Re: [HACKERS] performance regression, 7.2.3 -> 7.3b5 w/ VIEW

2002-11-12 Thread Mike Mascari
Ross J. Reedstrom wrote: Hey Hackers - I was testing beta5 and found a performance regression involving application of constraints into a VIEW - I've got a view that is fairly expensive, involving a subselet and an aggregate. When the query is rewritten in 7.2.3, the toplevel constraint is used

[HACKERS] performance regression, 7.2.3 -> 7.3b5 w/ VIEW

2002-11-12 Thread Ross J. Reedstrom
Hey Hackers - I was testing beta5 and found a performance regression involving application of constraints into a VIEW - I've got a view that is fairly expensive, involving a subselet and an aggregate. When the query is rewritten in 7.2.3, the toplevel constraint is used to filter before the subse

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump in 7.4

2002-11-12 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
> pg_dump already has rudimentary dependency tracking (one level > deep); each > item can have a list of oid's it depends on. You *could* patch it to add > the types to the table dependencies. > > In the future I'd imagine we'll just dump the OIDs of all first level > dependencies for each object,

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump in 7.4

2002-11-12 Thread Philip Warner
At 01:33 PM 13/11/2002 +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Does this sound like an idea? It does, but in keeping with allowing pg_restore to be quite flexible, I'd like to see the dependency data stored in the dump file, then processed at restore-time. I've just become rather frustrated tr

[HACKERS] pg_dump in 7.4

2002-11-12 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Hi, Has anyone given much thought to improving pg_dump's object order algorithm for 7.4? It seems that now we have dependencies, it should just be a matter of doing a breadth-first or depth-first search over the pg_depend table to generate a valid order of oids. To allow for mess-ups in that tab

Re: [HACKERS] Prepare enabled pgbench

2002-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thanks. I can commit it for 7.4. BTW, it would be nice if we could > have a switch to turn on/off PREPARE/EXECUTE in pgbench so that we > could see how PRPARE/EXECUTE could improve the performance... That is a *must*. Otherwise, you've simply made an arb

Re: [HACKERS] 500 tpsQL + WAL log implementation

2002-11-12 Thread Justin Clift
Bravo Curtis, This is all excellent research. :-) Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift Curtis Faith wrote: > Disk space is much cheaper than CPU and memory so I think that a logging > system that used as much as three or four times the space but is three or > four times faster would be a wo

Re: [HACKERS] Prepare enabled pgbench

2002-11-12 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> > My concern is PREPARE/EXECUTE may NOT always improve the > > performance. I guess we have very few data to judge PREPARE/EXECUTE is > > good or not. Moreover PREPARE/EXECUTE might be improved in the > > future. If that happens, keeping that switch would help examining the > > effect, no? > > I

Re: [HACKERS] Prepare enabled pgbench

2002-11-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > > But one of the purposes of pgbench is examining performance on > > > different environments, doesn't it? I'm afraid hard coded > > > PREPARE/EXECUTE makes it harder. > > > > I was just thinking that pgbench is for measuring code changes, not for > > testing changes _in_ p

Re: [HACKERS] Prepare enabled pgbench

2002-11-12 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> > But one of the purposes of pgbench is examining performance on > > different environments, doesn't it? I'm afraid hard coded > > PREPARE/EXECUTE makes it harder. > > I was just thinking that pgbench is for measuring code changes, not for > testing changes _in_ pgbench. Once we know the perfor

Re: [HACKERS] Prepare enabled pgbench

2002-11-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > > Thanks. I can commit it for 7.4. BTW, it would be nice if we could > > > have a switch to turn on/off PREPARE/EXECUTE in pgbench so that we > > > could see how PRPARE/EXECUTE could improve the performance... > > > > We could probably just run before-after patch tests to s

Re: [HACKERS] Prepare enabled pgbench

2002-11-12 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> > Thanks. I can commit it for 7.4. BTW, it would be nice if we could > > have a switch to turn on/off PREPARE/EXECUTE in pgbench so that we > > could see how PRPARE/EXECUTE could improve the performance... > > We could probably just run before-after patch tests to see the > performance change.

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE TABLE/AS does not allow WITH OIDS?

