On 30 January 2016 at 05:11, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> Well, this gets at one of the problems here, which is that you can't
> fix a commit message once the commit has been pushed. So even if we
> all agreed in principle to a standard format, it's not clear that you
> could enforce compliance with th
On 8 September 2017 at 15:34, chiru r wrote:
> We have multiple SAP applications running on Oracle as backend and looking
> for an opportunity to migrate from Oracle to PostgreSQL. Has anyone ever
> deployed SAP on PostgreSQL community edition?
>
> Is PostgreSQL community involved in any future ro
On Sep 25, 2017 1:39 PM, "Joshua D. Drake" wrote:
> On 09/25/2017 10:32 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>
>> On 25/09/17 19:26, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> Alvaro Hernandez writes:
>>>
>>
>
>> There is already about 3 million output plugins out there so I think we
>> did reasonable job there. The fact that v
It's broadly interesting, but since it bakes in a build dependency on
CMake, there is some risk that the dependencies become an insurmountable
problem.
(Does CMake run on a VAX 11/780?? :-))
It is probably worth a try, to see what improvements arise, albeit with the
need to accept some risk of r
On 2 September 2015 at 04:52, Shulgin, Oleksandr <
oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>
>> On 2015-09-01 14:07:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > But I think it's quite wrong to assume that the infrastructure for
>> > this is available and
On 3 September 2015 at 12:57, Shulgin, Oleksandr <
oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de> wrote
>
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>>
>> Maybe someday we should have all that, but I think for right now
>> that's complicating things unnecessarily. I think the best proposal
>> so far
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 7:49 AM, firoz e v wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Is there a way to store the password in ".pgpass" file in an encrypted
> format (for example, to be used by pg_dump).
>
>
>
> Even though, there are ways to set the permissions on .pgpass, to disallow
> any access to world or group,
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 12:30 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tatsuo Ishii writes:
>> I noticed pg_dump does not exit gracefully when killed.
>> start pg_dump
>> kill pg_dump by ctrl-c
>> ps x
>
>> 27246 ?Ds96:02 postgres: t-ishii dbt3 [local] COPY
>> 29920 ?S 0:00 sshd: ishii@pts/
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 2:55 AM, Gavin Flower
wrote:
> On 20/08/13 15:26, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I will be taking a long (and long-overdue) vacation from Sep 10 to Oct 20.
> I expect to have email access, but won't be doing much more than minimally
> keeping up with my inbox.
>
> This means I'll be p
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 3:10 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
>> After someone in IRC asked if there was an equivalent to MySQL's
>> server_id, it was noted that we do have a system identifier but it's not
>> very accessible.
>>
>> The attached patch implements a pg_system_identifier() function that
>>
Sitting on my todo list for a while has been to consider the idea of
adding a bit of additional functionality to createuser.
One of the functions of CREATE ROLE is to associate the role with
other roles, thus...
create role my_new_user nosuperuser nocreatedb login
IN ROLE app_readonly_role
Attached is a patch implementing the "-g / --roles" option for createuser.
I'll be attaching it to the open CommitFest shortly.
createuser.diff
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgr
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> How do we handle the Python dependency, or is this all to be done in
> some other language? I certainly am not ready to take on that job.
I should think it possible to reimplement it in C. It was considerably
useful to start by implementi
I would be more inclined to let GraphViz into the process than Dia; the
former fits *much* better into a Make-based process.
It is worth observing that there are schema diagramming systems (SchemaSpy
is mighty likable) that build diagrams using GraphViz. We have integrated
this into internal depl
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Dimitri,
>
>> Josh Berkus writes:
>>> pg_partman has several external (python) scripts which help the
>>> extension, located in /extras/ in its source. The problem currently is
>>> that if you install pg_partman via pgxn or package, you don'
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Garick Hamlin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 01:59:04PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Garick Hamlin wrote:
>> > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 09:54:14PM +0900, MauMau wrote:
>> >> From: "Robert Haas"
>> >>> ISTM that the biggest proble
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Garick Hamlin
wrote:
>> I think using /dev/urandom directly would be surprising. At least it
would
>> have probably have taken me a while to figure out what was depleting the
>> entropy pool here.
