Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Ang Chin Han
Tilo Schwarz wrote: What about the Python approach: The literal text is enclosed either in a pair of three single quotes or three double quotes. So you can do (e.g. in the python shell) It'll only make plpyhon functions harder to write, if you need to use longstring quoting INSIDE your plpython

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > OK, here is an Opteron/Itanium patch that might work. > > > > [having now read both patches] > > > > Assuming that this covers the issues (what other OSes might run on > > 64-bit machi

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
Manfred Spraul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is the Itanium tas implementation correct? FWIW, this evening I did a few dozen iterations of "make check" parallel regression tests on a 4-way Itanium box at Red Hat's Toronto office, working from CVS-tip sources. No sign of problems. That's not a pr

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Christopher Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Matthew T. O'Connor") writes: > OK, well as we wait on the fix for the stats system, let me submit my > patch for pg_autovacuum. This patch assumes that the stats system will > be fixed so that all inserts, updates and deletes performed on shared > tables reguardless of what da

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Manfred Spraul
Manfred Spraul wrote: Is the Itanium tas implementation correct? I think it should be xchg4.aqv instead of just xchg4 - as far as I know a normal atomic exchange is is not a memory barrier on Itanium. At least the Linux kernel version contains "cmpxchg4.aqv". Sorry for the noise, I'm wrong: Ita

[HACKERS] [ANN] PGSqlClient 1.0 Beta 1 released

2003-09-12 Thread Carlos Guzman Alvarez
Hello: 1st Beta 1 version of PGSqlClient an ADO.NET Data Provider for PostgreSQL 7.4+ released. Beta 1 ( 12-09-2003 ) - - -- -- - * Better fit to ADO.NET. * Simple Transport Layer security ( TLS 1.0 ) implementation It's used yet for both TLS and non-TLS connections but it's not finis

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Manfred Spraul
Bruce Momjian wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: He is uncomfortable with the port/*.h changes at this point, so it seems I am going to have to add Itanium/Opteron tests to most of those files. Why don't you try to put together a proposed patch of that

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Christopher Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Matthew T. O'Connor") writes: > So we would have a problem if commands that effect these tables are done > from lots of different databases. In reality, I don't think these > tables change that much (pg_database, pg_shadow, and pg_group), and most > of commands that do effect t

Re: [HACKERS] plpython

2003-09-12 Thread Tilo Schwarz
James Pye writes: > Type conversion > > plpython's current type conversion implementation appears to be dependent > on strings as the common format. This is fine, but not very extensible as > is, unless you don't mind explicitly parsing strings inside each function > that takes an unsupporte

Re: [HACKERS] Need NetBSD thread tester

2003-09-12 Thread Thomas T. Thai
> Wow, that is strange. Someone else told me NetBSD supports threads, and > doesn't need any special compile flags, but of course, it has to have > pthread.h to support threads. NetBSD 1.6.1 is very current, so it isn't > an old OS. NetBSD-1.6.1 doesn't have native thread. NetBSD-current has i

Re: [HACKERS] Need NetBSD thread tester

2003-09-12 Thread Larry Rosenman
--On Friday, September 12, 2003 13:30:38 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Larry Rosenman wrote: > Wow, that is strange. Someone else told me NetBSD supports threads, > and doesn't need any special compile flags, but of course, it has to > have pthread.h to support threads. NetBS

Re: [HACKERS] Need NetBSD thread tester

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Larry Rosenman wrote: > > Wow, that is strange. Someone else told me NetBSD supports threads, and > > doesn't need any special compile flags, but of course, it has to have > > pthread.h to support threads. NetBSD 1.6.1 is very current, so it isn't > > an old OS. > > > > Can you compile if you rem

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
On Fri, 2003-09-12 at 13:06, Tom Lane wrote: > > I can hardwire in something to hedge this off like setting the threshold > > for shared tables much much lower than normal thresholds. I could also > > do something more complicated and try to aggregate all the activity seen > > by all the databases

