Re: [HACKERS] Improving REINDEX for system indexes (long)

2003-09-21 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
Tom Lane wrote: (B> (B> "Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: (B> > I require you to explain me why you committed the change (B> > with no discussion and little investigation. (B> (B> If you want an apology for not having discussed it in advance, I'll (B> gladly offer one. It was po

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

2003-09-21 Thread Tom Lane
Eric Ridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > any ideas here? 7.3.2 and 7.4beta3 compile just fine (I noticed that > 7.4 has something more cross-platform for tas). What happened in 7.3.4 > that broke it? That makes no sense at all --- AFAICT there were *no* darwin or ppc specific changes between 7

Re: [HACKERS] Improving REINDEX for system indexes (long)

2003-09-21 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
Kurt Roeckx wrote: (B> (B> On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 04:56:35AM +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote: (B> > First it should have been discussed before your commitment or at least (B> > it should be discussed after reversing your change. (B> > (B> > I require you to explain me why you committed the chang

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL not ACID compliant?

2003-09-21 Thread Heikki Tuuri
Florian, if you set the transaction isolation level SERIALIZABLE in MySQL/InnoDB, then InnoDB uses next-key locking in every SELECT, and transactions really are serializable in the mathematical sense. I think the same holds for DB2 and MS SQL Server. PostgreSQL and Oracle use a loophole of SQL-19

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 7.4beta3 does not compile on AIX 5 ...

2003-09-21 Thread Hans-Jürgen Schönig
Tom Lane wrote: we have fixed the first problem. here is the next one ... libm seems to be missing although it is installed (I have installed it for running 7.3.4). > It looks like -lm needs to be added to SHLIB_LINK in ecpglib/Makefile. > I had already proposed this patch for SSL-enabled builds:

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

2003-09-21 Thread Eric Ridge
On Sep 21, 2003, at 3:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: BTW, is anyone interested in looking into whether we can be made to build without using either flag? I tried it and saw a number of I did this... before I knew about -no-cpp-precomp. :( I read all about -traditional-cpp in the gcc man page, but cou

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

2003-09-21 Thread Eric Ridge
On Sep 21, 2003, at 3:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Great. I was afraid it might have been new with 10.2. Also, 7.3.4 doesn't link on the OS X 10.3 beta's. Apparently tas is never being defined. I could never fix this. In the list archives I found all sorts of references to tas()/TAS and older ve

Re: [HACKERS] Improving REINDEX for system indexes (long)

2003-09-21 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 04:56:35AM +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote: > First it should have been discussed before your commitment or at least > it should be discussed after reversing your change. > > I require you to explain me why you committed the change > with no discussion and little investigation.

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 7.4beta3 does not compile on AIX 5 ...

2003-09-21 Thread Tom Lane
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I have tried to perform a regression test on AIX 5.1 (PostgreSQL 7.4beta3). > I have encountered an error. Ill-considered combination of #ifdefs apparently. I have applied the attached patch. regards,

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

2003-09-21 Thread Marko Karppinen
Tom: BTW, is anyone interested in looking into whether we can be made to build without using either flag? I tried it and saw a number of failures that looked like they traced to incompatible macro expansion. This wouldn't surprise me if PG were some halfbaked package that only got tested with stoc

Re: [HACKERS] Improving REINDEX for system indexes (long)

2003-09-21 Thread Tom Lane
"Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I require you to explain me why you committed the change > with no discussion and little investigation. If you want an apology for not having discussed it in advance, I'll gladly offer one. It was poorly done. I do, however, think that the reindexing

Re: [HACKERS] Improving REINDEX for system indexes (long)

2003-09-21 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
First it should have been discussed before your commitment or at least it should be discussed after reversing your change. I require you to explain me why you committed the change with no discussion and little investigation. I also noticed that your change for catalog/index.c Revision 1.200

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

2003-09-21 Thread Tom Lane
Marko Karppinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On lauantai, syys 20, 2003, at 23:37 Europe/Helsinki, Tom Lane wrote: >> Is anyone on the list still running OS X 10.1, or anyway still using a >> version of the OS X developer tools older than the Dec 2002 release? > -no-cpp-precomp replaced -traditio

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Can't Build 7.3.4 on OS X

2003-09-21 Thread Marko Karppinen
On lauantai, syys 20, 2003, at 23:37 Europe/Helsinki, Tom Lane wrote: Is anyone on the list still running OS X 10.1, or anyway still using a version of the OS X developer tools older than the Dec 2002 release? It would be good to check if -no-cpp-precomp creates any problems on any release that any

[HACKERS] Improving REINDEX for system indexes (long)

2003-09-21 Thread Tom Lane
I've been looking at the issues involved in reindexing system tables, and I now have what I think is a fairly defensible set of proposals. We should whenever possible use the same reindexing technique used by CLUSTER: assign a new relfilenode number, build the new index in that file, and apply an

Re: [HACKERS] Error message cleanup

2003-09-21 Thread Gaetano Mendola
Peter Eisentraut wrote: "transaction block" vs. "BEGIN/END transaction block" -> Both are used, I think the first one is better. I vote for the second one. Regards Gaetano Mendola ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free spa

[HACKERS] PostgreSQL 7.4beta3 does not compile on AIX 5 ...

2003-09-21 Thread Hans-Jürgen Schönig
I have tried to perform a regression test on AIX 5.1 (PostgreSQL 7.4beta3). I have encountered an error. gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/shopnet/postgresql-7.4beta3/src/interfaces/libpq' gmake[3]: Entering directory `/usr/src/shopnet/postgresql-7.4beta3/src/interfaces/ecpg' gmake -C include

[HACKERS] Error message cleanup

2003-09-21 Thread Peter Eisentraut
I've looked through the messages in the backend and identified some areas that still deserve some cleanup. Below I list some issues that deserve some discussion or that deserve being remembered by other developers. id, oid, pid-> ID, OID, PID attribute -> column tuple

Re: [HACKERS] Killing the backend to cancel a long waiting query

2003-09-21 Thread Dave Page
It's rumoured that Christopher Kings-Lynne once said: >> Wouldn't it be useful, though, to implement a "KILL" or "CANCEL" SQL >> command that takes a backend ID as its argument (and, of course, does >> the appropriate checks of whether you're a superuser or the owner of >> the backend) and sends th

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL not ACID compliant?

2003-09-21 Thread Heikki Tuuri
Tom, - Original Message - From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Heikki Tuuri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 10:32 AM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL not ACID compliant? > "Heikki Tuuri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > if you set the t

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL not ACID compliant?

2003-09-21 Thread Tom Lane
"Heikki Tuuri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > if you set the transaction isolation level SERIALIZABLE in MySQL/InnoDB, > then InnoDB uses next-key locking in every SELECT, and transactions really > are serializable in the mathematical sense. My understanding is that next-key locking only helps when