when client thread big, the tps without connection time wrong
number of threads: 100
duration: 10 s
My 0.02 €:
I cannot test that on my laptop! What kind of server is this?
The thread start time is currently taken before thread creation. The
overhead of creating 100 threads compared to
If you're going to use something which is PostgreSQL-specific, you may
as well write your own views or use the "native" tables and views
directly.
I wish I could write portable code, if possible:-)
I'm basically writing views on top of the information_schema under the
assumption that what i
If you're going to use something which is PostgreSQL-specific, you may as
well write your own views or use the "native" tables and views directly.
I wish I could write portable code, if possible:-)
I'm basically writing views on top of the information_schema under the
assumption that what is
Maybe you shouldn't be using the information_schema in the first place.
Sure, I could write non standard code for every database instead of trying
to write a portable code which work on all of them directly:-)
I think that trying to do the portable way, under the assumption that the
standa
Well, one must choose between to evil:
Yeah, exactly. I think that the current tradeoff is just fine.
Hmmm. I think exactly the contrary. There is no point in having a non
reliable feature.
ISTM that very few people use the information schema, and if the query
results is not reliable, i
Dear Tom,
Still for the sake of argument:
Note that (2) fails for long names; you have to do something to
compress to NAMEDATALEN.
Indeed.
What if the type is changed to TEXT? It is just a view after all.
How important is it to stick to "sql_identifier"?
The big problem with either of th
Hallo,
\d information_schema.referential_constraints
View "information_schema.referential_constraints"
...
FROM pg_namespace ncon
JOIN pg_constraint con ON ncon.oid = con.connamespace
JOIN pg_class c ON con.conrelid = c.oid
Well, for the sake of argument, how would you pro
.connamespace
JOIN pg_class c ON con.conrelid = c.oid
--
Fabien Coelho - CRI, Maths & Systèmes, MINES ParisTech
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Dear Tom,
The REFERENTIAL_CONSTRAINTS table in the information_schema references a
constaint through its database/schema/name, but this information is not
unique, so it may identify several constraints, thus the information
derived may not be consistent.
Postgres does not enforce that constra
Hello,
I haven't found a bug management system about postgresql, so here is a
mail. Maybe this issue was already reported, sorry if it is the case.
I have seen anything about the information_schema in pg todo list.
This is tested on postgresql 8.4.4.
The REFERENTIAL_CONSTRAINTS table in the
I found a way to break a foreign key constraint in PostgreSQL
[ ie, make a rule that defeats an ON DELETE CASCADE operation ]
This isn't a bug, it's just the way things work. Rules (and triggers)
apply to the commands that implement foreign key updates, so a poorly
written rule can make those
Dear Michael,
This comes up often and the response is usually something like,
"Rules are macros, which is why referring to NEW.id causes another
evaluation of nextval(). If you don't want that to happen then use
a trigger."
That is indeed what I gathered;-)
It might be sensible to avoid multiple e
st be C or PL*.
That could also be a candidate TODO, next to "improve the doc"?
Thanks for your answer,
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
between
beta3 and beta4, on a debian linux box under an intel architecture.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
Dear debuggers,
I'd like to report the following "strange" behavior that I encountered
while trying (a bad idea, I know) to use a rule as a "poor man sql-trigger".
It seems that "on update do also" rules the new.* fields are evaluated
several times instead of being computed once, which is a bad id
Dear bug-hunters,
With a nearly current cvs head version I have the following:
psql> SELECT VERSION();
...
PostgreSQL 8.0.0beta2 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc (GCC)
3.3.4 (Debian 1:3.3.4-6sarge1)
psql> CREATE TABLE foo(id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY, data TEXT);
psql> CREATE FUNCTION add_data(
ld do it by default). Something like:
DECLARE CURSOR foo FOR your-select-query...;
FETCH FORWARD 10 FROM foo;
FETCH FORWARD 10 FROM foo;
FETCH FORWARD 10 FROM foo;
...
CLOSE foo;
Hope this help.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
st.
The connection to the server was lost. Attempting reset: Failed.
@:
!>
then
psql> ALTER INDEX bla.t_pkey SET TABLESPACE pg_default;
ERROR: could not create relation 1663/19396/19473: File exists
So the state is pretty incoherent.
Well, I can still drop the database.
--
F
> Am Dienstag, 17. August 2004 14:26 schrieb Fabien COELHO:
> > The patch adds missing the "libpgport.a" file to the installation under
> > "install-all-headers". It is needed by some contribs. I install the
> > library in "pkglibdir", but I was
t, either,
> but regproc can't do anything about that. Cast to regprocedure if you
> want to see a more helpful display of the function.
Much better indeed.
Thanks a lot for the light. Have a nice day.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast
alog.sum
pg_catalog.max
pg_catalog.min
...
However psql \da show all of them in pg_catalog, as expected.
