Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Robert Treat wrote:
Also should installation.sgml
mention the issueswith building 32 vs 64 bit binaries
I'm not convinced there is an issue. dtrace will build the right
binaries by default. If you're messing with mixed environments *and*
delve into dtrace,
Sorry for the delayed response.
Robert Treat wrote:
Looking through -patches I don't see the doc patch, and outside of
installation.sgml there doesn't seem to be anything either. Robert, are you
still on the hook for these?
Josh will help submit the doc patch. I have documented the usage
i
All,
I'll be fixing this documentation issue now that I have full information.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an ind
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Robert Treat wrote:
Also should installation.sgml
mention the issueswith building 32 vs 64 bit binaries
I'm not convinced there is an issue. dtrace will build the right
binaries by default. If you're messing with mixed environments *and*
delve into dtrace, you shoul
Robert Treat wrote:
> Also should installation.sgml
> mention the issueswith building 32 vs 64 bit binaries
I'm not convinced there is an issue. dtrace will build the right
binaries by default. If you're messing with mixed environments *and*
delve into dtrace, you should probably be able to fi
Robert,
I'm working on the new version of the Solaris FAQ and I mentioned this
in this document. I'm going to sent patch asap.
Zdenek
Robert Treat napsal(a):
On Monday 24 July 2006 17:00, Robert Lor wrote:
Excellent! I'll submit a doc patch shortly.
Regards,
-Robert
Peter Eisentra
On Monday 24 July 2006 17:00, Robert Lor wrote:
> Excellent! I'll submit a doc patch shortly.
>
> Regards,
> -Robert
>
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >I've committed the dtrace patch. Some documentation would be nice now ...
>
Looking through -patches I don't see the doc patch, and outside of
insta
Excellent! I'll submit a doc patch shortly.
Regards,
-Robert
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I've committed the dtrace patch. Some documentation would be nice now ...
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send
I've committed the dtrace patch. Some documentation would be nice now ...
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
As I understand this, the probe file is compiled into some sort of
object file which is linked into the binary.
Correct.
So if we ever have probes
in other components, we'd probably want to have separate probe source
and object files for them. That would seem bett
Robert Lor wrote:
> Regarding where to put probe.d, will src/probe.d work since probes
> for all subsystems will go into this one file.
As I understand this, the probe file is compiled into some sort of
object file which is linked into the binary. So if we ever have probes
in other components,
Here is a consolidated patch that contains all the files. I made some
configure and makefile adjustments and put standard comment headers in
all the files. You can use DTRACEFLAGS to pass options to configure,
which should help sorting out the 32/64-bit issue. The problem of the
*.d files is
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Robert Lor wrote:
Now I'm getting a different type of error. After running the patch
command, the configure file is partially patched but not the others.
Attached is configure.rej. I just checked out the source from CVS.
Sorry, there must be something wrong wit
Robert Lor wrote:
> Now I'm getting a different type of error. After running the patch
> command, the configure file is partially patched but not the others.
> Attached is configure.rej. I just checked out the source from CVS.
Sorry, there must be something wrong with your source code or patch
to
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Perhaps the attached patch in -c format will work better.
Now I'm getting a different type of error. After running the patch
command, the configure file is partially patched but not the others.
Attached is configure.rej. I just checked out the source from CVS.
-ba
Robert Lor wrote:
> I can't seem to apply the patch on Solaris.
Perhaps the attached patch in -c format will work better.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
diff -cNr ../cvs-pgsql/configure ./configure
*** ../cvs-pgsql/configure 2006-07-21 23:35:48.0 +0200
--- .
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Here is a consolidated patch that contains all the files. I made some
configure and makefile adjustments and put standard comment headers in
all the files. You can use DTRACEFLAGS to pass options to configure,
which should help sorting out the 32/64-bit issue. The pr
Peter, I'll test the patch on Solaris. Thanks!
Regards,
-Robert
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Here is a consolidated patch that contains all the files. I made some
configure and makefile adjustments and put standard comment headers in
all the files. You can use DTRACEFLAGS to pass options to co
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Robert Lor wrote:
The user needs to have the flexibility to build a 32 bit PG binary
even when he run the 64 bit kernel. If I understand you correctly,
your suggestion will not allow a 32 bit binary to be built on a 64
bit OS.
I'm not sure about the context. H
Robert Lor wrote:
> The user needs to have the flexibility to build a 32 bit PG binary
> even when he run the 64 bit kernel. If I understand you correctly,
> your suggestion will not allow a 32 bit binary to be built on a 64
> bit OS.
I'm not sure about the context. How do you control whether the
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I would prefer to drop the PG_ prefixes on PG_TRACE and pg_trace.h. We
know which software we're dealing with.
I also agree with Martin & Tom to keep the PG_ prefixes.
We should probably move the probes file to a subdirectory. Anyone know
a good place?
Also, a
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 01:42:26PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I would prefer to drop the PG_ prefixes on PG_TRACE and pg_trace.h. We
>> know which software we're dealing with.
> I don't know. "trace" is a fairly generic word, how do you know that
> none of
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 01:42:26PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Robert Lor wrote:
> > I've have attached a patch along with two new files.This patch should
> > reflect what we discussed at the Summit. Please let me know if I miss
> > anything.
>
> I would prefer to drop the PG_ prefixes on PG_
Robert Lor wrote:
> I've have attached a patch along with two new files.This patch should
> reflect what we discussed at the Summit. Please let me know if I miss
> anything.
I would prefer to drop the PG_ prefixes on PG_TRACE and pg_trace.h. We
know which software we're dealing with.
> 1) The c
24 matches
Mail list logo
