Re: [PATCHES] Sun Studio on Linux spinlock patch

Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So, is this a feature we want? I have no objection to being able to use Sun Studio, but the submitted patch seemed to need a lot of work yet ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql

Re: [PATCHES] ADD COLUMN with PRIMARY KEY bug (was: I think this is a BUG?)

"Brendan Jurd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The attached patch resolves the bug reported by Kaloyan Iliev [1] on -general. Applied as two separate patches (bug fix and inessential cleanup). The bug turns out to date back to the original addition of support for ALTER ... ADD COLUMN ... DEFAULT/NOT

Re: [PATCHES] ADD COLUMN with PRIMARY KEY bug (was: I think this is a BUG?)

"Brendan Jurd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I realised that there's no reason for preparing a separate SetNotNull > subcommand anymore, now that ATExecAddColumn takes care of enforcing > the constraint, so I removed this special case. This part seems to me to be code beautification, not a bug-fix

[PATCHES] ADD COLUMN with PRIMARY KEY bug (was: I think this is a BUG?)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, The attached patch resolves the bug reported by Kaloyan Iliev [1] on -general. The problem occurred when executing ALTER TABLE ... ADD COLUMN ... PRIMARY KEY with no default clause, on a table with rows already present. The NOT NULL constraint w

Re: [PATCHES] 64-bit CommandIds

Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I think the case for it got a whole lot weaker in 8.3, with lazy > > consumption of CIDs. > > Agreed. Let's see if we get requests for it in >= 8.3 releases. In the original submission message you find this text: : attached is our patch against HEAD which enables exten

Re: [PATCHES] 64-bit CommandIds

Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > So, is this an option we want for configure? > > I think the case for it got a whole lot weaker in 8.3, with lazy > consumption of CIDs. If someone had tables big enough to make the > 32-bit-CID limit still be a problem despite that

Re: [PATCHES] 64-bit CommandIds

Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So, is this an option we want for configure? I think the case for it got a whole lot weaker in 8.3, with lazy consumption of CIDs. If someone had tables big enough to make the 32-bit-CID limit still be a problem despite that fix, I'd think they'd not be

Re: [PATCHES] Sun Studio on Linux spinlock patch

So, is this a feature we want? --- Julius Stroffek wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > This patch seems broken in a number of ways. Why are you removing > > -DLINUX_PROFILE, for example? Are you sure you don't need -D_GNU_SOURCE?

Re: [PATCHES] 64-bit CommandIds

So, is this an option we want for configure? --- Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote: > Alvaro Herrera ?rta: > > Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote: > > > > > >> attached is our patch against HEAD which enables extending CommandIds > >> to 64

Re: [PATCHES] Improve shutdown during online backup, take 4

"Albe Laurenz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Why not? It'll fall out of the state again immediately in >> PostmasterStateMachine, no, if we do a CancelBackup here? > We cannot call CancelBackup there because that's exactly the state > in which a smart shutdown waits for a super

Re: [PATCHES] Improve shutdown during online backup, take 4

Tom Lane wrote: >>> Lastly, the changes to pmdie's SIGINT handling seem quite bogus. >>> Don't you need to transition into WAIT_BACKUP rather than WAIT_BACKENDS >>> state in that case too? Shouldn't you do CancelBackup *before* >>> PostmasterStateMachine? The thing screams of race conditions. >

Re: [PATCHES] lc_time and localized dates

Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: > Here is an updated patch. It follows the Oracle behaviour and uses a > cache mechanism to avoid calling setlocale() all the time. I unified the > localized_* and str_* functions. I didn't test it on Windows. I would > appreciate some feedback. Added to Ma

Re: [PATCHES] Improve shutdown during online backup, take 4

"Albe Laurenz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Lastly, the changes to pmdie's SIGINT handling seem quite bogus. >> Don't you need to transition into WAIT_BACKUP rather than WAIT_BACKENDS >> state in that case too? Shouldn't you do CancelBackup *before* >> PostmasterStateMachine?

Re: [PATCHES] Improve shutdown during online backup, take 4

Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Hmm. I've preivously been told not to use "Failed to" but instead > > use "Could not"... Didn't notice that Tom used the other one in his > > suggestion. > > > Tom (or someone else) - can you comment on if I misunderstood that > > r

Re: [PATCHES] Improve shutdown during online backup, take 4

Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hmm. I've preivously been told not to use "Failed to" but instead use > "Could not"... Didn't notice that Tom used the other one in his > suggestion. > Tom (or someone else) - can you comment on if I misunderstood that > recommendation earlier, or if i

Re: [PATCHES] Improve shutdown during online backup, take 4

Albe Laurenz wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > I concur that the messages added to pg_ctl are bizarrely formatted. > > Why would you put a newline in the middle of a sentence, when you > > could equally well emit something like > > > > WARNING: online backup mode is active. > > Shutdown will not comple

Re: [PATCHES] Improve shutdown during online backup, take 4

Tom Lane wrote: > I concur that the messages added to pg_ctl are bizarrely formatted. > Why would you put a newline in the middle of a sentence, when you > could equally well emit something like > > WARNING: online backup mode is active. > Shutdown will not complete until pg_stop_backup() is calle