>
> Perhaps s
On 22 September 2015 at 15:11, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Andrew Dunstan
wrote:
> > Good point. In the 18th and 19th centuries it was deemed by some
grammarians
> > to be incorrect for some reason, (and yet Thackeray still used it in
Vanity
> > Fair, for instance) and
On 30 September 2015 at 12:26, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 09/30/2015 07:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>
>> I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your
>> blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that
>> mailing lists are insufficient is simply s
On 30 September 2015 at 14:31, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 09/30/2015 11:23 AM, Christopher Browne wrote:
>
>> It's well and nice to think that an issue tracker resolves all of this,
>> and, if we
>> had tiny numbers of issues, we could doubtless construct a repo
On 13 October 2015 at 11:48, Michal Novotny
wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I would like to ask you whether is there any tool to be able to compare
> database schemas ideally no matter what the column order is or to dump
> database table with ascending order of all database columns.
>
> For example, if I h
On 14 October 2015 at 13:04, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 9/15/15 10:13 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Jim Nasby writes:
>>
>>> On 9/15/15 8:43 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
AFAICT from a quick look at its documentation, asciidoc can produce
either html or docbook output; so as soon as you want something
On 26 October 2015 at 16:25, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 10/14/15 6:41 AM, Victor Wagner wrote:
> > 1. It is allowed to specify several hosts in the connect string, either
> > in URL-style (separated by comma) or in param=value form (several host
> > parameters).
>
> I'm not fond of having URLs
On 27 October 2015 at 20:51, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Craig Ringer writes:
> > I think it'd be helpful to define some level of policy about what the
> > debug levels are intended for, so there's some guidance on what level
> > to emit messages on rather than playing "pick a number".
>
> +1 ... I doubt
On 30 October 2015 at 09:26, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On 10/28/15 4:18 AM, Victor Wagner wrote:
> >> On Mon, 26 Oct 2015 16:25:57 -0400
> >> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >>
> >>> Also, this assumes that all the components other than host an
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> What would be interesting is if we could monitor how long all *foreground* IO
> requests took. If they start exceeding some number, that means the system is
> at or near full capacity, and we'd like background stuff to slow down.
There's somet
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Assuming we had the cast, What would "intval like '1%'" mean? You're going
> to match 1, 10..19, 100..199, 1000..1999 ...
>
> Now maybe there's a good use for such a test, but I'm have a VERY hard time
> imagining what it might be.
Well, I
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Don Baccus wrote:
>
> On Feb 18, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Rob Wultsch wrote:
>>
>> Where first_name is string the queries above have very different
>> behaviour in MySQL. The first does a full table scan and coerces
>> first_name to an integer (so '5adfs' -> 5)
>
> Oh my
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Don Baccus wrote:
>
> On Feb 18, 2012, at 1:43 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
>> A hierarchy like the following is perfectly logical:
>> - to 0999 :: Cash accounts [1]
>
> I asked earlier if anyone would expect 01 like '0%'
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Marko Kreen wrote:
> About our Spencer code - if we don't have resources (not called Tom)
Is there anything that would be worth talking about directly with
Henry? He's in one of my circles of colleagues; had dinner with a
group that included him on Thursday.
--
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Timothy Garnett wrote:
> I wanted to gauge the interest in adding an option for this to pg_dump.
I was thinking about an application for much the same feature.
Consider the case where you have a relatively small database such as
the accounting records for a not-h
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 7:47 AM, Rosario Borda
wrote:
> Good morning to all. First I apologize for my English.
> After a HD crash I have recovered a portion of the data in binary
> files of postgres, carving it from the HD. But I do not know the
> format of these files, and find difficult to trans
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> By default, a trigger function runs as the table owner, ie it's
> implicitly SEC DEF
>> to the table owner.
>
> Really? That's certainly what I would *want*, but it's not what I've
> seen.
Yeah, not quite consistent w
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 1:50 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2012, at 4:53 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
>>> I also liked Kevin's suggestion of DISCREET
>>
>> That would probably create too much confusion with "discrete".
>
> SECRETE?
BOUND? GAGGED?
--
When confronted by a difficult pr
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" writes:
>> As far as I can tell, triggers run as the user performing the
>> operation which fires the trigger, not as the owner of the table.
> > Can anyone provide an example of a trigger running as the table
>> owner? Is ther
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> But it is very effective at avoiding 4 out of the 5 writes you mention.
For the "common case," would we not want to have (1) [WAL] and (2)
[Writing the pre-frozen tuple]?
If we only write the tuple (2), and don't capture WAL, then the COPY
w
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Artur Litwinowicz's message of lun mar 05 18:32:44 -0300 2012:
>
>> Ouch... "in next 2-4 years" - it broke my heart like a bullet - You
>> should not write it... ;)
>> I feel that I need to set aside SQL, Python, PHP and so on
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Artur Litwinowicz wrote:
> Algorithm for first loop:
> check jobs exists and is time to run it
> run job as other sql statements (some validity check may be done)
> get next job
> no jobs - delay
There are crucial things missing here, namely the need to establ
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> And also some interface. It'd be useful to have background jobs that
> executed either immediately or at a certain time or after a certain
> delay, as well as repeating jobs that execute at a certain interval or
> on a certain schedule. Figur
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Why do we need a ticker? Just fetch the time of the task closest in the
> future, and sleep till that time or a notify arrives (meaning schedule
> change).
