Re: [HACKERS] PITR for replication?

2004-04-05 Thread Christopher Browne
Oops! [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("J. Andrew Rogers") was seen spray-painting on a wall: > I may be completely missing the point here, but it looks to me as > though the PITR archival mechanism is also most of a native > replication facility. Is there anyone reason this couldn't be > extended to replicatio

Re: [HACKERS] Update on PITR

2004-04-05 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Marc G. Fournier") writes: > On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: >> > Is your timeline based on the assumption of doing all the work >> > yourself? If so, how about farming out some of it? I'd be >> > willing to contribute some effort to PITR. (It's been made c

Re: [HACKERS] Function to kill backend

2004-04-05 Thread Rod Taylor
On Fri, 2004-04-02 at 16:52, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Hi! > > When debugging on win32, I've created myself a little function that I > feel should be added to the "backend proper". While it adds a lot of > vlaue on win32, I think it adds quite a bit of value on non-win32 > platforms as well... > >

[HACKERS] just a test

2004-04-05 Thread Marc G. Fournier
ignore it Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unre

Re: [HACKERS] Solaris initdb fails: shmmax tweak alternative?

2004-04-05 Thread Greg Sabino Mullane
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 >> Having to recompile initdb.c is probably not an option. > >initdb is just a shell script in existing releases. Yes, you are right. By sheer habit I typed in cd ~/pgsql/src/bin. > My bet is that they ate all available shmem, leaving none for

[HACKERS] 7.5 beta version

2004-04-05 Thread Dann Corbit
I am having some trouble interfacing the 7.5 server built with MINGW with tools generated using other compilers. I suspect that the issue is one of default structure packing. In the old version we were using, we built PostgreSQL using Intel C++ or MS VC++ and the same for the libpq and other inte

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Hans-Jürgen Schönig
Jeff wrote: On Apr 5, 2004, at 12:35 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: For me, /contrib is for things closely tied to the backend code, like GIST stuff, and for key tools, like conversion programs. something that would be useful (and perhaps may be part of that pgfoundry or whatever its called movement) w

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Fabien COELHO
> say "Silly, thats on gborg!" and they look at me strangely Sure. The "gborg" name does not strike as being related to postgresql. -- Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choos

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Jeff
On Apr 5, 2004, at 12:35 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: For me, /contrib is for things closely tied to the backend code, like GIST stuff, and for key tools, like conversion programs. something that would be useful (and perhaps may be part of that pgfoundry or whatever its called movement) would be makin

Re: [HACKERS] Regression from 7.3 to 7.4

2004-04-05 Thread Tom Lane
Dennis Bjorklund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This testcase works in 7.3 but not in 7.4: > create table t1 (a int); > create table t2 (b int); > select * from t1, (select b as a from t2 group by a) as foo; > ERROR: column "t2.b" must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be used in an > aggregate f

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Fabien COELHO
> > Is it better in /contrib or gborg? > > Gborg imho. I thought we were trying to move all non-core code there > now. Isn't that why psqlodbc etc. were moved? The argument was that it can be devopped and released independently? Features in "contrib/" have a premium over external add-ons. -- F

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Dave Page
It's rumoured that Bruce Momjian once said: > > Is it better in /contrib or gborg? > Gborg imho. I thought we were trying to move all non-core code there now. Isn't that why psqlodbc etc. were moved? Regards, Dave ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3:

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote: > > > > Is it better in /contrib or gborg? > > > > > I have learned (please correct me if I am wrong) that people tend to > look in contrib before they look at gborg. > Also, when people ask for training most of them ask for stuff in > contrib. It is people's mind t

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Hans-Jürgen Schönig
Is it better in /contrib or gborg? I have learned (please correct me if I am wrong) that people tend to look in contrib before they look at gborg. Also, when people ask for training most of them ask for stuff in contrib. It is people's mind that contrib is somehow a source of additional, smal

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >>Nested transactions: I don't think nested transactions will really help > >>to resolve the core problem. Committing a subtransaction will most > >>likely not imply that a

