Bruce Momjian wrote:
pg_upgrade does work, assuming there are no changes to the index or heap
file formats. (However, I now need to update it for schemas.) However,
the last time I worked on it for 7.2, no one was really interested in
testing it, so it never got done. In fact, there was a bu
I'll do it on my site.
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Any volunteers to act as a tertiary? :)
We're actually working on adding a new server online that is offshore,
which will also give us another subnet to work off of ... but having a
third-party secondary server wouldn't hurt, you are right ...
The site looks fantastic! Great work!
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I'm just announcing here, since I'd like to see some ppl testing this out
and let us know if there are any problems ... DNS is going to take a
little while to propogate, so the old site may still come up in the
interium ... another re
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Any volunteers to act as a tertiary? :)
We're actually working on adding a new server online that is offshore,
which will also give us another subnet to work off of ... but having a
third-party secondary server wouldn't hurt, you are right ...
OK, add 64.46.156.80 as
Neil Conway wrote:
On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 17:15, Dave Page wrote:
There were always ads there
Yes -- but AFAIK there were in the process of being phased out
(furthermore, the old site only had ads on the initial mirror page,
whereas they are much more widespread on the
Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Neil Conway wrote:
On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 13:26, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, mlw wrote:
The PHP site shows adds.
Ok -- but the vast majority (say, 95%) of OSS sites don't show ads.
This is a serious inquiry, very serious. People are complaining about ads.
What do we need in the form of equipment, bandwidth, etc.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Tom Lane wrote:
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Please understand something here ... a large portion of the banner ads are
*not* paid ... they are recognition of the many mirror sites that are
supporting the project by reducing the amount of bandwidth that is
requi
Dann Corbit wrote:
Message
I have
a machine with 4 CPU's and 2 gigabytes of physical ram.
I would
like to get PostgreSQL to use as much memory as possible. I can't seem
to get PostgreSQL to use more than 100 megabytes or so.
How can
I optimize the us
I just wanted to post this note.
I have been in Oracle hell for four days now, and in between the 5
minutes of work and the hours of watings, dealing with table spaces,
extents, and all that, I just keep thinking about how much easier
PostgreSQL is to work with.
We all may bitch and moan about
Gavin Sherry wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, mlw wrote:
I just wanted to post this note.
I have been in Oracle hell for four days now, and in between the 5
minutes of work and the hours of watings, dealing with table spaces,
extents, and all that, I just keep thinking about how
Does anyone think it would be a good idea, or is it even practical, to
have a 'indx' subdirectory along side of the 'base' directory?
I was thinking that, if it were an easy modification, that it could be
an easy way to separate data and indexes to different hard disks.
---
I don't think a semicolon is a comment. It causes the execution of the
previous statement.
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Hi,
In postgresql 7.3.1, if I do pg_dumpall -c, at the top of the dump file is
this:
DROP DATABASE au_shipping
;CREATE DATABASE au_shipping WITH OWNER = auadmin TEMPLATE =
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder writes:
- postgres should auto-tune itself - the *cost could perhaps be
adjusted after some statistics have been collected, and there should be
some sensible way to determine an optimal setting for the famous
shared_b
This is an interesting thought. My gut tells me it is a viable
opportunity for the corporate entities that offer support and wish to
have 'VAR' status.
This is just my opinion, but I view the core development group as pure
development, and the various people that resell or distribute PostgreSQL
I have been following the debate about the Windows build environment.
I would like to say that the build environment is not a real issue for
Windows developers. For the most part Windows developers will be happy
with a working binary and an interface library. The one is savvy enough
to want to
Greg Copeland wrote:
On Thu, 2003-01-23 at 09:12, Steve Wampler wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Also remember that in even well developed OS's like FreeBSD, all a
process's threads will execute only on one CPU.
I doubt that
Sorry, I think there was a misunderstanding. What were you looking for?
I used inno setup as well. If you want I can send my install script.
I thought I was being very forth coming.
I even help out on the Windows PG console window.
