- Original Message -
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "John Huttley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, 23 November 2000 19:05
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Please advise features in 7.1
> "John Huttley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Reason: I want to know if
- Original Message -
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "John Huttley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, 23 November 2000 19:05
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Please advise features in 7.1
> "John Huttley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Reason: I want to know if
* Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001122 22:44]:
> Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Looking some more, I found some other places that need a space (I
> > suspect...), so here is an updated patch.
>
> This seems like the wrong way to go about it, because anytime anyone
> changes any el
"John Huttley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Reason: I want to know if any of these features are scheduled.
> 1. Calculated fields in table definitions . eg.
>Create table test (
> A Integer,
> B integer,
>the_sum As (A+B),
> );
You can do that now (an
Hello,
I've looked at the resources available through the web page to CVS and other
stuff,
however I cant find a statement of whats likely to be in 7.1 and what is planned
for later.
Reason: I want to know if any of these features are scheduled.
1. Calculated fields in table definitions . eg.
At 23:27 22/11/00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> Is there a reason why it doesn't promote float8 to numeric?
>
>Mixing exact and inexact numerics (to use the
>spec's terminology) can hardly be expected to produce an exact result.
I suppose it's a question
Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Looking some more, I found some other places that need a space (I
> suspect...), so here is an updated patch.
This seems like the wrong way to go about it, because anytime anyone
changes any elog output anywhere, we'll risk another failure. If
syslog
Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> select cast(sum(f1) as float8)/sum(f2) from tsc;
> Now in 7.1 this breaks with:
> ERROR: Unable to identify an operator '/' for types 'float8' and 'numeric'
> You will have to retype this query using an explicit cast
> Is there a reason w
There is a minor breakage of existing apps that occurs with current CVS.
In 7.0 doing the following:
create table tsc(f1 int4 , f2 int4);
insert into tsc values(1,4);
select sum(f1)/sum(f2) from tsc;
would actually result in zero, since it worked with integers throughout. As
a resu
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> can someone point me to the C file that handles CREATE
> TABLE so I can see how it's done?
backend/parser/analyze.c has the preprocessing (see
transformCreateStmt). Actual execution starts in
backend/commands/creatinh.c, and there's also im
> Is anybody working on:
>
> alter table add constraint primary key(column,...);
>
> or
>
> alter table add constraint unique(column,...);
>
> or
>
> alter table drop constraint
I'd be more than happy to work on either of the above in the current
implementation, however - I'm not
At 10:21 23/11/00 +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>
>I'm just asking, because I'm still trying to find something small and
>self-contained I can work on!
>
Is anybody working on:
alter table add constraint primary key(column,...);
or
alter table add constraint unique(column,.
After Tom's bug fix, I can now load the data model with no
problem.
Very cool, I'm pumped!
- Don Baccus, Portland OR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net.
Just a quick question regarding the pg_dump program:
I notice that PRIMARY KEY constraints are currently dumped as:
PRIMARY KEY ("field")
Whereas (to be in line with all the other constraints), it should be dumped
as:
CONSTRAINT "name" PRIMARY KEY ("field")
Otherwise, some poor bugger who wen
>
>Fixed - fdstate was not properly setted in fd.c:fileNameOpenFile
>with WAL enabled, sorry.
>
>Philip, please try to reproduce crash.
>
Seems to have fixed the crash for me as well. Thanks.
Philip Warner|
> >> I'm guessing this is a variant of the problem Philip
> >> Warner reported yesterday. Probably WAL-related. Vadim?
>
> > Probably, though I don't understand how WAL is related to
> > execution plans. Ok, it's easy to reproduce - I'll take a look.
>
> Could just be a question of a differe
At 11:34 22/11/00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> full CREATE TABLE with all constraints shown
>
> ALTER TABLE DISABLE CONSTRAINTS
I think you need something more like:
SET ALL CONSTRAINTS DISABLED/OFF
since disabling one tables constraints won't work when we have
subselect-in-check
>
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>
> > > > Problem is that there are 5 difference types of constraints,
> > > implemented in
> > > > 5 different ways. Do you want a unifed, central catalog of
> > > constraints, or
> > > > just for some of them, or what?