Keep in mind that cron functionality also includes "batch", which
means that the pro
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas writes:
>>> Well, the standard syntax apparently aims to reduce the number of
>>> returned rows, which ORDER BY does not. Maybe you could do it
>>> with ORDER BY .. LIMIT, but the idea here I think is that
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> As soon as we're done here, the CommitFest will end, and there won't
> be any other people's patches to review.
Hurray? :-)
--
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>> If homebrew intentionally creates a hole like that, then for as long
>> as I'm one of the PostgreSQL webmasters it will *never* be listed on
>> our download pages.
>
> I think that's a bit har
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Dobes Vandermeer wrote:
> I think there is something to be gained by having a first-class concept of a
> "document" in the database. It might save some trouble managing
> parent/child relations, versioning, things like that.
Methinks this needs a *lot* more specif
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> But objective rules do not require a just judge, and they have a
>> different advantage: predictability. If I know that a clock starts ticking
>> the moment I get my first review, I'll shape
There hasn't been general agreement on the merits of particular .gitignore
rules of this sort.
You could hide your own favorite patterns by putting this into your
~/.gitignore that isn't part of the repo, configuring this globally, thus:
git config --global core.excludesfile '~/.gitignore'
That h
This situation falls from a problem that we noticed a mighty long time ago
in Slony, where the set of XIDs outstanding gets very large, and, attendant
to that, the set of "action id" values by which tuples are being filtered,
gets correspondingly large.
It happens when there is a long pause in app
The assumption that we ought to plan expressly for an incompatibility that
essentially discards pg_upgrade seems premature, particularly in advance of
would-be solutions that, in some cases, mightn't actually work.
If pg_upgrade doesn't work, then, at present, the plausible solutions are
to either
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 1:42 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>
>
>> Joking about "640K" aside, it doesn't seem reasonable to expect a truly
>> enormous query as is generated by the broken forms of this logic to turn
>> out happily. I'd rather fix Slony (as done in the above patch).
>>
>
> Yes, by all m
BTW, one of the ideas that popped up in the unConference session on
replication was "why couldn't we use a background worker as a replication
agent?"
The main reason pointed out was 'because that means you have to restart the
postmaster to add a replication agent.' (e.g. - like a Slony "slon"
pro
The case where I wanted "routine" shutdown immediate (and I'm not sure I
ever actually got it) was when we were using IBM HA/CMP, where I wanted a
"terminate with a fair bit of prejudice".
If we know we want to "switch right away now", immediate seemed pretty much
right. I was fine with interrupt
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Yuri Levinsky wrote:
> Guys,
> I am sorry for taking your time. The reason for my question is:
> As former Oracle DBA and now simple beginner PostgreSQL DBA I would like
> to say: the current partitioning mechanism might be improved. Sorry, it
> seems to me far b
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Andrew Dunstan
> wrote:
> > I'd like to see prizes each release for "best contribution" and "best
> > reviewer" - I've thought for years something like this would be worth
> > trying. Committers and core memb
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-06-27 15:11:26 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
> > > On 6/27/13 6:34 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > >> Is there a reason why we have set the min allowed value for port to 1
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Cédric Villemain wrote:
> > Clearly I ticked off a bunch of people by publishing "the list". On the
> > other hand, in the 5 days succeeding the post, more than a dozen
> > additional people signed up to review patches, and we got some of the
> > "ready for committ
Shouldn't be possible.
The act of requesting to LISTEN requires doing a sort of update to the
database. In elder versions, it put tuple(s) into pg_catalog.pg_listener,
and that's Right Well Disallowed on a WAL-based replica.
I would think that if you're keen on building an "event detection
subst
On 13 May 2015 at 17:55, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Aaron W. Swenson" writes:
> > Trying to build HEAD and ran into this issue building the docs:
> > openjade:logicaldecoding.sgml:575:62:Q: length of name token must
> > not exceed NAMELEN (44)
> > openjade:replication-origins.sgml:87:67:Q: l
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Jan Wieck wrote:
> On 09/02/2014 06:56 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> People are free to do what they want, but to my mind that would be a
>> massive waste of resources, and probably imposing a substantial extra
>> maintenance burden on the core committers.