Justin Clift wrote:
Hi everyone,
Mark (mlw) put together
st encourage them to do
so. I think that would do more harm than not having the option. When
PostgreSQL has a native Windows version, I'll add it. Until then, I
think of it more as a "desktop" version for small offices and
developers. The "server" version currently
Original Message
Subject: Re: [mail] Re: [HACKERS] Windows Build System
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 15:46:20 -0500
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: Curtis Faith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 'Al Sutton'
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Like it or not, if PG releases a very good Win32 port, ALL the unixoids
combined will be out numbered by the windoze users.
Lamar Owen wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2003 20:22, Dann Corbit wrote:
Now, as far as the Win32 animosity goes, I think that is a natural thing
too. There is a culture c
Tom Lane wrote:
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Like it or not, if PG releases a very good Win32 port, ALL the unixoids
combined will be out numbered by the windoze users.
A lot of us are *not* looking forward to that prospect.
regards, tom lane
No doubt to that, but, dep
Dann Corbit wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 8:24 PM
To: mlw
Cc: Lamar Owen; Dann Corbit; PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List
Subject: Re: [mail] Re: [HACKERS] Windows Build System
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Forgive my stupidity, are you running PostgreSQL with the data on an NFS
share?
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
I have posted before about this but I am now posting to both NetBSD and
PostgreSQL since it seems to be some sort of interaction between the two. I
have a NetAPP filer on which I am puttin
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
On Thursday 30 January 2003 14:02, mlw wrote:
Forgive my stupidity, are you running PostgreSQL with the data on an NFS
share?
Yes, sorry. PostgreSQL is running from the local disk but the data is on the
mounted drive.
I'm not sure, I guess it could
Tom Lane wrote:
"Curtis Faith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
If a developer can simply download the source, click on the Visual C++
project in the win32 directory and then build PostgreSQL, and they can
see that Windows is not the "poor stepchild" because the VC project is
well laid out, they
Tom Lane wrote:
"Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
May I make a suggestion that maybe it is time to start thinking about
tuning the default config file, IMHO its just a little bit too
conservative,
It's a lot too conservative. I've been thinking for awhile t
Greg Copeland wrote:
I'd personally rather have people stumble trying to get PostgreSQL
running, up front, rather than allowing the lowest common denominator
more easily run PostgreSQL only to be disappointed with it and move on.
After it's all said and done, I would rather someone simply s
Apology
After Mark calms down and, in fact, sees that Greg was saying the right thing
after all, chagrin is the only word.
I'm sorry.
Greg Copeland wrote:
On Tue, 2003-02-11 at 11:23, mlw wrote:
Greg Copeland wrote:
I'd personally rather have peop
The debate on the configuration file sparked a memory of an old patch I
submitted in 7.1 days.
One of the things I do not like about PostgreSQL is, IMHO, is a
backwards configuration process. Rather than specify a data directory,
the administrator should specify a database configuration file. W
Robert Treat wrote:
I'm going to be lazy and ask if you can post what the better solution
that was coming was (or a link to the thread). While I'll grant you that
the "it's coming" argument is pretty weak after two releases, that fact
that it may have been a better solution could still hold up.
Peter Bierman wrote:
At 12:31 AM -0500 2/13/03, mlw wrote:
The idea that a, more or less, arbitrary data location determines the
database configuration is wrong. It should be obvious to any
administrator that a configuration file location which controls the
server is the "right"
Christopher Browne wrote:
In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Curt Sampson) wrote:
On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, Peter Bierman wrote:
What do you gain by having the postmaster config and the database
data live in different locations?
You can t
Robert Treat wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 09:23, mlw wrote:
I deal with a number of PG databases on a number of sites, and it is a
real pain in the ass to get to a PG box and hunt around for data
directory so as to be able to administer the system. What's really
annoyi
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 09:23:20 -0500,
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Personally, however, I think the configuration issue is a no-brainer and
I am amazed that people are balking. EVERY other service on a UNIX box
is configured in this way, why
Stephan Szabo wrote:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, mlw wrote:
Robert Treat wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 09:23, mlw wrote:
I deal with a number of PG databases on a number of sites, and it is a
real pain in the ass to get to a PG box and hunt
Stephan Szabo wrote:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, mlw wrote:
Stephan Szabo wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 09:23, mlw wrote:
I deal with a number of PG databases on a number of sites, and it is a
real pain in the ass to
scott.marlowe wrote:
These are not issues at all. You could put the configuration file
anywhere, just as you can for any UNIX service.
postmaster --config=/home/myhome/mydb.conf
I deal with a number of PG databases on a number of sites, and it is a
real pain in the ass to get t
One of the things that I HATE about this discussion is that everyone
wants to put limits on configurability.