> > >
> > > Dunno.
* Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001122 15:25]:
> * Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001122 15:03]:
> > Just playing with the syslog functionality on 7.1devel, and the
> > explain output looks weird to me:
> >
> > Nov 22 14:58:44 lerami pg-test[4005]: [2] DEBUG: MoveOfflineLogs:
> > skip
> I assume you're talking about this DEBUG stuff:
>
> ...
> Creating directory /home/postgres/testversion/data/pg_xlog
> Creating template1 database in /home/postgres/testversion/data/base/1
> DEBUG: starting up
> DEBUG: database system was shut down at 2000-11-22 14:38:01
I had to add Startup
> It would be a pleasure to help with the spanish docs, if any help is needed.
There is a documentation translation effort hosted in Spain, and I'm
sure that they would welcome help to stay current (I believe that a
substantial portion of docs are already done for a recent, but perhaps
not curren
* Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001122 15:03]:
> Just playing with the syslog functionality on 7.1devel, and the
> explain output looks weird to me:
>
> Nov 22 14:58:44 lerami pg-test[4005]: [2] DEBUG: MoveOfflineLogs:
> skip 0006
> Nov 22 14:58:44 lerami pg-test[4005]: [3] DEB
Just playing with the syslog functionality on 7.1devel, and the
explain output looks weird to me:
Nov 22 14:58:44 lerami pg-test[4005]: [2] DEBUG: MoveOfflineLogs:
skip 0006
Nov 22 14:58:44 lerami pg-test[4005]: [3] DEBUG: MoveOfflineLogs:
skip 0005
Nov 22 14:59:09 leram
My feeling is "Let's walk before we run." We need psql \dt to show
primary/foreign keys and SERIAL first.
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Why can't COPY recognize for itself that rebuilding the indexes after
> >> loading data is a better strategy than incremental index update?
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > > Problem is that there are 5 difference types of constraints,
> > implemented in
> > > 5 different ways. Do you want a unifed, central catalog of
> > constraints, or
> > > just for some of them, or what?
> >
> > Dunno. Maybe a unified re
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm also somewhat annoyed that these messages show up during initdb
> now. Anyone know why exactly? I couldn't trace it down.
I assume you're talking about this DEBUG stuff:
...
Creating directory /home/postgres/testversion/data/pg_xlog
Creating t
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, Jan Wieck wrote:
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
> >
> >There's a message on -general about a possible
> > problem in the deferred RI constraints. He was doing a
> > sequence like:
> > begin
> > delete
> > insert
> > end
> > and having it fail even though the deleted key was b
On Wednesday 22 November 2000 02:36, Don Baccus wrote:
>
> >More generally, a lot of the PG documentation could use the attention
> >of a professional copy editor --- and I'm sad to say that the parts
> >contributed by native English speakers aren't necessarily any cleaner
> >than the parts contri
Brian Hirt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a question about the performance of the planner in 7.1. I've been
> testing the 11/21 snapshot of the database just to get an idea of how it
> will work for me when I upgrade from 7.02 I've noticed that some queries
> are taking much longer and I
"Mikheev, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'm guessing this is a variant of the problem Philip Warner reported
>> yesterday. Probably WAL-related. Vadim?
> Probably, though I don't understand how WAL is related to execution plans.
> Ok, it's easy to reproduce - I'll take a look.
Could ju
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > #3 0x8149b98 in ExceptionalCondition (
> > conditionName=0x81988a0 "!(((file) > 0 && (file) <
> (int) SizeVfdCache
> > && VfdCache[file].fileName != ((void *)0)))", exceptionP=0x81b93c8,
> > detail=0x0,
> > fileName=0x8198787 "fd.c", lin
Hi,
I have a question about the performance of the planner in 7.1. I've been
testing the 11/21 snapshot of the database just to get an idea of how it
will work for me when I upgrade from 7.02 I've noticed that some queries
are taking much longer and I've narrowed it down (i think) to the plan
Hello,
I posted this message on pgsql-general, but didn't get a lot of feedback. I am
running into problems using PL/Perl on Solaris 2.5.1.