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Bob . Henkel
I would be FOR it if the README states the dangers Bob Henkel 651-738-5085 Mutual Funds I/T Woodbury Hartford Life 500 Bielenberg Drive Woodbury, MN 55125 |-+> | | Hans-Jürgen | | | Schönig | |

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Hans-Jürgen Schönig
Tom Lane wrote: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Nested transactions: I don't think nested transactions will really help to resolve the core problem. Committing a subtransaction will most likely not imply that a parent transaction can be committed as well. A

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Tom Lane
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Nested transactions: I don't think nested transactions will really help > to resolve the core problem. Committing a subtransaction will most > likely not imply that a parent transaction can be committed as well. Agreed. > As

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Hans-Jürgen Schönig
Tom Lane wrote: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: People asked me to put a simple extension for PostgreSQL Open Source. The attached package contains a simple functions whichs tells a remote TCP socket that somebody is about to modify a certain table. Doesn't

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Bob . Henkel
"Doesn't this encourage violation of the basic notion of a transaction? The message will be sent immediately, whether or not the sending transaction actually commits." Any postgresql C coders out there that can help us out with nested transactions? This pretty much comes down to having neste

Re: [HACKERS] Solaris initdb fails: shmmax tweak alternative?

2004-04-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Having to recompile initdb.c is probably not an option. initdb is just a shell script in existing releases. > Sybase and Oracle both installed properly without having to change shmmax. My bet is that they ate all available shmem, leaving none f

Re: [HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Tom Lane
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > People asked me to put a simple extension for PostgreSQL Open Source. > The attached package contains a simple functions whichs tells a remote > TCP socket that somebody is about to modify a certain table. Doesn't this encoura

[HACKERS] Evening in NYC

2004-04-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
SRA America is sponsoring an evening event with me in NYC. If folks want to go, the details are on our web site under "Events". -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Ro

Re: [HACKERS] Function to kill backend

2004-04-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> In this case, SIGINT (query cancel) will not help, because >>> all locks held by the transaction will still be held. >> >> Wrong. > Really? [ experiments... ] My apologies --- you are correct about the present behavior. If a SIGINT arrives wh

Re: [HACKERS] Solaris initdb fails: shmmax tweak alternative?

2004-04-05 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Greg Sabino Mullane said: > > > Having to recompile initdb.c is probably not an option. Which version of PostreSQL are you installing on this production machine? initdb is not a C program in any released version - in 7.4.2 it is a shell script which you could trivially modify. Of course, in the ne

Re: [HACKERS] Solaris initdb fails: shmmax tweak alternative?

2004-04-05 Thread Greg Sabino Mullane
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > [ raises eyebrow... ] So you're installing a test database server on a > production machine? That's not preferred admin practice anywhere that > I know of. If it's really going to be a production server, I won't have > a lot of sympathy for the

[HACKERS] Socket communication for contrib

2004-04-05 Thread Hans-Jürgen Schönig
Community, People asked me to put a simple extension for PostgreSQL Open Source. The attached package contains a simple functions whichs tells a remote TCP socket that somebody is about to modify a certain table. Why would anybody do that? Currently PostgreSQL provides a nice LISTEN / NOTIFY mec

Re: [HACKERS] i18n of PostgreSQL - part 1

2004-04-05 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Freitag, 2. April 2004 07:21 schrieb BARTKO, Zoltan: > just wanted to mention that the first part of the slovak translation of Pg > is available - the psql strings - at the following address: > > http://de.geocities.com/bartkozo/psql-sk.po.gz Installed in 7.5 branch. -

Re: [HACKERS] Function to kill backend

2004-04-05 Thread Magnus Hagander
> > In this case, SIGINT (query cancel) will not help, because > all locks > > held by the transaction will still be held. > > Wrong. Really? Please point out where I am wrong in this: SESSION A: BEGIN TRANSACTION SESSION A: LOCK TABLE foo IN ACCESS EXCLUSIVE MODE S