* Josh Berkus (j...@agliodbs.com) wrote:
What I'm getting from your e-mail, Dave, is If it doesn't solve all
problems for everyone in the world from Day 1, it's not worth doing.
It's my experience that the way to get OSS software that works is to
build a little bit at a time, each delivery of
Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
It's my mailbox --- it is my time to decide when to look at it, or not.
Absolutely.
There is nothing private about its contents.
Understood.
You can do whatever you want with the release
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I think so. I'm not sure if it will push out the comment that is
immediately adjacent to the trailing semicolon, but I don't think it
will decrease the indent on the ones you've indented more. I think
this is close enough for now and you should go
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 03:32:28PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 21:22, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
No, I don't think so. �HS without SR means you still have to fool
with setting up WAL-file-based replication, which despite
Bruce Momjian wrote:
2) Right now pg_migrator renames old tablespaces to .old, which fails
if the tablespaces are on mount points. I have already received a
report of such a failure. $PGDATA also has that issue, but that
renaming has to be done by the user before pg_migrator is run, and
* Dave Page (dp...@pgadmin.org) wrote:
Because if we (PostgreSQL) are going to support this effort, then it
should not ignore such a huge percentage of our installation base.
Not doing it day 1 is not ignoring. It's using what resources *are*
being made available to the best extent we can. If
On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 18:02 -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
On Jan 7, 2010, at 5:18 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 16:56 -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
Not much more to send really.
No problem. I can see what causes it, nothing more required, thanks.
What I don't fully
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I am tempted to say we should clamp down and go into damage control
mode
I'm torn between thinking it would be good to spell it that way and
thinking that we should have serializable_isolation_implementation
GUC (or something to that effect) which maps to an enumeration
containing snapshot and ssi. Opinions welcome, since I've put
that GUC at the top of my
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 08:57:15PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I am
Robert Haas wrote:
OK, we have a proposal on the table to bump some patches from this
CommitFest to free up more committer resources, particularly Tom, to
work on Hot Standby and Streaming Replication and attempt to
accelerate the process of getting 8.5 out the door. This proposal
needs
* David Fetter (da...@fetter.org) wrote:
OK, we have a proposal on the table to bump some patches from this
CommitFest to free up more committer resources, particularly Tom, to
work on Hot Standby and Streaming Replication and attempt to
accelerate the process of getting 8.5 out the door.
On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 21:02 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
Hmm. Why would we use a GUC for this instead of an additional option
to BEGIN TRANSACTION?
I'm with you. I feel pretty strongly that we should not have
behavior-changing GUCs.
I make an exception for compatibility GUCs where the eventual
On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 20:57 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
- Listen/Notify Rewrite.
- Writeable CTEs.
...
Votes?
I'm not qualified to vote on how other people spend their time, but here
are my thoughts:
SR was submitted quite some time ago, so I don't see it as breaking the
rules to put it first
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
This strikes me as quite premature. Heiki just said he expects to have SR
committed next week.
Getting it committed is not what I'm worried about. What I'm
concerned about is Tom's statement that he believes that HS is
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Yep. It would also lower the barrier to future innovations of that
type, which would be a good thing, IMO.
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
OK, we have a proposal on the table to bump some patches from this
CommitFest to free up more committer resources, particularly Tom, to
work on Hot Standby and Streaming Replication and attempt to
accelerate the process of getting 8.5 out the door.
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes:
FWIW here is the patch I run. Stupid as the patch may be, count it as
a +1 for people in the field doing this. Hence a reason to think
about doing something in core. maybe.
Thanks for the patch --- it's certainly a fine starting point.
We can either
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
OK, we have a proposal on the table to bump some patches from this
CommitFest to free up more committer resources, particularly Tom, to
work on Hot Standby and Streaming Replication
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 20:26, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes:
We can either drop this in core (with a lot of #ifdef LINUX added)
Any thoughts on doing something like (in fork_process.c)
#ifdef LINUX
void oom_adjust()
{
...
}
#else
void oom_adjust()
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Looking at this list again, it strikes me that the listen/notify rewrite
might need to go in so that we have a sane framework for listen/notify
with HS.
It's also related to this
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Fair enough ;-). But I don't feel a need to make a decision now,
either. We can at least wait a week and see if Heikki gets SR
committed.
OK.
...Robert
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jan 7, 2010, at 1:31 PM, Dave Page wrote:
No, I'm suggesting the mechanism needs to support source and binary
distribution. For most *nix users, source will be fine. For Windows
binaries are required.
I would love to follow what Strawberry Perl has done to solve
Robert Haas wrote:
If we're going to have any chance of getting
these patches in, we have to give the patch authors good feedback
early in the CommitFest so that they have time to make the necessary
revisions before the end of the CommitFest. If we think we can swing
it, I'm happy to handle
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
while I agree that HS is very useful without SR, I think that it's
mostly the well known powerusers inthe community are actively waiting
for HS and not so much for SR. For the typical user outside of -hackers
or
201 - 225 of 225 matches
Mail list logo