I am an old fashion UNIX guy, capability without enforcing policy!
Adding an ability is different than enforcing a policy. All I any to do
is add the capability of configuration in a way
s-:")) != -1)
+ while ((opt = getopt(argc, argv, "A:a:B:b:C:c:D:d:Fh:ik:lm:MN:no:p:Ss-:")) !=
+-1)
{
switch (opt)
{
@@ -441,6 +441,9 @@
case 'b':
/* Can no longer set the backend e
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Robert Treat wrote:
IIRC the postmaster.pid file should be in /var/run according to FHS, I'm
not sure about postmaster.opts though...
Again, if we're going to make a change, let's make sure we think it
through.
Can non-root write to /var/run?
Robert Treat wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 14:51, mlw wrote:
Robert Treat wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 12:13, mlw wrote:
My patch only works on the PostgreSQL server code. No changes have been
made to the initialization scripts.
The patch declares three extra
Martin Coxall wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 20:28, Steve Crawford wrote:
I don't see why we can't keep everyone happy and let the users choose the
setup they want. To wit, make the following, probably simple, changes:
1) Have postgresql default to using /etc/postgresql.conf
/etc/postg
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Oliver Elphick wrote:
On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 17:52, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
Seems to me that if FHS allows such a mess, it's reason enough to avoid
compliance. Either that or those of you who build for distributions are
making an ill advised ch
Tom Lane wrote:
Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I assume $PGDATA was around long before GUC?
Yes, it was. But I have not yet seen an argument here that justifies
why $SOMECONFIGDIRECTORY/postgresql.conf is better than
$PGDATA/postgresql.conf. The latter keeps
Tom Lane wrote:
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The idea that a, more or less, arbitrary data location determines the
database configuration is wrong. It should be obvious to any
administrator that a configuration file location which controls the
server is the "ri
Tom Lane wrote:
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Here is the test, configure a server, with sendmail, named, apache, and
PostgreSQL. Tell me which of these systems doesn't configure right.
AFAIK, only one of those four is designed to support multiple instan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> What does this error mean - and how can I avoid it in the future?
>
> postmaster: StreamConnection: accept: Too many open files in system
>
> Any help would be much appreciated!
>
> Ryan Mahoney
It would be helpful if you could give more information, but if you ar
I have looked and I have looked, it is not immediately clear to me how integer
arrays are passed to C function.
create table fubar (vars integer[]) ;
select c_function(vars) from fubar;
insert into fubar (vars) values ('{1,2,3,4,5,6}');
extern "C" c_function (varlena var)
{
Just a little note of pseudo humor.
We could not postmaster (pg version 7.0.3) and I could not figure out why. I
checked directory permissions, all that. It kept complaining that it could not
create the pid file.
I did not understand why it would not work. I grepped through all the postgres
sour
I am getting a bit concerned about Postgres 7.1 performance with multiple
connections. Postgres does not seem to scaling very well. Below there is a list
of outputs from pgbench with different number of clients, you will see that
postgres' performance in the benchmark drops with each new connectio
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I am getting a bit concerned about Postgres 7.1 performance with
> > multiple connections. Postgres does not seem to scaling very
> > well. Below there is a list of outputs from pgbench with different
>
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> * Magnus Naeslund(f) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010426 21:17] wrote:
> > How does 7.1 work now with the vacuum and all?
> >
> > Does it go for indexes by default, even when i haven't run a vacuum at all?
> > Does vacuum lock up postgres? It says the analyze part shouldn't, b
You actually almost have it right.
