn't be interested as well? *raised
eyebrow*
sounds great, then hopefully we get v7.0.3 out early next week :) thanks
...
okay, to date I've just been manually fixing stuff like this, but its time
to debug what the problem is here ...
so, what have you tried to do to set it as digest, and what error did you
get?
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I too got somehow on the list without subscribing.
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Ned Lilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, here in relatively minor form is the First Example of a Great
Bridge Priority (which Tom, Bruce, and Jan have all predicted would
come... ;-)
Hmm. I wasn't aware that Jan had done it at Great Bridge's
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Ned Lilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, here in relatively minor form is the First Example of a Great
Bridge Priority (which Tom, Bruce, and Jan have all predicted would
come... ;-)
Hmm. I wasn't aware that Jan had done it at Great
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Lamar Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I do have a question -- just how much configuration (and other) changes
occurred to REL7_0_PATCHES (since the logs seem to not be telling the
whole story)?
I say this because I found at least one such change --
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Ned Lilly wrote:
We recognize this is a temporary hack - and fully expect it to go away
in 7.1 We actually think that the final solution might be more
appropriate in pg_dump itself than pg_dumpall, but that's obviously a
much more breakable proposition (hence the separate
ya know, I always love seeing email's like this ... what time do you
consider to be the end of the day? and going directly to the top means
talking to ... wow, me. and its the end of my day here, and I don't have
you off yet, so now you are in a pickle, no? :)
On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Jones,
I believe that its just resting on Vadim again to give us the go ahead
... which I believe its always been on his shoulders, no? :)
Vadim?
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Vadim Mikheev writes:
WAL todo list looks like:
So what's the latest on going beta?
--
Peter
one list at a time, I move and test .. -hackers is the second ...
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: [EMAIL PROTECTED] secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
Morning all ...
Today, we are moving the mailing lists over to the new mail
server. There *might* be a brief period where any mail sent to the lists
will be returned with a 'user unknown' error, as there will be a brief
period where the aliases will be disabled on the old server and
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Larry Rosenman wrote:
Err, with Tom's objections, why was this applied?
was going to ask this too ... someone going patch-happy again? :)
* Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001028 11:34]:
Applied. Thanks.
Okay, here's my attempt at fixing the problems with
makes sense to me
On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
After reviewing a number of past threads about the INET/CIDR mess,
I have concluded that we should adopt the following behavior:
1. A data value like '10.1.2.3/16' is a legal INET value (it implies
the host 10.1.2.3 in the network
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
http://www.postgresql.org/mhonarc has them all listed .. not sure how to
get there from the Web site ... Vince?
There are links from both the Developer's Corner and User's Lounge -
General
http://www.postgresql.org/mhonarc has them all listed .. not sure how to
get there from the Web site ... Vince?
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Krzysztof Kowalczyk wrote:
Are mailing list archives of various postgresql mailing list available
anywhere?
I know they were some time ago but I couldn't
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
No. I will turn it into an FAQ, and the item will be "How do I install
PostgreSQL on MS Windows". How's that?
I don't see how that would be better. Why this artificiality?
Installation instructions belong into
On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Philip Warner writes:
I like the pg_{import,export} names myself ... *nod*
Sounds fine also; but we have compatibility issues in that we still need
pg_dump. Maybe just a symbolic link to pg_export.
I'm not so fond of changing a
Something to force a v7.0.3 ... ?
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
... with a blinding flash ...
The VACUUM funnies I was complaining about before may or may not be real
bugs, but they are not what's biting Alfred. None of them can lead to
the observed crashes AFAICT.
What's
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Something to force a v7.0.3 ... ?
Yes. We had plenty to force a 7.0.3 already, actually, but I was
holding off recommending a release in hopes of finding Alfred's
problem.
I thought so, about having plenty
Morning all ...
I'm trying to get the committers mailing list to work, and the
"break" is in sendmail, as far as I can tell. Basically, its taking
'locally posted messages' and not adding a domain to the back of it, so
that majordomo sees them as:
--== Error when connecting: Invalid
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
What was the matter with the name pg_restore?
I didn't wanna be the one to ask, but I was kinda confused on that point
too ...
Since we may have a workable backup/restore based on WAL available in 7.1,
I am now wondering at the wisdom of creating
On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
we bite the bullet to the extent of supporting a distinction between
physical and logical column numbers, then ISTM there's no strong need
to do any of this other stuff at all. I'd expect that
On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
Hiroshi's patch would make for a good starting point by bringing in the
ability to do the DROP COLUMN feature, as I understand, without the
rollback capability,
No Hiroshi's patch is rollback enabled, simply because all it does is
On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
okay, but, again based on my impression of what Tom has stated, and
previous conversations on this topic, the key problem is what happens if I
drop a column and a later date decide add a new column
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
One thing it might be interesting (please tell me if you think
otherwise) would be to improve pg with better statistical information, by
using, for example, histograms.
Yes, that's been on
On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Zeugswetter Andreas SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My conclusion would be that we need both:
1. a fast system table only solution with physical/logical column id
2. a tool that does the cleanup (e.g. vacuum)
But the peak space usage during cleanup
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I am tempted to apply this. This is the second person who asked for
binding to a single port. The patch looks quite complete, with doc
changes. It appears to be a thorough job.
Any objections?
From a quick read of his "description of problem",
On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
Thus spake Bruce Momjian
I have installed this in the current source tree, ready for 7.1.
I have installed
Announce: Release of PyGreSQL version 3.0
When is 7.1 being locked down? I may be releasing 3.1 with a few small
fixes and
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
The Hermit Hacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
hrmm .. mvcc uses a timestamp, no? is there no way of using that
timestamp to determine which columns have/haven't been cleaned up
following
On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
The core group has decided to delay 7.1 beta until November 1. We have
done this to enable the write-ahead log code (WAL) to be shipped with
7.1.
Of course, it also gives me time to catch up on my e-mail, which I am
doing now. :-)
tell me about
Well all, I just spent a bit of time trying to figure out how to recover a
database where the tables appear to be intact with postgres in 'single
user mode', and came up with a quick and dirty that might not be totally
complete, but might help someone else in a similar situation ...
Pointers to what this is? Do we have it documented anywhere? Search
engine, of course, is done, so can't search there ...
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: [EMAIL PROTECTED] secondary:
tom is looking into a bug right now that he wants to try and fix before we
release it ... hopefully this week we'll release it ...
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, G. Anthony Reina wrote:
I remember a post about 2 weeks back concerning a new patch that was to
be introduced as 7.0.3. I haven't seen any
Can someone add something to the docs that gives an example of what should
be used from the command line to reindex a database's system tables?
All the man page says is use th e-O an d-P options :(
I'm getting:
psql -h pgsql horde
ERROR: cannot read block 6 of pg_attribute_relid_attnam_index
Wow, has this been just one of those days ...
Trying to clean up a few of the database, I'm wondering how to fix some of
these things, if its even possible, without having to rebuild the whole
database:
%~/bin/postgres -O -P -D/pgsql/special/sales.org swissre
DEBUG: Data Base System is
figuring I'd try out getting into the backend using postgres, to see if I
can 'bypass' some of the errors on those corrupted database, I'm wondering
if there is any way of taking what a 'select * from table' outputs:
1: userid = "cibc001154" (typeid = 1043, len = -1, typmod = 36,
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
Karel Zak [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not documented (from oracle_compat.c) in PG documentation:
btrim()
ascii()
ichar()
repeat()
and about ichar() is nothing in Oracle documentation, it's knows chr()
only...
Sounds to me
301 - 400 of 403 matches
Mail list logo
