Re: [PATCHES] XLogCacheByte is unused

2007-09-13 Thread Bruce Momjian
This has been saved for the 8.4 release: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold --- ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: > I found XLogCtlData.XLogCacheByte is already unused in CVS HEAD. > Should we remove the var

Re: [PATCHES] tab complete changes

2007-09-13 Thread Bruce Momjian
Patch applied. Thanks. --- Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > the attached patch makes teh following changes to the psql tab-complete > support > > * adds a few missing words to some commands (like adding GIN as a valid > ind

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] PGparam extension version 0.4

2007-09-13 Thread Bruce Momjian
This has been saved for the 8.4 release: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold --- Andrew Chernow wrote: > Version 0.4 of libpq param put and PGresult get functions. > > Added support for inet and ci

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] PAM authentication fails for local UNIX users

2007-09-13 Thread Bruce Momjian
Applied: PAM does work authenticating against Unix system authentication because the postgres server is started by a non-root user. In order to enable this functionality, the root user must provide additional permissions to the postgres user (for reading /etc/shadow). -

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 15

2007-09-13 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On 9/14/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > HeapTupleSatisfiesAbort is bogus because it has failed to track recent > changes in tqual.c. Oh. I should have been aware. Rather than fix it, though, I question why we need it at all. The only > use of it is in heap_prune_tuplechain() and

Re: [PATCHES] Reduce the size of PageFreeSpaceInfo on 64bit platform

2007-09-13 Thread Bruce Momjian
This has been saved for the 8.4 release: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold --- ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: > I wrote: > > > I'll rewrite my patch to use > > FSMPageData in both places so that users c

Re: [PATCHES] WIP: rewrite numeric division

2007-09-13 Thread Bruce Momjian
This has been saved for the 8.4 release: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold --- Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Paesold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Please, let's revisit this, and not postpone it wit

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Still recommending daily vacuum...

2007-09-13 Thread Bruce Momjian
Jim C. Nasby wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. > From > http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/routine-vacuuming.html : > > "Recommended practice for most sites is to schedule a database-wide > VACUUM once a day at a low-usage time of day, supplemented by more > frequent vacuuming of

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 15

2007-09-13 Thread Tom Lane
Okay, something else (a real problem this time ;-)): HeapTupleSatisfiesAbort is bogus because it has failed to track recent changes in tqual.c. Rather than fix it, though, I question why we need it at all. The only use of it is in heap_prune_tuplechain() and ISTM that code is redundant, wrong, or

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 15

2007-09-13 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On 9/13/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Never mind ... though my > suspicions would probably not have been aroused if anyone had bothered > to fix the comments. > > Yeah, my fault. I should have fixed that. Sorry about that. Thanks, Pavan -- Pavan Deolasee EnterpriseDB htt

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 15

2007-09-13 Thread Tom Lane
"Pavan Deolasee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 9/13/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> You have apparently >> decided to redefine the WAL record format as using one-based rather than >> zero-based item offsets, which would be fine if any of the rest of the >> code had been changed to agr

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 15

2007-09-13 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On 9/13/07, Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Yeah, I just checked the work-in-progress patch I sent you back in July. > I refactored it to use one-based offsets for consistency, since I > modified log_heap_clean quite heavily anyway. > > It's possible that I broke it in the pro

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 15

2007-09-13 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Pavan Deolasee wrote: > On 9/13/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You have apparently >> decided to redefine the WAL record format as using one-based rather than >> zero-based item offsets, which would be fine if any of the rest of the >> code had been changed to agree ... >> >> > I know He

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 15

2007-09-13 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On 9/13/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm curious how much the WAL-recovery aspects of this patch have been > tested, because heap_xlog_clean seems quite broken. There are quite a few crash recovery tests that one of our QA persons (Dharmendra Goyal) has written. I can post them

Re: [PATCHES] HOT patch - version 15

2007-09-13 Thread Tom Lane
"Pavan Deolasee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Please see the revised patches attached. I'm curious how much the WAL-recovery aspects of this patch have been tested, because heap_xlog_clean seems quite broken. You have apparently decided to redefine the WAL record format as using one-based rather

Re: [PATCHES] HOT documentation README

2007-09-13 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On 9/12/07, Pavan Deolasee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > One change that is worh mentioning > and discussing is that we don't follow HOT chains while fetching tuples > during > autoanalyze and autoanalyze would consider all such tuples as DEAD. > In the worst case when all the tuples in the tabl