You are passing VARDATA(user) to crypt, this is wrong.
You must do something like this:
int ulen = VARSIZE(user)-VARHDRSZ;
char utmp[ulen+]; // This works in newer GCC, cool.
memcpy(utmp,VARDATA(user), len);
utmp[ulen]=0;
crypted=crypt(utmp,salt);
Strings are
Alastair D'Silva wrote:
>
> Hi guys (and girls),
>
> Firstly, I must say that everyone has been quite helpful to me while I've
> been migrating my database to PostgreSQL 7.1.
>
> One feature I would like to see would be the ability to set a "usage" and
> "idle" threshold, so that tables automat
Don Baccus wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
> >
> > I've used the open source SAPDB and the performance is pretty damned
> > impressive. However, 'open source' in application to it is somewhat
> > deceptive, since you have to make it with SAP's proprietary build
> > tools/environment.
> >
> > In my opinion, h
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> I was talking to a Linux user yesterday, and he said that performance
> using the xfs file system is pretty bad. He believes it has to do with
> the fact that fsync() on log-based file systems requires more writes.
>
> With a standard BSD/ext2 file system, WAL writes ca
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Just put a note in the installation docs that the place where the database
> > is initialised to should be on a non-Reiser, non-XFS mount...
>
> Sure, we can do that now. What do we do when these are the default file
> systems for Linux? We can tell them to create ot
Here is a radical idea...
What is it that is causing Postgres trouble? It is the file system's attempts
to maintain some integrity. So I proposed a simple "dbfs" sort of thing which
was the most basic sort of file system possible.
I'm not sure, but I think we can test this hypothesis on the FAT3
Michael Samuel wrote:
>
> ReiserFS only supports metadata logging. The performance slowdown must be
> due to logging things like mtime or atime, because otherwise ReiserFS is a
> very high performance FS. (Although, I admittedly haven't used it since it
> was early in it's development)
The way
Michael Samuel wrote:
>
> > Remember, general purpose file systems must do for files what Postgres is
> > already doing for records. You will always have extra work. I am seriously
> > thinking of trying a FAT32 as pg_xlog. I wonder if it will improve performance,
> > or if there is just somethin
A small debate started with bad performance on ReiserFS. I pondered the likely
advantages to raw device access. It also occured to me that the FAT file system
is about as close to a managed raw device as one could get. So I did some
tests:
The hardware:
A PII system running Linux 7.0, with 2.2.16
Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
>
> At 02:09 AM 5/4/01 -0500, Thomas Swan wrote:
> > I think it's worth noting that Oracle has been petitioning the
> > kernel developers for better raw device support: in other words,
> > the ability to write directly to the hard disk and bypassing the
> > filesystem all toge
Marko Kreen wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 01:09:38PM -0400, mlw wrote:
> > A small debate started with bad performance on ReiserFS. I pondered the likely
> > advantages to raw device access. It also occured to me that the FAT file system
> > is about as close to a m
Marko Kreen wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 06:43:51PM -0400, mlw wrote:
> > Marko Kreen wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 01:09:38PM -0400, mlw wrote:
> > > > A small debate started with bad performance on ReiserFS. I pondered the likely
> > >
How do I define a function as taking a variable number of parameters. The
documentation seems to indicate (...) but, no such luck.
markw=# create function concat( ... )
markw-# returns varchar
markw-# as '/usr/local/lib/pgcontains.so', 'concat'
markw-# language 'c' with (
Does anyone know if it is possible to define a Postgres C function as taking a
variable number of parameters? The fmgr code will pass it, but I don't see any
way to use "create function" to register it.
Does one have to issue a create function for each additional parameter?