I have PostgreSQL v7.0.2, Perl v 5.005_03 (built as a shared library), and am
using gcc v2.7.2.2 to compile all of the source.
I include the paths to libpe
Hi,
I'd like make some changes on the 7.1 (to be) libpgtcl.
1. Make the large object access null-byte safe, when
libpgtcl is compiled against a 8.0 or higher version of
Tcl.
This would cause that a libpgtcl.so built on a system
with Tcl 8.0
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> #3 0x8149b98 in ExceptionalCondition (
> conditionName=0x81988a0 "!(((file) > 0 && (file) < (int) SizeVfdCache
> && VfdCache[file].fileName != ((void *)0)))", exceptionP=0x81b93c8,
> detail=0x0,
> fileName=0x8198787 "fd.c", lineNumber=851) at
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Why can't COPY recognize for itself that rebuilding the indexes after
>> loading data is a better strategy than incremental index update?
>> (The simplest implementation would restrict this to happen only if the
>> table is empty when COPY starts, which
I ran the src/test/regressplans.sh script, which runs the regression tests
under exclusion of various join and scan types. Without merge joins (-fm)
I get an assertion failure in opr_sanity.
The query is:
SELECT p1.oid, p1.aggname
FROM pg_aggregate as p1
WHERE p1.aggfinalfn = 0 AND p1.agg
> The answer to that of course is that cross-table constraints (like
> REFERENCES clauses) must be disabled while loading the data, or the
> intermediate states where only some tables have been loaded are likely
> to fail. So we do need some kind of DISABLE CONSTRAINT mode to make
> this work. B
I said:
> But it seems to me that it'd be really whizzy if there were two
> different styles of output, one for a full dump (CREATE, load data,
> add constraints) and one for schema-only dumps that tries to reproduce
> the original table declaration with embedded constraint specs. That
> would be
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> Jan Wieck writes:
>
> > Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > >
> > >There's a message on -general about a possible
> > > problem in the deferred RI constraints. He was doing a
> > > sequence like:
> > > begin
> > > delete
> > > insert
> > > end
> > > and having it fail eve
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a good reason not to use UNIQUE. As I remember, pg_dump creates
> the tables, copies in the data, then creates the indexes. This is much
> faster than doing the copy with the indexes already created.
Right, that's the real implementation reason
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> More generally, a lot of the PG documentation could use the attention
> of a professional copy editor --- and I'm sad to say that the parts
> contributed by native English speakers aren't necessarily any cleaner
> than the parts contributed by those who are not.
The differen
> At 16:33 22/11/00 +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >At 15:50 22/11/00 +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >> >I've been examining the pg_dump source and output, and I've come to the
> >> >conclusion that I can modify it so that UNIQUE constraints
> >> appear as part of
> >> >the CREAT
> I might be interested in helping with it. Whats involved (DocBook, SGML)?
Yup. The PostgreSQL source tree has a docs directory with all of the
sources for the docs. I use emacs for editing, and several other options
are discussed in the appendix on documentation in the doc set.
On Wednesday 22 November 2000 00:54, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I don't know from your post if you thought I was adding
> > to the criticism or not, but I can say with certainty I wasn't.
>
> No, I saw that you understood perfectly, I just wanted to add another
> two cents...
>
> > I'm not denigrating th
At 16:33 22/11/00 +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>At 15:50 22/11/00 +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>> >I've been examining the pg_dump source and output, and I've come to the
>> >conclusion that I can modify it so that UNIQUE constraints
>> appear as part of
>> >the CREATE TABLE stat
At 15:50 22/11/00 +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >I've been examining the pg_dump source and output, and I've come to the
> >conclusion that I can modify it so that UNIQUE constraints
> appear as part of
> >the CREATE TABLE statement, rather than as a separate CREATE INDEX.
> ...
> >Is th
At 15:50 22/11/00 +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>I've been examining the pg_dump source and output, and I've come to the
>conclusion that I can modify it so that UNIQUE constraints appear as part of
>the CREATE TABLE statement, rather than as a separate CREATE INDEX.
...
>Is there any prob
48 matches
Mail list logo