Re: [HACKERS] Need NetBSD thread tester

2003-09-12 Thread Larry Rosenman
--On Friday, September 12, 2003 13:03:33 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Larry Rosenman wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. --On Friday, September 12, 2003 12:18:52 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I need someone running NetBSD to read the top of > src/tool

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Matthew T. O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So we would have a problem if commands that effect these tables are done > from lots of different databases. In reality, I don't think these > tables change that much (pg_database, pg_shadow, and pg_group), and most > of commands that do effect t

Re: [HACKERS] Need NetBSD thread tester

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Larry Rosenman wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. > > > --On Friday, September 12, 2003 12:18:52 -0400 Bruce Momjian > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I need someone running NetBSD to read the top of > > src/tools/test_thread_funcs.c and compile and run that function and > > report the

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
On Fri, 2003-09-12 at 12:46, Tom Lane wrote: > How will it act with shared tables if the stats system isn't fixed? > We may decide that tracking shared tables correctly will have to wait > for 7.5. The behavior in the patch will vacuum a shared table only from template1, and only analyze from all

Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Sean Chittenden
> > ... then @autoconf me harder@ could be used as the start and > > ending token, > > Hm, I should have read your message more carefully --- I missed the > bit at the middle where you propose nearly the same idea I had ;-). > But the flex patterns you wrote don't actually support this do they? T

Re: [HACKERS] Need NetBSD thread tester

2003-09-12 Thread Larry Rosenman
--On Friday, September 12, 2003 12:18:52 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I need someone running NetBSD to read the top of src/tools/test_thread_funcs.c and compile and run that function and report the results. I have access to one NetBSD system on an Alpha: $ uname -a NetBSD mil

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Matthew T. O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Even if this the stats system isn't fixed, this patch still is much > better about monitoring system tables that aren't shared, so it's an > improvement no matter what. How will it act with shared tables if the stats system isn't fixed? We may de

Re: [HACKERS] __cpu__ defines

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > As part of my spinlock testing, I noticed that we test for __cpu__ when > > using gcc, and __cpu when not using gcc. However, I see that my i386 > > gcc 2.95 defines both (shown using src/tools/ccsym): > > gcc only documents the __foo__ versi

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
On Fri, 2003-09-12 at 09:35, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: > > I made a patch to fix this, but in testing it I noticed that the stats > > system doesn't work on shared tables as I was expecting it too (as my > > latest patch requires it too :-). It treats instances of shared tab

Re: [HACKERS] __cpu__ defines

2003-09-12 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian writes: > As part of my spinlock testing, I noticed that we test for __cpu__ when > using gcc, and __cpu when not using gcc. However, I see that my i386 > gcc 2.95 defines both (shown using src/tools/ccsym): gcc only documents the __foo__ version, so there is a small reason to lean

[HACKERS] Need NetBSD thread tester

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
I need someone running NetBSD to read the top of src/tools/test_thread_funcs.c and compile and run that function and report the results. Thanks. --- Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > FreeBSD 4.8/i386: > > Your gethostbyname

Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit pgsql

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
You should find that the next daily snapshot and beta3 will properly detect Opteron/Itanium on your platform. I don't think we can help you with the compiler bugs, however. ;-) --- Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote: > -On [2003

Re: [HACKERS] Vote: Adding flex/bison derived files in WIN32_DEV

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > >Because MinGW/Msys doesn't come with flex/bison by default, I have added > >those derived files to the WIN32_DEV branch in CVS. It makes it easier > >for people to install _just_ MinGW and compile PostgreSQL on Win32. The > >branch will live for

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > OK, here is an Opteron/Itanium patch that might work. [having now read both patches] Assuming that this covers the issues (what other OSes might run on 64-bit machines within 7.4's lifespan?) I think there is little question that this is the more conser

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > OK, here is an Opteron/Itanium patch that might work. > > [having now read both patches] > > Assuming that this covers the issues (what other OSes might run on > 64-bit machines within 7.4's lifespan?) I think there is little questio

Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I'd like to see pg_dump use this mechanism for quoting, at least for function bodies. I guess it could retrieve the text and then keep generating delimiters until it found one that didn't occur inside the text. Right, that was w