I am trying to port s
Take these queries:
select * from foo as F, (select * from bar where name = 'bla') as B where
F.name = B.name
union all
select * from foo as F, (select * from bar where name = 'bla') as B where
F.type = B.type
OR
create temp table B as select * from bar where name = 'bla';
select * from foo as
Andrew McMillan wrote:
>
> mlw wrote:
> >
> > Take these queries:
> >
> > select * from foo as F, (select * from bar where name = 'bla') as B where
> > F.name = B.name
> > union all
> > select * from foo as F, (select * from bar whe
Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
>
> > When the system is too heavily loaded (however measured), any further
> > login attempts will fail. What I suggested is, instead of the
> > postmaster accept()ing the connection, why not leave the connection
> > attempt in the queue until we can afford a back
Nathan Myers wrote:
> > There are two was to think about this. Either you make this parameter
> > tunable to give a proper estimate of the usability of the system, i.e.
> > tailor the listen queue parameter to reject sockets when some number
> > of sockets are waiting, or you say no one should eve
Kevin wrote:
>
> While I'm sure it's just because of the simplicity of this example, it
> seems that the query could be reorganized to avoid this double query:
>
> select * from foo F, bar B where B.name = 'bla' and (B.name = F.name or
> B.type = F.type);
That was the original format of the que
Naomi Walker wrote:
>
> Does postgresql have any sort of fast bulk loader?
It has a very cool SQL extension called COPY. Super fast.
Command: COPY
Description: Copies data between files and tables
Syntax:
COPY [ BINARY ] table [ WITH OIDS ]
FROM { 'filename' | stdin }
[ [USING] DELI
Just want to say I have been looking at the development version of 7.2 and I am
completely impressed. The one huge stumbling block to a 24x7 deployment,
vacuum, has been removed!! This is utterly fantastic! Is there a target date
for release? (sorry for asking, I know how irritating such questions
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Nathan Myers wrote:
> >> But using SOMAXCONN blindly is always wrong; that is often 5, which
> >> is demonstrably too small.
>
> > It is rumored that many BSD version are limited to 5.
>
Oops!! I looked at the title and it may have been misleading. Sorry.
mlw wrote:
>
> Just want to say I have been looking at the development version of 7.2 and I am
> completely impressed. The one huge stumbling block to a 24x7 deployment,
> vacuum, has been removed!! This is utter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mlw)
> wrote:
> > I was looking over the todo list and saw that someone wanted to support
> > XML. I have some quick and dirty stuff that could be used.
> >
>
> I'm no
"Frank Ch. Eigler" wrote:
>
> markw wrote:
>
> : [...] Actually I have been thinking about a couple projects I have
> : done. Vendors like to think XML is a way to distribute databases.
>
> I would find it very helpful to see a table of what sorts of XML
> functionality each major vendor suppo
I was looking over the todo list and saw that someone wanted to support XML. I
have some quick and dirty stuff that could be used.
OK, what should the feature look like?
Should it be grafted onto pg_dump or should a new utility pg_xml be created?
How strict should it be? A stricter parser is ea
Ken Hirsch wrote:
>
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Frank Ch. Eigler" wrote:
> > > : So a parser that can scan a DTD and make a usable create table (...)
> > > : line would be very helpful. [...]
> > >
> > > Hmm, but h
"Ross J. Reedstrom" wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 12:19:48PM -0400, mlw wrote:
> >
> >
> > Bill
> > Programmer
> >
> > 1290
> >
> > Canton Ave
> >
> >
> >
>
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > I would find it very helpful to see a table of what sorts of XML
> > > functionality each major vendor supports.
> >
> > Actually I was thinking of databases of data, not database systems.
>
> I think we can go two ways. Allow COPY/pg_dump to read/write XML, or
> wr
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > I have been fighting, for a while now, with idiot data vendors that think XML
> > is a cure all. The problem is that XML is a hierarchical format where as SQL is
> > a relational format.
> >
> > It would be good to get pg_dump to write an XML file and DTD, but getting
>
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > > I have managed to get several XML files into PostgreSQL by writing a parser,
> > > > and it is a huge hassle, the public parsers are too picky. I am thinking that a
> > > > fuzzy parser, combined with some intelligence and an XML DTD reader, could make
> > > > a ver
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Maybe just call the traditional vacuum VACUUM LOCK. It was the
> > LOCK/NOLOCK idea that I think was important.
>
> Right now it's called VACUUM FULL, but I'm not particularly wedded to
> that name. Does anyone else like VACUUM LOCK? Or have an even better
> idea?
