On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 04:05, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > A simple idea would be to add the committed subxact Xids to the
> > xl_xact_commit and xl_xact_abort structs. However, this will be a
> > variable length array, and those structs already have variable len
Gaetano Mendola wrote:
Hi all,
someone of you sent me an example of a new data type
called tinyint.
Hi.
I seen that is using a well directory structure just
for compile a tinyint.c.
Yes. The idea was to have it do more than just this one type. Maybe a
bad idea, on retrospect.
Is there any "empt
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A simple idea would be to add the committed subxact Xids to the
> xl_xact_commit and xl_xact_abort structs. However, this will be a
> variable length array, and those structs already have variable length
> arrays at the end (filenodes to drop). I don't
Hi all,
someone of you sent me an example of a new data type
called tinyint.
I seen that is using a well directory structure just
for compile a tinyint.c.
Is there any "empty" structure that I have to use in
order to delivery compile my email.c or I can
just use a single line command:
gcc email.c -
Take it a little further: if we extend ALTER TABLE to be able to alter
view column types, would you expect CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW to stop
checking that the column types didn't change? I'd argue that that's a
real bad idea. If you want the view's output signature to change, you
should have to use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neil Conway wrote:
| On Sat, 2004-05-08 at 13:10, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
|
|>However an *add on* is an *add on* with not the same eligibility
|>of the main project
|
|
| I'd suggest implementing the custom datatype first and packaging it
| separately (
Hackers,
I'm trying to figure out how to log the subtransaction operations.
A simple idea would be to add the committed subxact Xids to the
xl_xact_commit and xl_xact_abort structs. However, this will be a
variable length array, and those structs already have variable length
arrays at the end (f
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
After staring at the code for a long time, I think I see how to do
this. It's complicated a bit by the fact that $ is a valid
identifier character. So my current thinking is to say that if we
see $ not in a quo
Further design plans for PITR...as posted previously, Bruce and I had a
long discussion recently to iron out the major thinking and a good deal
of the detail also.
In overview, major change is introducing an ARCHIVE process running
under control of the Postmaster, similar to Stats collector.
Due t
On Sat, 2004-05-08 at 13:10, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> However an *add on* is an *add on* with not the same eligibility
> of the main project
I'd suggest implementing the custom datatype first and packaging it
separately (say, via pgFoundry) -- it can always be moved into the core
distribution at s
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> Bruce Momjian kirjutas E, 10.05.2004 kell 06:58:
> > Added to TODO:
> >
> > * Add MERGE command that does UPDATE, or on failure, INSERT
>
> perhaps the issue raised about BEFOR/AFTER INSERT/UPDATE TRIGGERS and
> RULES should get a mention in the TODO (... needs to be di
Bruce Momjian kirjutas E, 10.05.2004 kell 06:58:
> Added to TODO:
>
> * Add MERGE command that does UPDATE, or on failure, INSERT
perhaps the issue raised about BEFOR/AFTER INSERT/UPDATE TRIGGERS and
RULES should get a mention in the TODO (... needs to be discussed, or
somesuch ...)
--
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Agreed it is time to get this regression test working on MinGW. I
> suggest we add ORDER BY to the needed queries.
Please do not do that. This is a join test, not an ORDER BY test,
and I don't want it ignoring unordered join methods.
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are we supposed to be able to rename view columns or not? You can't if
> you replace the view, but you can if you rename the column.
I think that's a definition disagreement, not a bug.
Replacing a view is not supposed to change the external
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Agreed it is time to get this regression test working on MinGW. I
> > suggest we add ORDER BY to the needed queries.
>
> Please do not do that. This is a join test, not an ORDER BY test,
> and I don't want it ignoring unordered join
Agreed it is time to get this regression test working on MinGW. I
suggest we add ORDER BY to the needed queries. Tom as hoping to come up
with a better solution, but at this point I think we should just add the
ORDER BY rather than adding a different output file.
Comments?
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 03:56:55PM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 03:19:21PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > Has this been resolved?
> it elsewhere. I've been trying some alternative approaches to
> causing it today, and so far no luck.
On the weekend, we ran a set
This patch also looks relevant to Postgres for two reasons.
This part seems like it might expose some bugs that otherwise might have
remained hidden:
This affects I/O scheduling potentially quite significantly. It is no
longer the case that the kernel will submit pages for
I'm not sure how important these changes are, but perhaps we'll find fsync
faster than O_SYNC on linux 2.6.6 where O_SYNC was faster before?
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[PATCH] ext3 fsync() and fdatasync() speedup
ext3's fsync/fdatasync implementation is currently syncing the in
Hi,
Are we supposed to be able to rename view columns or not? You can't if
you replace the view, but you can if you rename the column.
test=# create view test as select 1 as a;
CREATE VIEW
test=# \d test
View "public.test"
Column | Type | Modifiers
+-+---
a
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> No. Committing the relfilenode swap would cut the knees off of any
>> active scan on the old file.
> Could it upgrade its lock to exclusive just before doing the swap?
That is a recipe for deadlock failures.
regards,
No. Committing the relfilenode swap would cut the knees off of any
active scan on the old file.
Could it upgrade its lock to exclusive just before doing the swap?
Chris
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send
Hi all,
> > The ability to comment on all types of catalog objects or actual
> > comments on all predefined catalog objects? Both are more or less
> > reasonable. But I think we should have some sort of
> > internationalization mechanism for the actual comments.
>
> One of my first commits f
Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there a way the CLUSTER command can be changed to not take an
> exclusive lock on the table,
No. Committing the relfilenode swap would cut the knees off of any
active scan on the old file.
regards, tom lane
--
Hi,
Is there a way the CLUSTER command can be changed to not take an
exclusive lock on the table, and instead allow reads on the old table
and index, just preventing writes?
Chris
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once
> Bulk? Redundancy with the SGML documentation?
>
> There are already more than enough places to have to edit documentation
> when we change/add a column in a system catalog. I don't see the value
> of adding another, especially not one that's constrained to one line.
> And what will comments on
26 matches
Mail list logo