2002-11-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > What would be required to have OIDs for all SELECT/INTO product tables > > for this release? > > It *might* work to just reverse the default assumption in > ExecAssignResultTypeFromTL(). But I will vote against making such a > cha

Re: [HACKERS] Prepare enabled pgbench

2002-11-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > Tatsuo, are you or anyone else working on adding PREPARE, EXECUTE support to > > pgbench? > > As far as I know, no one is working on that. > > > If not, I can do it myself and if you are interested, I'll send you the > > patch. > > Thanks. I can commit it for 7.4. BTW, it

Re: [HACKERS] Prepare enabled pgbench

2002-11-12 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> Tatsuo, are you or anyone else working on adding PREPARE, EXECUTE support to > pgbench? As far as I know, no one is working on that. > If not, I can do it myself and if you are interested, I'll send you the > patch. Thanks. I can commit it for 7.4. BTW, it would be nice if we could have a swit

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
"scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ok, now that I've run it that way, the last couple of pages of output > look like this: Hm. So the "while read line" loop is iterating only once. I was thinking to myself that something within the while loop must be eating up stdin, so that there's

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread scott.marlowe
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > "scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > OK, make -x check fails, is there some other way to use -x I'm not > > thinking of here? > > I was thinking of running the script by hand, not via make: > > /bin/sh -x ./pg_regress --temp-install --top-buildd

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
"scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > OK, make -x check fails, is there some other way to use -x I'm not > thinking of here? I was thinking of running the script by hand, not via make: /bin/sh -x ./pg_regress --temp-install --top-builddir=../../.. --schedule=./parallel_schedule --multib

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread scott.marlowe
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > "scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > And then it stops. Anyone know why it doesn't run the rest of the > > regresssion tests? > > Somebody else just reported the same thing on Solaris. Must be > something about the pg_regress script that does

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread scott.marlowe
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > "scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > And then it stops. Anyone know why it doesn't run the rest of the > > regresssion tests? > > Somebody else just reported the same thing on Solaris. Must be > something about the pg_regress script that does

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
"scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > And then it stops. Anyone know why it doesn't run the rest of the > regresssion tests? Somebody else just reported the same thing on Solaris. Must be something about the pg_regress script that doesn't play nicely with Solaris' shell. Can you poke

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread scott.marlowe
On 12 Nov 2002, Robert Treat wrote: > On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 16:27, Tom Lane wrote: > > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > >> Are we ready for RC1 yet? > > > > > Questionable. We don't even have 50% confirmation coverage for the > > > supported platforms

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread scott.marlowe
On 12 Nov 2002, Robert Treat wrote: > On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 16:27, Tom Lane wrote: > > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > >> Are we ready for RC1 yet? > > > > > Questionable. We don't even have 50% confirmation coverage for the > > > supported platforms

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Robert Treat
On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 16:27, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Bruce Momjian writes: > >> Are we ready for RC1 yet? > > > Questionable. We don't even have 50% confirmation coverage for the > > supported platforms yet. > > We can't just wait around indefinitely fo

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bruce Momjian writes: >> Are we ready for RC1 yet? > Questionable. We don't even have 50% confirmation coverage for the > supported platforms yet. We can't just wait around indefinitely for port reports that may or may not ever appear. In any case,

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian writes: > Are we ready for RC1 yet? Questionable. We don't even have 50% confirmation coverage for the supported platforms yet. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Use

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Ok, when #define NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 is removed from aix.h, then the > > results match the Solaris files. > > Great! > > > Attached is a patch to make AIX match Solaris. Please apply and add AIX > > to the supported p

[HACKERS] Collation and case mapping thoughts (long)

2002-11-12 Thread Peter Eisentraut
I have been doing some research about how to create new routines for string collation and character case mapping that would allow us to break out of the one-locale-per-process scheme. I have found that the Unicode standard provides a lot of useful specifications and data for this. The Unicode dat

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ok, when #define NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 is removed from aix.h, then the > results match the Solaris files. Great! > Attached is a patch to make AIX match Solaris. Please apply and add AIX > to the supported platforms. Patch applied to 7.3

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg "problem" ...

2002-11-12 Thread Jakub Ouhrabka
hi, i think that ecpg is only text preprocessor. it doesn't understand the c semantics - it goes from the top to the end of the file row by row and sees your declaration twice. kuba On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > if (ic_flag == 1) { > /*only select those non-

Re: [HACKERS] Idea for better handling of cntxDirty

2002-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Mikheev, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Wouldn't it work for cntxDirty to be set not by LockBuffer, but by >> XLogInsert for each buffer that is included in its argument list? > I thought to add separate call to mark context dirty but above > should work if all callers to XLogInsert always

[HACKERS] Prepare enabled pgbench

2002-11-12 Thread Curtis Faith
Tatsuo, are you or anyone else working on adding PREPARE, EXECUTE support to pgbench? If not, I can do it myself and if you are interested, I'll send you the patch. - Curtis ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http

[HACKERS] ecpg "problem" ...

