On 1/5/07, Albert Cervera Areny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here's a new version that takes into account the SELECT INTO TEMP case. Thanks
Jaime!
ok. seems good to me...
What other temporary objects do you think should be considered?
sorry for the noise, seems i'm thinking on other dbms...
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Perhaps even more to the point, what makes you think that someone
> > will notice the warning? If the docs build is one step in an
> > automated build process, this seems unlikely.
>
> Taking a closer look, it's pretty much guaranteed that no one will
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Perhaps even more to the point, what makes you think that someone
> >> will notice the warning? If the docs build is one step in an
> >> automated build process, this seems unlikely.
>
> >
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Perhaps even more to the point, what makes you think that someone
>> will notice the warning? If the docs build is one step in an
>> automated build process, this seems unlikely.
> Taking a closer look, it's pretty much guaranteed
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Per some previous discussion that I can't really recall if it was on or
> off list, here is a WIP patch to make pg_regress run completely outside
> of msys on win32.
>
> The change needed is that the processing of files from input/ and
> output/ into sql/ and e
Tom Lane wrote:
> Perhaps even more to the point, what makes you think that someone
> will notice the warning? If the docs build is one step in an
> automated build process, this seems unlikely.
Taking a closer look, it's pretty much guaranteed that no one will see
them, because the targets they
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I wrote:
>
> ifeq (,$(wildcard bookindex.valid))
> echo "Run 'gmake' again to generate output with a proper index"
> endif
>
> but that warns on the first _two_ runs, meaning it expanded at the
> time the rule started, not at the time it hit that lin
On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 11:29 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > ... The active-portal kluge that you've just
> > mentioned is nothing but a kluge, proving that you thought of some cases
> > where it would fail. But I doubt you thought of everything.
>
> BTW, a sufficient counterexample for that
On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 11:14 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 03:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I think you just talked yourself out of getting this patch applied.
>
> > Maybe; what would be your explanation?
>
> The main reason is that y
SenTnel wrote:
> Hi !
>
> Tryed to install PostgreSQL 8.2 in a virtual dedicated win 2003 server, and
> ran into the installation problem you all know with initdb.
>
> I found this thread :
> http://www.nabble.com/-PatchFix-for-bug---2558%2C--InitDB-failed-to-run-on-windows-2003-tf2103710.htm
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There is no failure condition where the rows continue to exist
> on disk && the table relfilenode shows a committed transaction pointing
> to the file containing the marked-valid-but-actually-not rows.
What of
BEGIN;
CREATE TABLE foo ...;
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>> I don't know enough about the relevent tool to know if they actually
>> generate a warning about whether they need to be rerun. In any case it
>> seems a much better approach to simply run it again when needed rather
>> th
I wrote:
> ... The active-portal kluge that you've just
> mentioned is nothing but a kluge, proving that you thought of some cases
> where it would fail. But I doubt you thought of everything.
BTW, a sufficient counterexample for that kluge is that neither SPI or
SQL-function execution use a sepa
Update the UTF-8 RFC reference. RFC 2044 was obsoleted by RFC 2279,
which was obsoleted by RFC 3629.
--
Michael Fuhr
Index: doc/src/sgml/charset.sgml
===
RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/charset.sgml,v
retrieving revis
Hi !
Tryed to install PostgreSQL 8.2 in a virtual dedicated win 2003 server, and
ran into the installation problem you all know with initdb.
I found this thread :
http://www.nabble.com/-PatchFix-for-bug---2558%2C--InitDB-failed-to-run-on-windows-2003-tf2103710.html#a8164273
, "[Patch] - Fi
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 03:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think you just talked yourself out of getting this patch applied.
> Maybe; what would be your explanation?
The main reason is that you were guilty of false advertising. This
patch was described as
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > The attached patch warns users when they create documentation output
> > that has no index, and suggests re-running 'gmake'.
>
> > ! # for some reason $wildcard expands too early, so we use 'test'
>
> $wildcard is expanded whenever you tell it to
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 12:42:06AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 23:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > Everyone using these tools knows about the two-pass behavior.
> > >
> > > No, n
On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 12:59 +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 11:46:29AM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 03:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > The patch sets HEAP_XMIN_COMMITTED on all of the rows loaded
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 11:46:29AM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 03:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The patch sets HEAP_XMIN_COMMITTED on all of the rows loaded by COPY as
> > > well.
> >
> > I think you just talked yourself out of
On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 03:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 21:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Uh ... what in the world has an active portal got to do with it?
> >> I think you've confused snapshot considerations with crash recovery.
>
>
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 12:42:06AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 23:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Everyone using these tools knows about the two-pass behavior.
> >
> > No, not everyone knows. In fact I would argue that most do not know. It
> > isn
on an Intel based Solaris 10U2 box using Sun Studio 11 with
-xarch=generic64 we get a compile time failure in contrib/pgcrypto
because BYTE_ORDER is not defined.
in src/include/port/solaris.h we define it to little endian only for
__i386 - however in 64bit mode the compiler only defines __amd64 ca
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> The attached patch warns users when they create documentation output
> that has no index, and suggests re-running 'gmake'.
> ! # for some reason $wildcard expands too early, so we use 'test'
$wildcard is expanded whenever you tell it to. What did you write?
> ! @test
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 21:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Uh ... what in the world has an active portal got to do with it?
>> I think you've confused snapshot considerations with crash recovery.
> The patch sets HEAP_XMIN_COMMITTED on all of the rows loaded
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 21:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The rule is: if the relfilenode for a table is new in this transaction
> > (and therefore the whole things will be dropped at end-of-transaction)
> > then *all* COPY commands are able to avoid writing
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 21:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Saturday 06 January 2007 16:36, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >
> >> BEGIN;
> >> CREATE TABLE foo...
> >> INSERT INTO foo--uses WAL
> >> COPY foo.. --no WAL
> >> INSERT INTO foo--uses WAL
> >> COPY
27 matches
Mail list logo
