"August Zajonc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> One possible pooling model is to have a bunch of worker connections opened
> to the pgsql instance. Then as sql statements arrive the they are routed
> through an available connection that is open but not doing any work. So 100
> inbound connection ma
> Well, it'd keep user-space wraparound from affecting the system tables,
> but given that the system tables have adequate defenses already (ie,
> unique indexes) I'm not sure that there's any point. It'd not improve
> the picture for user-table OID uniqueness by any measurable degree.
But from
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
[snip]
> > > >
> > > > Yes TID is available and I introduced Tid Scan in order
> > > > to support this kind of implementation. However there
> > > > are some notices.
> > > > 1) Is *FOR UPDATE* cursor allowed in PL/pgSQL ?
> > > >(It doesn't seem easy for me).
> > >
Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > > Anyhow, I see that there is a move afoot to eliminate mandatory OIDs.
> > > > > My question now is: if there is no OID, is there any comparable way to
> > > > > implement CURRENT OF cursor? B
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Anyhow, I see that there is a move afoot to eliminate mandatory OIDs.
> > > > My question now is: if there is no OID, is there any comparable way to
> > > > implement
Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Anyhow, I see that there is a move afoot to eliminate mandatory OIDs.
> > > My question now is: if there is no OID, is there any comparable way to
> > > implement CURRENT OF cursor? Basically what is
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Anyhow, I see that there is a move afoot to eliminate mandatory OIDs.
> > My question now is: if there is no OID, is there any comparable way to
> > implement CURRENT OF cursor? Basically what is needed is some way to
> > identi
Most pooling is in essense a form of multiplexing. For transactions this can
be a bad thing.
10 connections -> pooler -> 2 worker connections
Incoming connection #1 (I1) issues BEGIN WORK
I1 statement passed to outgoing #1 -> O1
I2 and I3 statements flow through to -> O2
I4 statement UPDATE Row
> Curious if anyone has done any work on client side connection pooling
> recently? I'm thinking pooling multiplexed against transaction
> commits?
I did some work on an abstracted DB API (supports PostgreSQL, Oracle and
MySQL natively), with pooling and auto reconnect which I'd be happy to send
hello all
Anyone knows a way to get the machine that execute the query?
thanks ...
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Fernando Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The wire protocol will always handle the (tableoid) long form,
>
> I think you are handwaving away what is precisely the most painful
> aspect. To allow 64-bit type OIDs in the wire protocol, we must
> (a) have a protocol versi
Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't think my patch against recent sources would apply cleanly to
> older ones, and I didn't run the regression against it, but it seemed
> to work, and is only a two line change in current source.
This patch needs more work. You are assuming that
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I don't think my patch against recent sources would apply cleanly to
> > older ones, and I didn't run the regression against it, but it seemed
> > to work, and is only a two line change in current source.
>
> Th
Hi,
please apply patch to current CVS which implements:
1. null-safe interface to GiST
(as proposed in http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=1028327)
2. support for 'pass-by-value' arguments - to test this
we used special opclass for int4 with values in range [0-2^15]
More testi
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Giles Lean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Implementations of strxfrm() that I've looked at have had result data
> > that is three or four times larger than then input string -- quite a
> > penalty in some situations.
>
> Especially so given that we don't hav
Connection pooling can be done two places. Server side or client side,
though client side in reality may be a middle-tier layer, not an actual
application.
One possible pooling model is to have a bunch of worker connections opened
to the pgsql instance. Then as sql statements arrive the they are
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Oleg Bartunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If we decide to release 7.1.3 I'd like to see our patch for
> > contrib/intarray too.
>
> Which one?
Patch I've submitted last week. It's in current CVS
http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=1028099
om,
Dave Cramer writes:
> Apparently bigint is not really 8 bytes???
It's sort of 7.999 bytes.