I cannot see the difference in the initialization script to explain that.
Maybe something wrong with the regproc type?
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of b
> > "ALTER SCHEMA foo OWNER TO bla" if you're a super user.
>
> And using 8.0... I saw that but was looking for a 7.4 solution...
Maybe: UPDATE pg_namespace SET nspowner= WHERE nspname='foo';
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
7;;
Hope this help, have a nice day,
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
> was just looking at this this morning. is there anyway to change
> ownership of a schema? i couldn't find one and thought i'd ask before
> whacking on the system tables.
"ALTER SCHEMA foo OWNER TO bla" if you're a super user.
--
Fabien Co
offer tablespace size as well.
Ok. I must admit that I did not pay attention to the unapplied patches
queue.
Thanks,
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
I wanted to report a bug, but could not:
http://www.postgresql.org/bugform.html ("Report a bug" link from
postgresql main page) leads to:
"Not Found, The requested URL /bugform.php was not found on this server."
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
*** [dbsize.o] Error 1
It seems that GetDatabasePath was updated, but not all its callers were
fixed.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ith tricky cases. The
formula may be simplified, but all these cases must pass. Please keep
them.
Have a nice day,
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]*** ./src/backend/utils/adt/timestamp.c.origFri Jun 4 15:50:58 2004
--- ./src/backend/utils/adt/time
nexistent users during time vacuum?
Although that could be done, I'm not sure I would like such a thing
to happen.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if
grand "TODO" item;-)
IMHO, this should be a prerequisite to adding "roles".
Hace a nice day,
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
s wrong with
wishing better/full testing of postgresql data access controls and compare
the results with what is defined by the norm?
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
uld be kept:
- validate grant/revoke (error, warning, success0 wrt sql standard
I may be interested in implementing ROLEs someday, and such tests would be
welcome just to check that nothing is broken.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)
nce would be a big trouble, because create user
are not issued that often, and I would not expect them to appear within a
large transaction.
Anyway I'm planing to hace a look at the real thing first (shared seq).
So no worry, and thanks for your question.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
t_sysid" user/group could store the next value in the relevant shared
relations.
This approach would be light weight from the implementation point of view.
Not very clean, but that would be easy and would not change much the
catalog.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
esysid FROM pg_user;
...
nobody | 2147483647
bla | -2147483648
Warf!
I think that what is practical is to iterate through the sequence if some
user already exists. Collisions are unlikely, so it would not be
expensive.
So the only problem is to implement system-wide "cluster&qu
thing like select relname from pg_class where relacl similar to
'[0-9]+=' would be sufficient.
Yep. Not with this very regexpr (think of user "tp01"), but something
like that could work, indeed.
--
Fabien COELHO _ http://www.cri.ensmp.fr/~coelho _ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CRI-EN
be
referenced before posting a bug-report. Any hints?
simply follow "bug reporting guidelines" on http://www.postgresql.org/ ?
--
Fabien COELHO _ http://www.cri.ensmp.fr/~coelho _ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CRI-ENSMP, 35, rue Saint-Honoré, 77305 Fontainebleau cedex, France
phone: (+33|
ss ?).
Well, keeping this noise does not look attractive.
So I think that the sequence would be better, if possible.
Same for groups, BTW.
Have a nice day,
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
s a summary, it is pretty subtle, especially as the standard
wording is contrived, and postgres does not do what should be done in a
lot of cases. There are also actual "security" bugs.
For the TODO, I would suggest something general:
- fix grant/revoke wrt SQL standard, val
nition of an "identified" privilege (see my previous mail), I
finally think that the specs is ok and it just need to be implemented.
The bizarre would be more in the way that things are explained in the spec
than what is specified.
Have a nice day,
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
r to reinstall if
s?he forgot it...
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
ompliance for
> privileges otherwise ...
I think that if pg really sticks to the spec as I finally understand it
with your help, it would not be bad. I mean with both error (empty set in
grant or revoke) and warnings (non grantable parts for grant, non granted
parts for revoke).
T
ue about it on -hackers.
Ok. Thanks.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e access
rules directly, so the general rules would apply on an empty set.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
d is missing in my version of the standard,
because otherwise I cannot really extract a semantics from access rule 1
case a in 12.7. Case b is much more explicit in my version for , you need a "WITH ADMIN OPTION".
If my guess is correct and that an access rule is violated, then this
not Peter, but I have an answer anyway: the standard says it should be
narrowed.
ISO/IEC 9075-2:2003 (E)
12.3
...
Syntax Rules
1) ALL PRIVILEGES is equivalent to the specification of all of the
privileges on for which the has grantable
privilege descriptors.
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
`/tmp/': Operation not permitted
If you want to call that a "feature", I disagree without further strong
argument, and anyway the documentation should be clear about that.
Have a nice day,
--
Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
47 matches
Mail list logo
