On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 00:05, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
At present the WALSender only sends from one file at a time, so
sending a message when we open a new file would be straightforward.
Are you
On mån, 2011-08-15 at 18:39 +0100, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
If you want to upgrade a system running 8.3 (that uses float based
timestamps) in using
pg_upgrade you must compile 9.0 (or 8.4 or 9.1) with
--disable-integer-datetimes. If at some point in the future you
then want
to upgrade to
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
So right now what we do is allow a single packet to span multiple
files, but since MAX_SEND_SIZE is 128KB it will always be smaller than
a single file, so we can only ever span two files at most.
Unless someone has
I'm trying to make my streaming log receiver work properly with 9.1,
and have come across a couple of things. The first one that's causing
trouble is that the definition of the protocol is currently in
walprotocol.h, which is not include:able in a frontend application.
AFAICT, this is because it
On 15 August 2011 12:22, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
The basic reason for this is that we're putting TimestampTz fields in
the protocol. This also means that the protocol actually changes
definition depending on if the server is compiled with integer or
float timestamps.
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
I'm trying to make my streaming log receiver work properly with 9.1,
and have come across a couple of things. The first one that's causing
trouble is that the definition of the protocol is currently in
walprotocol.h, which is not include:able in a
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 16:20, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
I'm trying to make my streaming log receiver work properly with 9.1,
and have come across a couple of things. The first one that's causing
trouble is that the definition of the
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 16:20, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
However, for a narrow fix, I could see moving the data type definition
to someplace with fewer dependencies. Perhaps split it into a separate
file timestamp_type.h, or something like
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 16:53, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 16:20, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
However, for a narrow fix, I could see moving the data type definition
to someplace with fewer dependencies. Perhaps
On 11-08-15 10:00 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
Without commenting on what should be done in your specific case, I
wonder whether it's time to fully retire the deprecated double
representation of timestamps. Is anyone actually expected to rely on
their availability when 9.2 is released? This also
On 15.08.2011 18:54, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 16:53, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagandermag...@hagander.net writes:
I also ran into a similar problem with some WAL macro definitions that
are in xlog_internal.h. I've moved them to xlogdefs.h in the attached
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Perhaps we should change the protocol so that it explicitly says which
file the streamed piece of WAL belongs to. That way a client could write
it to the correct file without knowing about all those macros.
Yeah, maybe.
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 18:12, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Perhaps we should change the protocol so that it explicitly says which
file the streamed piece of WAL belongs to. That way a client could write
it to the correct
On 15 August 2011 16:56, Steve Singer ssin...@ca.afilias.info wrote:
This would mean that anyone using the floating point timestamps today won't
be able to use pg_upgrade to upgrade to whichever version we remove them
from. 8.3 had float based timestamps as the default and I suspect many
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 16:53, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Don't think you should expose fsec_t, nor most of those macros. The
foo_per_bar values are just namespace clutter.
Hmm, ok. I just went for what seemed like a reasonable subset. I do
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 18:40, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 16:53, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Don't think you should expose fsec_t, nor most of those macros. The
foo_per_bar values are just namespace clutter.
On 11-08-15 12:33 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On 15 August 2011 16:56, Steve Singerssin...@ca.afilias.info wrote:
This would mean that anyone using the floating point timestamps today won't
be able to use pg_upgrade to upgrade to whichever version we remove them
from. 8.3 had float based
Steve Singer ssin...@ca.afilias.info writes:
On 11-08-15 12:33 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On 15 August 2011 16:56, Steve Singerssin...@ca.afilias.info wrote:
This would mean that anyone using the floating point timestamps today won't
be able to use pg_upgrade to upgrade to whichever version
On 15 August 2011 18:09, Steve Singer ssin...@ca.afilias.info wrote:
Really? I find that slightly surprising, considering that a quick look
at master's timestamp.c suggests that the choice to use the in64
representation over the double representation is entirely a case of
compile time
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 18:12, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Perhaps we should change the protocol so that it explicitly says which
file the streamed
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 21:12, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 18:12, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Perhaps we should
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Why not have a specific protocol message to indicate a change of filename?
I don't mean a WAL message, I mean a streaming protocol message.
That we could have, and it would work as long as it's always sent as
the first packet in any stream.
If we
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
At present the WALSender only sends from one file at a time, so
sending a message when we open a new file would be straightforward.
Are you sure? We can receive a single message spanning multiple files...
You're
23 matches
Mail list logo