>>
>
>
On 8 November 2014 17:49, Robert Haas wrote:
> > We could just integrate those parts, and be done with it. But would that
> > actually be a good thing for the community? Then slony needs to do it
> > and potentially others as well? Then auditing can't use it? Then
> > potential schema tracking sol
On 17 December 2015 at 14:16, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> or different idea - just enforce syntax check without execution.
That seems pretty cool... I'd find "syntax check without execution" to be
pretty useful to test SQL (and especially DDL).
--
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Marko Tiikkaja writes:
> > Courtesy of me, Christmas comes a bit early this year. I wrote a patch
> > which allows you to add STRICT into PERFORM and INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE
> > without specifying an INTO clause.
>
> What is the use-case for thi
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Charles Gomes
wrote:
>
> Hello guys,
>
> I've been finding performance issues when using a trigger to modify
inserts on a partitioned table.
> If using the trigger the total time goes from 1 Hour to 4 hours.
>
> The trigger is pretty simple:
>
> CREATE OR REPLACE
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Hannu Krosing wrote:
>> This is what I did with my sample pl/python function ;)
>
> Yeah, except that the "c" in "ctime" does not stand for create, and
> therefore the function isn't necessarily reliable. The
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> The popen patch doesn't support the '|compression-binary' option through
> the FE protocol. Even if it did, it would only be available for
> superusers as we can't allow regular users to run arbitrary commands on
> the server-side.
That poi
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Christopher Browne
> wrote:
>> That points towards a fix that involves having a set of non-arbitrary
>> commands
>> that we allow plain users to use.
>>
>> Hmm. There&#
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> Backpatching sounds a bit scary. It's not a clear-cut bug, it's just that
> autovacuum could be smarter about its priorities. There are other ways you
> can still bump into the xid-wraparound issue, even with this patch.
I don't think t
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-01-25 11:51:33 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>> > 2. for other tables, consider floor(log(size)). This makes tables of
>> > sizes in the same ballpark be considered together.
>>
>> > 3. For tables of similar size
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> OK, but can we lay the issue of a *normalized* command string to the
>> side for just one minute, and talk about exposing the *raw* command
>> string? It seems to me that this would be (1) very easy to do, (2)
>>
I'm poking at event triggers a bit; would like to set up some examples
(and see if they
work, or break down badly; both are interesting results) to do some
validation of schema
for Slony.
What I'm basically thinking about is to set up some event triggers that run on
DROP TABLE / DROP SEQUENCE, and
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 6:19 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
wrote:
> Christopher Browne writes:
>> I'm poking at event triggers a bit; would like to set up some examples
>> (and see if they
>> work, or break down badly; both are interesting results) to do some
>> v
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 1/25/13 11:56 AM, Christopher Browne wrote:
>>
>> With a little bit of noodling around, here's a thought for a joint
>> function
>> that I*think* has reasonably common scales:
>>
>>
>>
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> Also, it's far from obvious to me that "largest first" is the best rule
>> anyhow; it's likely to be more complicated than that.
>>
>> But anyway, the right place to add this sort of consideration is in
>> pg_restore -
>>
>> This strikes me as too clever by half. You've introduced the concept
>> of a "Browne strength" (apparently named for Christopher Browne) and
>> yet you haven't even bothered to add a comment explaining the meaning
>> of the term, let along
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> My intention was to apply a Nasby correction to Browne Strength and call
>> the resulting function Browne' (Browne prime). Does that sound better?
>
> /me rests head in hands. I'm no
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> You're right, this doesn't work superbly well, especially for
>> insert-only tables... But imo the place to fix it is not the
>> priorization logic but relation_needs_vacanalyze, since fix
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
> wrote:
>> Robert Haas writes:
I disagree with that. I don't see why the enclosing event trigger
shouldn't be aware of all the objects dropped by the command that just
ran to c
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think it's fairly obvious that
> (1) dealing with a DROP only after it's happened is pretty limiting;
> (2) allowing user-defined code to run mid-command is dangerous.
> What's at issue is the tradeoff we make between these inescapable
> facts,
I would expect the strategy you have in mind to be more useful to apply at
the filesystem level, so that it's not in Postgres altogether. (Ala
"Stacker", remember DR-DOS?)
But, to speak arguable heresy, the demerits of this sort of thing are
described nicely in Another Database's Documentation: <
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Atri Sharma wrote:
> >>
> >> This is an interesting idea. Historically I've always decomposed
> >> graphs into relational structures because that's the only practical
> >> way to query them. Graphs are
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 8/9/12 9:08 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 6:50 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> >>> I'm wondering if perhaps -- in addition to what you've done here -- we
> >>> should make "psql -1" error out if reading from a terminal.