> test=# update testbigint set fp0 = -9223372036854775808 where id = 1;
> ERROR: int8 value out of range: "-9223372036854775808"
This is a bug in the int8 value parser. While it reads the string it
alw
At 11:22 AM -0400 8/7/01, Tom Lane wrote:
>Neil Tiffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I have not even considered multiple database servers running
>> different database, which is our design goal. In this case we would
>> like to have a slimmed down (and blazingly fast) PostgreSQL server in
>>
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Dave Cramer wrote:
> This came into the jdbc list
>
> Apparently bigint is not really 8 bytes???
>
> I test this out with psql
>
> test=# create table testbigint (id serial, fp0 int8);
> NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit sequence 'testbigint_id_seq'
> for SERIAL c
If we decide to release 7.1.3 I'd like to see our patch for
contrib/intarray too.
Oleg
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > (moved to a non-high-speed neighboorhood *sigh*) ...
>
> Ugh :-(
>
> > Tom, can you resend that list of changes
Meszaros Attila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Accidentally I've ran out of disk space during intensive database write
> operations. At the begining the backend went to recovery mode a few times,
> and continued the work, but finally it has terribly died
> ( Segfault at backend/utils/mmgr/mc
This came into the jdbc list
Apparently bigint is not really 8 bytes???
I test this out with psql
test=# create table testbigint (id serial, fp0 int8);
NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit sequence 'testbigint_id_seq'
for SERIAL column 'testbigint.id'
NOTICE: CREATE TABLE/UNIQUE will cre
Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anyhow, I see that there is a move afoot to eliminate mandatory OIDs.
> My question now is: if there is no OID, is there any comparable way to
> implement CURRENT OF cursor? Basically what is needed is some way to
> identify a particular row between
"August Zajonc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Curious if anyone has done any work on client side connection pooling
> recently? I'm thinking pooling multiplexed against transaction commits?
^^^
What does this phrase mean exactl
Curious if anyone has done any work on client side connection pooling
recently? I'm thinking pooling multiplexed against transaction commits?
AZ
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://www.postgresql.org/sear
config.guess now supports OpenUNIX 8, AIX 5, HPUX on IA64, and Linux on
PPC64. Enjoy.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an a
"Oliver Elphick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This change has only been made in the unstable release; so I don't mind
> if peer and ident are folded together. Anyone running unstable knows
> the world may turn upside down beneath him!
> So if you have a patch to do that, go ahead.
Sounds great
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is a very interesting idea. Have two oid counters, one for system
> tables and another for user tables. It isolates problems with oid
> wraparound caused by large user tables.
Well, it'd keep user-space wraparound from affecting the system tables
Hi,
Accidentally I've ran out of disk space during intensive database write
operations. At the begining the backend went to recovery mode a few times,
and continued the work, but finally it has terribly died
( Segfault at backend/utils/mmgr/mcxt.c 222 )
After this event, the recovery ha
Oracle PL/SQL supports a very convenient feature in which you can say
something like
DECLARE
CURSUR cur IS SELECT * FROM RECORD;
BEGIN
OPEN cur;
UPDATE record SET field = value WHERE CURRENT OF cur;
CLOSE cur;
END
We have cursors in the development version of PL/pgSQL, but t
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I guess that the change of OID from 4 to 8 bytes could be carried out
> > as a compile time option ?
>
> Not unless you like the notion that the wire protocol depends on a
> compile time option.
That could be a separate option, p
> "Oliver Elphick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This change has only been made in the unstable release; so I don't mind
> > if peer and ident are folded together. Anyone running unstable knows
> > the world may turn upside down beneath him!
>
> > So if you have a patch to do that, go ahead.
>
Fernando Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The wire protocol will always handle the (tableoid) long form,
I think you are handwaving away what is precisely the most painful
aspect. To allow 64-bit type OIDs in the wire protocol, we must
(a) have a protocol version jump, and (b) force all serv
> > Based on the discussion so far, here is an attempt to flesh out the
> > details of what to do with OIDs for 7.2:
> >
> > 1. Add an optional clause "WITH OIDS" or "WITHOUT OIDS" to CREATE TABLE.