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Does this say that Darwin on something other than PPC doesn't have > > spinlocks? Is that going to hit a spinlock define, or fall through? > > It says that darwin.h is broken, and always has been, for non-PPC > builds. Since there i

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Does this say that Darwin on something other than PPC doesn't have > spinlocks? Is that going to hit a spinlock define, or fall through? It says that darwin.h is broken, and always has been, for non-PPC builds. Since there is no non-PPC Darwin (afaik),

Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I'd like to see pg_dump use this mechanism for quoting, at least for > > function bodies. I guess it could retrieve the text and then keep > > generating delimiters until it found one that didn't occur inside the > > text. > > Rig

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > He is uncomfortable with the port/*.h changes at this point, so it seems > > I am going to have to add Itanium/Opteron tests to most of those files. > > Why don't you try to put together a proposed patch of that kind, and > then we ca

Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'd like to see pg_dump use this mechanism for quoting, at least for > function bodies. I guess it could retrieve the text and then keep > generating delimiters until it found one that didn't occur inside the > text. Right, that was what I had in min

Re: [HACKERS] __cpu__ defines

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > As part of my spinlock testing, I noticed that we test for __cpu__ when > > using gcc, and __cpu when not using gcc. > > ... > > So, I wonder if we should be testing _just_ for __cpu, perhaps starting > > in 7.5. > > I might be all we

Re: [HACKERS] __cpu__ defines

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As part of my spinlock testing, I noticed that we test for __cpu__ when > using gcc, and __cpu when not using gcc. > ... > So, I wonder if we should be testing _just_ for __cpu, perhaps starting > in 7.5. I might be all wet on this, but I had the idea th

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > He is uncomfortable with the port/*.h changes at this point, so it seems > I am going to have to add Itanium/Opteron tests to most of those files. Why don't you try to put together a proposed patch of that kind, and then we can look to see how big and ug

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > 'K, now, I know we acquire all our shared_buffers on startup now ... do we > > do the same with semaphores? > > Yes. > > > If we do acquire at the start, would it not be trivial to add a message to > > the startup messages, base

Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...

2003-09-12 Thread Alessio Bragadini
Hi, after Beta1 I'd reported problems in the regression tests under Digital Unix/Tru64. Unfortunately I had no time to report about my tests and to check Beta2 before now. Beta2 builds fine on Digital Unix 4.0G: template1=# SELECT version(); version -

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 native port

2003-09-12 Thread Jason Tishler
On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 08:57:16AM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote: > Here: http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/ are ports of several unix > utility programs (including bison and flex) for win32. From my > experiences compiling the Peer Direct port, this is the easiest way to > get started. OK, I'll thro

Re: [HACKERS] __cpu__ defines

2003-09-12 Thread Larry Rosenman
--On Friday, September 12, 2003 09:53:10 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: As part of my spinlock testing, I noticed that we test for __cpu__ when using gcc, and __cpu when not using gcc. However, I see that my i386 gcc 2.95 defines both (shown using src/tools/ccsym): __GN

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 'K, now, I know we acquire all our shared_buffers on startup now ... do we > do the same with semaphores? Yes. > If we do acquire at the start, would it not be trivial to add a message to > the startup messages, based on #_of_semaphores != max_conn

Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: After sleeping on it, I do think that tying the mechanism to newlines is just unnecessary complication. I'm currently leaning to an idea that was suggested yesterday by (I think) Andreas: let the quote start marker be a token of the form dollarsign zero-or-more-letters dol

Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ... then @autoconf me harder@ could be used as the start and ending > token, Hm, I should have read your message more carefully --- I missed the bit at the middle where you propose nearly the same idea I had ;-). But the flex patterns you wrote don't

Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Jon Jensen
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > I'm currently leaning to an idea that was suggested yesterday by (I > think) Andreas: let the quote start marker be a token of the form > dollarsign zero-or-more-letters dollarsign > and let the quote body extend to the next occurrence of the identical