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 8/28/12 2:51 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>>
>>> >The thing I don't like about this is it assumes that time is the best
>>> > way to
>>> >refer to when things changed in a system. Not only is that a bad
>>> > assumption,
>>> >it also means that r
If the present project is having a tough time doing enhancements, I should
think it mighty questionable to try to draw it into core, that presses it
towards a group of already very busy developers.
On the other hand, if the present development efforts can be made more
public, by having them take p
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-09-22 at 16:25 +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
>> I think it's time to consider some *umbrella project* for maintaining
>> several small projects outside the core.
>
> Well, that was pgfoundry, and it didn't work out.
There se
We historically have connection pooling as an external thing; with the high
degree to which people keep implementing and reimplementing this, I think
*something* more than we have ought to be built in.
This, with perhaps better implementation, might be an apropos start.
Parallel with LDAP: it tak
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Excerpts from Daniele Varrazzo's message of dom sep 23 22:02:51 -0300 2012:
>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>>
>> > As proposed by Masahiko, a single organization grouping all the tools (one
>> > repository p
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Daniel Farina writes:
>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Jaime Casanova
>> wrote:
>>> The definition of information_schema.triggers contains this:
>>> -- TRIGGER_TYPE_UPDATE; we intentionally omit TRIGGER_TYPE_TRUNCATE
>>> so it seems that w
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas writes:
>> On 08.10.2012 18:26, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> The other thing that the abbreviation list files are doing for us is
>>> providing a user-configurable way to resolve conflicting abbreviations,
>>> for instance IST (the Indi
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 3:32 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 10 October 2012 02:10, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> The second is for making deployment scripts idempotent. For example,
>>> say you have script A which creates table "josh", and script B wh
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Anyway, lets start with a discussion of what rules give us that SQL
> standard features do not?
The somewhat broader question that this elicits is "How would we go
about deprecating a feature that seems to be troublesome?" I think
Josh Berkus
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:26 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> How does Slony write its changes without causing serialization replay
> conflicts?
It uses a sequence to break any ordering conflicts at the time that
data is inserted into its log tables.
If there are two transactions, A and B, that were
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> So we just need a function called pg_if_table_exists(table, SQL) which
>> wraps a test in a subtransaction.
>>
>> And you write
>>
>> SELECT pg_if_table_exists('foo', 'TRUNCATE TABLE foo')
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
wrote:
> Christopher Browne writes:
>> I suggest the though of embracing statement modifiers in DDL, with
>> some options possible:
>> a) { DDL STATEMENT } IF CONDITION;
>> b) { DDL STATEMENT } UNLESS CONDITION;
&
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
>> I'm a bit lost. I would think pl/pgsql is precisely the same as
>> Oracle's pl/sql and MS's T-SQL. I see the complaint you have as a
>> purely implementation detail. I don't think pl/pgsq
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Joshua Berkus wrote:
> So, problem #1 is coming up with a mathematical formula. My initial target
> values are in terms of # of rows in the table vs. # of writes before analyze
> is triggered:
>
> 1 : 3
> 10 : 5
> 100 : 10
> 1000 : 100
> 10 : 2000
> 100
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>>> if (select 1 from pg_class where relname = 'foo' and
>>> pg_table_is_visible(oid)) then
>>> truncate table foo;
>>> end if;
>>
>> Yeah, I think the functionality that we need is pretty m
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On 15 October 2012 19:19, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> I think Robert is right that if Slony can't use the API, it is unlikely
>> any other replication system could use it.
>
> I don't accept that. Clearly there is a circular dependency, and
>
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On Monday, October 15, 2012 10:08:28 PM Christopher Browne wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Peter Geoghegan
> wrote:
>> > On 15 October 2012 19:19, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> >> I think Robert is
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Sequences, as defined by SQL Standard, provide a series of unique
> values. The current implementation on PostgreSQL isolates the
> generation mechanism to only a single node, as is common on many
> RDBMS.
I remember constructing at least the
Well, replication is arguably a relevant case.
For Slony, the origin/master node never cares about logged changes - that
data is only processed on replicas. Now, that's certainly a little
weaselly - the log data (sl_log_*) has got to get read to get to the
replica.
This suggests, nonetheless, a
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> It is not meant to be a full implementation of application level queuing
>> system though but just the capture, persisting and distribution parts
>>
>> Using this as an "application level queue" needs a set of interface
>> functions to extra
1 - 100 of 483 matches
Mail list logo