> > The default behavior will be WITH OIDS.
>
> What about having an additional Oid generator whic
Tom,
If we have WITH NOOID, why not having a WITH OID32 and WITH OID64 (or
something of a sort)
as well (being OID32 the default and OID an alias to it)?
The last would not be available on some systems
(who will use a system that does not support long long as a database
server anyway?)
The wi
Neil Tiffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have not even considered multiple database servers running
> different database, which is our design goal. In this case we would
> like to have a slimmed down (and blazingly fast) PostgreSQL server in
> which we manage the uid in our middleware. Thi
At 10:09 AM +0500 8/7/01, Hannu Krosing wrote:
>Neil Tiffin wrote:
>>
>> I would just like to comment that for our project, GNU Enterprise, we
>> use our own 128 bit object ID that is unique (UUID) for every row in
>> all tables.
>>
>> It seems to me, without having looked into it, that having
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I'm not worried about the size of the return type of
> > a sequence, but I like the idea of Oracle-compatible
> > "seq.nextval" syntax.
>
> I didn't realize we had any Oracle-compatibility issues here. What
> exactly does Oracle's sequence facility look li
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (moved to a non-high-speed neighboorhood *sigh*) ...
Ugh :-(
> Tom, can you resend that list of changes you sent to me earlier?
Attached is the updated list. Note there are a couple of changes listed
that aren't actually in REL7_1_STABLE yet, bu
I'm missing an email here somewhere, and apologize ... I'm just getting my
mailboxes back in order now after moving to a dial-up link vs high speed
(moved to a non-high-speed neighboorhood *sigh*) ...
Tom, can you resend that list of changes you sent to me earlier?
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Justin Cl
Matthew Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not worried about the size of the return type of
> a sequence, but I like the idea of Oracle-compatible
> "seq.nextval" syntax.
I didn't realize we had any Oracle-compatibility issues here. What
exactly does Oracle's sequence facility look like?
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Will it be easier to make Relation shared and persistent or creating
> a new shared structure that has just a counter+lock for each
> relation oid ?
The latter. Relation (by which I mean a whole relcache entry with all
its subsidiary structure, not o
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I guess that the change of OID from 4 to 8 bytes could be carried out
> as a compile time option ?
Not unless you like the notion that the wire protocol depends on a
compile time option.
regards, tom lane
--
Karel Zak writes:
> Yes, you are right. But "make install prefix=..." can be used for
> package building if you want install all to some temp directory and
> compress it.
In that case it's much better to use "make install DESTDIR=...".
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://funkturm
> Based on the discussion so far, here is an attempt to flesh out the
> details of what to do with OIDs for 7.2:
>
> 1. Add an optional clause "WITH OIDS" or "WITHOUT OIDS" to CREATE TABLE.
> The default behavior will be WITH OIDS.
What about having an additional Oid generator which solely serve
Neil Tiffin wrote:
>
> I would just like to comment that for our project, GNU Enterprise, we
> use our own 128 bit object ID that is unique (UUID) for every row in
> all tables.
>
> It seems to me, without having looked into it, that having both a
> PostgreSQL UID and our own 128 bit objectid (
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> * How should one invoke nextval() and friends on such a sequence?
> Perhaps we could allow people to write nextval(sequencename) and/or
> sequencename.nextval, which would expose the sequence object to the
> parser so that datatype overloading could occur.
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Am I being overly simplistic?
>
> Yes. For one thing, Relation structs are *not* shared, nor even
> persistent (the relcache will happily discard them).
Will it be easier to make Relation shared and persistent or creating
a new shared s
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> If OID remains at 4 bytes then this still isn't very satisfactory for
> tables that are likely to have more than 4 billion INSERTs in their
> lifetime. However, rather than imposing the cost of 8-byte OIDs
> everywhere, I'd be inclined to say that people who need unique
> iden
50 matches
Mail list logo