Why r
gabriel wrote:
>
> hello all
> I have a postgresql 7.0
> and I'm trying to update to 7.1.2 using rpms
> but some files is missing
> like:
> libcrypto.so.0
> libssl.so.0
>
> anyone knows what package i can find this files??
>
> thanks...
>
> ---(end of broadcast)
Gilles DAROLD wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Why don't use the excellent DBIx-XML_RDB perl module ? Give it the query
> it will return XML output as you sample. With some hack you can do what you
> want...
>
The point I was trying to make is that XML is trivial to create. It is much
more difficult to read.
Maybe I'm being horribly stupid here, but
If the thinking is that some tables can escape having an OID, thus meaning OIDs
can be controlled by table, how hard would it be to have an OID range on a per
table basis?
Where each table to have its own notion of an OID, then OID wrap/depletion
sho
Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>
> The analog of ROWID in PostgreSQL is TID rather than OID
> because TID is a physical address of a tuple within a table.
> However there's a significant difference. Unfortunately TID
> is transient. It is changed by UPDATE and VACUUM.
> Though TIDs are unavailable for cri
Tom Lane wrote:
>
[Snipped]
I think making "WITHOUT OIDS" the default for table creation is the right thing
to do. Here is my reasoning:
An OID is a system wide limitation. 4B or 2B depending on sign-ness. (could
there be some bugs still lurking on high OIDs?) Since the OID is a shared
system w
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Why rename VACUUM, why not create a new command RECLAIM, or something like
> > that. RECLAIM does the VACUUM NOLOCK, while vacuum does the locking.
>
> Um, that gets the default backwards IMHO, where "
Hannu Krosing wrote:
>
> mlw wrote:
> >
> > I posted this question earlier, but it looks like it never made it on.
> >
> > If you can control the OIDs on a per table basis, and some tables need not even
> > have any, why not let each table have its own OID
Could we modify the Relation structure to hold an Oid counter? So every where
Postgres calls "newoid(void)" it gets changed to pass the relation structure it
will be associated with, i.e. newoid(Relation *). That way, every relation
could have its own counter, AND perhaps its own spinlock. Relatio
I think you are focusing too much on "ROWID" and not enough on OID. The issue
at hand is OID. It is a PostgreSQL cluster wide limitation. As data storage
decreases in price, the likelihood of people running into this limitation
increases. I have run into OID problems in my curent project. Geez, 40
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
>
> > It seems to me, I guess and others too, that the OID mechanism should
> be on a
> > per table basis. That way OIDs are much more likely to be unique, and
> TRUNCATE
> > on a table should reset it's OID counter to zero.
>
> Seems to me, that this would be no
Somehow I guess I created a misunderstanding. I don't really care about
ROWID. I care that OID is a 32 bit number. The notion that each table could
have its own "OID" similar to a ROWID could be an intermediate solution. I
have flip-flopped a couple times about whether or not the OID being able t
I am thinking about embarking on changing the typedef of OID to unsigned long
long.
My plan is to make it conditional at configure time, i.e.
#ifdef OID_ULONGLONG
typedef unsigned long long Oid;
#define OID_MAX ULLONG_MAX
#else
typedef unsigned int Oid;
#define OID_MAX UINT_MAX
#endif
Aside f
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Aside from adding %llu to all the %u everywhere an OID is used in a
> > printf, and any other warnings, are there any other things I should be
> > specially concerned about?
>
> FE/BE protocol,
> > >
> > > Near the end he gets specifically asked about "Red Hat Database" as a
> > > competitive threat, and he responds that he doesn't think anyone can match
> > > their "investment" of "800 professionals" to work on SQL Server.
> > >
> > > Now I'm sure he didn't mean it to sound this way, bu
Just a suggestion, how much work would it be to accept multiple parameters on
aggregate functions?
For instance:
select fubar(field1, field2) from table one group by field1;
The reason I think that this is useful is that for some statistical operations,
often times there is extra "per record"
101 - 200 of 364 matches
Mail list logo