2002-11-12 Thread Marc G. Fournier
if (ic_flag == 1) { /*only select those non-IC/Spyder nodes that has full update set*/ EXEC SQL DECLARE full_dyn_node CURSOR FOR SELECT node_name FROM NODE WHERE dynamic_community = 'f' AND ic_flag='n' AND machine_type!=22

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
> > I think so. The NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 issue was bothering me, but I > > feel that's resolved now. (It'd be nice to hear a crosscheck from > > some AIX users though...) > > abstime, tinterval and horology fail on AIX. > The rest is now working (AIX 4.3.2 xlc 5.0.0.2). > > I am just now rebu

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Inconsistent or incomplete behavior obverse in where

2002-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Josh Berkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Now, that's interesting. Why would defining a "numeric = float" have > broken "numeric = integer"? There's no reason I can think of. The problem probably is that the parser now finds two possible interpretations that look equally good to it, so it ca

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with 7.3 on Irix with dates before 1970

2002-11-12 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
> I have removed the NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 symbol from irix5.h, > rebuilt 7.3b2, and reran the regression. The three time tests > (tinterval, horology, abstime) now match the Solaris expected files. > I checked the timezone files, and the system does not appear to > have savings time d

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Inconsistent or incomplete behavior obverse in where

2002-11-12 Thread Josh Berkus
Paul, > "Unable to identify an operator '=' for types 'numeric' and 'double > precision' You will have to retype this query using an explicit cast" This is due, as you surmised, to decimal values defaulting to floats. While there is little problem with an = operator for numeric and float, you wo

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > abstime, tinterval and horology fail on AIX.=20 I would expect them now (without NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970) to match the solaris-1947 comparison files for these tests. Could you confirm that? regards, tom lane ---

Re: [HACKERS] 500 tpsQL + WAL log implementation

2002-11-12 Thread scott.marlowe
Curtis, have you considered comparing raw writes versus file system writes on a raw multi-disk partition? I always set up my machines to store data on a mirror set (RAID1) or RAID5 set, and it seems your method should be tested there too. P.s., Tom, the postgresql user would NOT need to run as

Re: RE : [HACKERS] Stability problems

2002-11-12 Thread scott.marlowe
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Nicolas VERGER wrote: > Scott you're right, it was a hardware problem. > Thanks for your help. > Glad to be of help. What was the problem? Bad memory or bad hard drive? Just curious. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have y

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
> > Are we ready for RC1 yet? > > I think so. The NO_MKTIME_BEFORE_1970 issue was bothering me, but I > feel that's resolved now. (It'd be nice to hear a crosscheck from > some AIX users though...) abstime, tinterval and horology fail on AIX. The rest is now working (AIX 4.3.2 xlc 5.0.0.2).

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Marc G. Fournier
'K, looks like we need two things confirmed ... the change that Tom made concerning mktime(), which we need someone on AIX to test ... and the following ... I've been following the commit messages closely, and haven't seen anything go in that make me edgy, so if we can get validation on those two

Re: [HACKERS] 500 tpsQL + WAL log implementation

2002-11-12 Thread Curtis Faith
tom lane wrote: > What can you do *without* using a raw partition? > > I dislike that idea for two reasons: portability and security. The > portability disadvantages are obvious. And in ordinary system setups > Postgres would have to run as root in order to write on a raw partition. > > It occurs

Re: [HACKERS] need a current cvsup file

2002-11-12 Thread Thomas Lockhart
Does any know the location of a good cvsup file for grabbing the various releases? There is none; when the configuration was changed the docs were not. Use the appendix in the current docs (not whatever TODO is) and replace the "pgsql" project name with "repository". Your CVS area will then co

[HACKERS] need a current cvsup file

2002-11-12 Thread GB Clark
Hello, Does any know the location of a good cvsup file for grabbing the various releases? The URL http://developer.postgresql.org/TODO/docs/cvsup.html is 404. Thanks, GB P.S. Thanks to Tom, I found the perl stuff I needed. P.P.S. The URL http://www.ca.postgresql.org/projects/index.html is ju

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> Are we ready for RC1 yet? I'm waiting for jenny wang confirms the fix regarding GB18030 support. In the mean time, I'll commit the fix anyway since current GB183030 support is so badly broken (I have checked all regression tests have passed). -- Tatsuo Ishii ---(end of b

Re: [HACKERS] RC1?

2002-11-12 Thread Vince Vielhaber
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Are we ready for RC1 yet? This is Tuesday, you can only ask on Fridays :) Vince. -- http://www.meanstreamradio.com http://www.unknown-artists.com Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio. ---(e

Re: Geometry regression tests (was Re: [HACKERS] Float output formatting

2002-11-12 Thread Pedro M. Frazao F. Ferreira
Tom Lane wrote: "Pedro M. Ferreira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [ patch for extra_float_digits ] I've applied this patch along with followup changes to pg_dump (it sets extra_float_digits to 2 to allow accurate dump/reload) and the geometry regression test (it sets extra_float_digits to -3).

RE : [HACKERS] Stability problems

2002-11-12 Thread Nicolas VERGER
Scott you're right, it was a hardware problem. Thanks for your help. Nicolas VERGER > -Message d'origine- > De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:pgsql-hackers- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]] De la part de scott.marlowe > Envoyé : mercredi 6 novembre 2002 21:38 > À : Nicolas VERGER > Cc : 'PostgreSQL Hack