Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users

2001-06-24 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I got an interesting result. If I compile backend with -g (and without > > -O2), I get no stuck spin lock errors. However, if s_lock.c is > > compiled with -O2 enabled, I got the error again. It seems only > > s_lock.c is related to this phenomenon. >

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] by request: base64 for bytea

2001-06-24 Thread Tom Lane
Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But what should be return type of decrypt()? You'll need more than one name: decrypt to text, decrypt to bytea, etc. Think about what happens when you need to support additional types. Relying on implicit conversions or binary equivalence will not scale.

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] by request: base64 for bytea

2001-06-24 Thread Tom Lane
Alex Pilosov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Function to cast bytea as text, I think, should do proper checking that > input did not contain nulls, and return text data back. That is most definitely not good enough. In MULTIBYTE installations you'd have to also check that there were no illegal mul

Re: [HACKERS] Extracting metadata about attributes from catalog

2001-06-24 Thread Tom Lane
"Bernardo Pons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> In 7.1, "format_type(typeoid, typmod)" is what produces the type >> displays seen in psql. This may or may not be exactly what you want, >> but that's how the knowledge of typmod encoding is exported at the >> moment. > There's 957 functions in psql

Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users

2001-06-24 Thread Tom Lane
Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I got an interesting result. If I compile backend with -g (and without > -O2), I get no stuck spin lock errors. However, if s_lock.c is > compiled with -O2 enabled, I got the error again. It seems only > s_lock.c is related to this phenomenon. That's ver

Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users

2001-06-24 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> > > FATAL: s_lock(0x2ac2d016) at spin.c:158, stuck spinlock. Aborting. > > > > Hmm, that's SpinAcquire, so it's one of the predefined spinlocks > > (and not, say, a buffer spinlock). You could try adding some > > debug logging here, although the output would be voluminous. > > But what would r

Re: [HACKERS] Setuid functions

2001-06-24 Thread Philip Warner
At 13:28 24/06/01 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >If someone wants to implement them, be my guest. I originally needed them >for fixing the RI permission problems, but they couldn't be used for that >after all. > They were part of a larger permissions overhaul that Jan proposed - IIRC, at the