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > > > "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> If we force people to give a --without-spinlocks config option to build > > >> that way, then `pg_config --configure' will reveal the dirty deed ... > > > > > That's not

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> If we force people to give a --without-spinlocks config option to build > >> that way, then `pg_config --configure' will reveal the dirty deed ... > > > That's not quite what I meant :) Right now, if I un

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Prompted by confusion over Itanium/Opterion, I have written a patch to > improve the way we define spinlocks for platforms and cpu's. It > basically decouples the OS from the CPU spinlock code. In almost all > cases, the spinlock code cares only about the compiler and CPU,

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Jan Wieck
Tom Lane wrote: "Matthew T. O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I made a patch to fix this, but in testing it I noticed that the stats system doesn't work on shared tables as I was expecting it too (as my latest patch requires it too :-). It treats instances of shared tables in separate databas

[HACKERS] __cpu__ defines

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
As part of my spinlock testing, I noticed that we test for __cpu__ when using gcc, and __cpu when not using gcc. However, I see that my i386 gcc 2.95 defines both (shown using src/tools/ccsym): __GNUC__=2 __GNUC_MINOR__=95 unix __i386__ i386 __bsdi_

Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Note that there is no particular need to insist on any nearby newlines. >> If the construct is written just following an identifier or keyword, >> then you do need some intervening whitespace to keep the $Q$ from being >> read as part o

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> If we force people to give a --without-spinlocks config option to build >> that way, then `pg_config --configure' will reveal the dirty deed ... > That's not quite what I meant :) Right now, if I understood what Bruce > was saying, if someone does

Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Note that there is no particular need to insist on any nearby newlines. > If the construct is written just following an identifier or keyword, > then you do need some intervening whitespace to keep the $Q$ from being > read as part of that identifier, but I doubt this will bother

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
"Matthew T. O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I made a patch to fix this, but in testing it I noticed that the stats > system doesn't work on shared tables as I was expecting it too (as my > latest patch requires it too :-). It treats instances of shared tables > in separate databases as tota

Re: [HACKERS] massive quotes?

2003-09-12 Thread Tom Lane
Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Using $$[.*]\n as a lexical token is a quasi-problematic as the anchor > is the newline, something that SQL has been free of for as long as I'm > aware of. By using a static lexical token, such as @@, newline's > aren't important, thus reducing the num

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > > > "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> Right, though I am not sure people will know _slow_ configuration vs. > > >> PostgreSQL is slow. > > > > > No, but definitely something for those discussion performance

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: > On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 18:25, Tom Lane wrote: > > "Matthew T. O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > hrm OK. Patch forthcoming > > > > BTW, I am not sure it is a good idea to suppress "redundant" vacuuming > > of shared tables in the first place. The trou

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 native port

2003-09-12 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
> > Below is the email that prompted me to add the derived files to > > WIN32_DEV CVS. > > > However, most people don't want them in there, so I have removed them, > > and updated the web page to recommend the nightly snapshots (which have > > the derived files), and mentioned the tools that will

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

2003-09-12 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Right, though I am not sure people will know _slow_ configuration vs. > >> PostgreSQL is slow. > > > No, but definitely something for those discussion performance to add > > to their checklist :) > > > BTW

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 native port

2003-09-12 Thread Merlin Moncure
-Original Message- From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 10:11 PM To: Steve Novick Cc: PostgreSQL-development; PostgreSQL Win32 port list Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Win32 native port > Below is the email that prompted me to add the derived files to

Re: [HACKERS] Trouble with error message encoding

2003-09-12 Thread Darko Prenosil
On Thursday 11 September 2003 20:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Darko Prenosil writes: > > Here is the idea: there is problem to find out in which encoding is using > > mo file, but we can force gettext to serve known encoding for example > > utf8. After that we can always convert from unicode to cl

Re: [HACKERS] Another small bug (pg_autovacuum)

2003-09-12 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 18:25, Tom Lane wrote: > "Matthew T. O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > hrm OK. Patch forthcoming > > BTW, I am not sure it is a good idea to suppress "redundant" vacuuming > of shared tables in the first place. The trouble with doing so is that > if you only