Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] pg_regress in C

2006-07-18 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 10:46:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > ... One reason I didn't try to do this is I'm a bit hesitant to > write a signal handler that does anything as interesting as a system() > call, which would seem to be necessary to duplicate what the shell > script did. Comments? It mig

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] 8.2 features?

2006-07-18 Thread Joe Conway
Tom Lane wrote: Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Strange. Last time I checked I thought MySQL dump used 'multivalue lists in inserts' for dumps, for the same reason that we use COPY I think Andrew identified the critical point upthread: they don't try to put an unlimited n

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] 8.2 features?

2006-07-18 Thread Tom Lane
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Strange. Last time I checked I thought MySQL dump used 'multivalue > lists in inserts' for dumps, for the same reason that we use COPY I think Andrew identified the critical point upthread: they don't try to put an unlimited number of rows in

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] 8.2 features?

2006-07-18 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I did some experimentation just now, and could not get mysql to accept a command longer than about 1 million bytes. It complains about Got a packet bigger than 'max_allowed_packet' bytes which seems a bit odd because max_allowed_packet is allegedly set to 16 million, but anyway I don't think p

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] 8.2 features?

2006-07-18 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I did some experimentation just now, and could not get mysql to accept a command longer than about 1 million bytes. It complains about Got a packet bigger than 'max_allowed_packet' bytes which seems a bit odd because max_allowed_packet is allegedly set to 16 million, but anyway I don't think p

Re: [PATCHES] modular pg_regress.sh

2006-07-18 Thread Tom Lane
Joachim Wieland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I propose a patch to make pg_regress.sh more modular. This patch has been pretty thoroughly superseded by the recent rewrite of pg_regress in C. It's possible that we could modularize the C version, but what I'd like to know first is why you can't jus

Re: [PATCHES] pg_regress in C

2006-07-18 Thread Tom Lane
"Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Per discussion at the conference: > In order to run the regression tests on Windows without msys, pg_regress > needs to be reimplemnted in C. Patch committed after significant further work. As committed, pg_regress.c is pretty nearly an exact replac

Re: [PATCHES] New shared memory hooks proposal (was Re: pre_load_libraries)

2006-07-18 Thread Marc Munro
The attached patch provides add-ins with the means to register for shared memory and LWLocks. This greatly improves the ease with which shared memory may be used from add-ins, while keeping the accounting and management for that shared memory separate. Specifically it adds named add-in shared mem

Re: [PATCHES] Win32 DEF file error

2006-07-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
Patch applied. Thanks. --- Magnus Hagander wrote: > The Win32 DEF files that are generated for libpq contain the attribute > "DESCRIPTION", which is actually only allowed for device drivers. The > compilers ignore it with

[PATCHES] Mark change-on-restart-only values in postgresql.conf

2006-07-18 Thread Zdenek Kotala
I added additional comments marked setting which need server restart to take effect. I use (!RSR!) tag for it, however if anybody have different idea, let me know and I will change it. I removed comments about commenting out behavior too, because patch now waiting for commit (or reject?).

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] 8.2 features?

2006-07-18 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Chris Browne wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Kings-Lynne) writes: The major downside is that somewhere between 9000 and 1 VALUES-targetlists produces "ERROR: stack depth limit exceeded". Perhaps for the typical use-case this is sufficient though. I'm open to better ideas, comments

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] 8.2 features?

2006-07-18 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Kings-Lynne) writes: >> The major downside is that somewhere between 9000 and 1 >> VALUES-targetlists produces "ERROR: stack depth limit >> exceeded". Perhaps for the typical use-case this is sufficient >> though. >> I'm open to better ideas, comments, objections

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] 8.2 features?

2006-07-18 Thread Tom Lane
>> If the use case is people running MySQL dumps, then there will be >> millions of values-targetlists in MySQL dumps. I did some experimentation just now, and could not get mysql to accept a command longer than about 1 million bytes. It complains about Got a packet bigger than 'max_all

Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch for contrib/cube

2006-07-18 Thread Joshua Reich
Please find my cleanup of cube attached. I have also included the cube_a_f8_f8() function to allow construction of a cube from 2 float8[]'s. Thanks, Josh Reich Neil Conway wrote: On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 17:55 -0400, Joshua Reich wrote: Ok. So, the cube code looks very unmaintained (not to off

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] 8.2 features?

2006-07-18 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: The major downside is that somewhere between 9000 and 1 VALUES-targetlists produces "ERROR: stack depth limit exceeded". Perhaps for the typical use-case this is sufficient though. I'm open to better ideas, comments, objections... If the use case is peop

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] 8.2 features?

2006-07-18 Thread Joe Conway
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: The major downside is that somewhere between 9000 and 1 VALUES-targetlists produces "ERROR: stack depth limit exceeded". Perhaps for the typical use-case this is sufficient though. I'm open to better ideas, comments, objections... I

[PATCHES] pgcrypto merge cleanup

2006-07-18 Thread Marko Kreen
- Few README fixes - Keep imath Id string, put $PostgreSQL$ separately. -- marko Index: contrib/pgcrypto/README.pgcrypto === RCS file: /opt/cvs/pgsql/contrib/pgcrypto/README.pgcrypto,v retrieving revision 1.15 diff -u -c -r1.15 READM

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] 8.2 features?

2006-07-18 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
The major downside is that somewhere between 9000 and 1 VALUES-targetlists produces "ERROR: stack depth limit exceeded". Perhaps for the typical use-case this is sufficient though. I'm open to better ideas, comments, objections... If the use case is people running MySQL dumps, then there