On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 14:17, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
> > Well, Tom does seem to have something with regard to StartUpIds. I feel
> > it is easier to force a new timeline by adding a very large number to
> > the LogId IF, and only if, we have performed an archive recovery. That
> > way, we
On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 02:04, Justin Clift wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > External tool is one thing, but the loadable personality seems like a
> > very good idea and worth discussing further.
>
> Would an interesting, and maybe slightly different way of viewing a
> "loadable personality," be
Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Tue, 2004-07-06 at 23:36, Greg Stark wrote:
"Scott Marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Why not rollback all or commit all?
I really really don't like subbegin and subcommit. I get the feeling
they'll cause more problems we haven't foreseen yet, but I can't put my
f
Few days old snapshot produces an error when making tsearch2 module:
dict_ispell.o(.text+0x31b):dict_ispell.c: undefined reference to
`pg_strcasecmp'
dict_ispell.o(.text+0x420):dict_ispell.c: undefined reference to
`pg_strcasecmp'
dict_ispell.o(.text+0x500):dict_ispell.c: undefined reference to
`p
On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 06:39, Yannick Lecaillez wrote:
> I have this "clustering on SAN" problem today and
Me thinks you've fallen into the trap of proprietary vendors. Your
problem isn't that you need "clustering on SAN", your problem is you
want some form of high availability solution for your
On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 00:16, Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > We can later implement savepoints, which will have "SAVEPOINT foo" and
> > "ROLLBACK TO foo" as interface. (Note that a subtransaction is slightly
> > different from a savepoint, so we can't use
On Tue, 2004-07-06 at 23:36, Greg Stark wrote:
> "Scott Marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Why not rollback all or commit all?
> >
> > I really really don't like subbegin and subcommit. I get the feeling
> > they'll cause more problems we haven't foreseen yet, but I can't put my
> > fing
Tom Lane wrote:
Recovering when you get an error is probably the trickiest part of this.
OK, I have a setup that instead of refusing to load trusted functions if
the Safe version is not up to date, forces them to error out by calling
elog(ERROR...), thus:
andrew=# select tval();
ERROR: trus
> Well, Tom does seem to have something with regard to StartUpIds. I feel
> it is easier to force a new timeline by adding a very large number to
> the LogId IF, and only if, we have performed an archive recovery. That
> way, we do not change at all the behaviour of the system for people that
> ch
Yannick Lecaillez wrote:
> Thanks a lot for all people which answer.
>
> I have this "clustering on SAN" problem today and i think it could be
> less harder to implement this today than it was for Oracle in 1993
> (since i can find a lot of work in opensource which could be interesting
> in this p
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
Also, how do you get an anonymous subtransaction? SAVEPOINT syntax would
seem to always require a name.
Yes, it does. But surely they can be nested so an inner use of name foo
hides an outer use of name foo. I'm not pretending to know all about the
standard savepoints, so
Thanks a lot for all people which answer.
I have this "clustering on SAN" problem today and i think it could be
less harder to implement this today than it was for Oracle in 1993
(since i can find a lot of work in opensource which could be interesting
in this project : distributed lock, clustered
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> > If I understand you correctly what you want is a ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT
> > foo; followed by a RELEASE SAVEPOINT foo;
>
> Ugh.. nasty syntax and an extra empty transaction.
If you translate it directly using only the primitives of the current
subbegi
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Oliver Jowett wrote:
So how do you propose supporting simple rollback of a subtransaction? It
seems like an extension regardless of how it's done.
If I understand you correctly what you want is a ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT
foo; followed by a RELEASE SAVEPOI
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> So how do you propose supporting simple rollback of a subtransaction? It
> seems like an extension regardless of how it's done.
If I understand you correctly what you want is a ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT
foo; followed by a RELEASE SAVEPOINT foo;
--
/Denni
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Oliver Jowett wrote:
Savepoint "ROLLBACK TO foo" doesn't invalidate 'foo'. If "SAVEPOINT foo"
is 'start new subtransaction foo', "ROLLBACK TO foo" must be 'roll back
subtransaction foo and all children; start new subtransaction foo'.
If that is all th
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> Savepoint "ROLLBACK TO foo" doesn't invalidate 'foo'. If "SAVEPOINT foo"
> is 'start new subtransaction foo', "ROLLBACK TO foo" must be 'roll back
> subtransaction foo and all children; start new subtransaction foo'.
If that is all there is, I much rat
Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Well, my opinion is that cursors and other resources should at least be
usable from a inner subtransaction in its parent -- because if that
can't be done we are wasting some of the benefits, because we can't just
"stick everything in a subt
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Its questionable if these are to be interpreted as just changing the
default tablespace for subsequent creates, or also moving all objects
that were created using the previous tablespace. Since it's
indistinguishable whether an object was created using the default
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > Its questionable if these are to be interpreted as just changing the
> > default tablespace for subsequent creates, or also moving all objects
> > that were created using the previous tablespace. Since it's
> > indistinguishable whether an obj
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
We can later implement savepoints, which will have "SAVEPOINT foo" and
"ROLLBACK TO foo" as interface. (Note that a subtransaction is slightly
different from a savepoint, so we can't use ROLLBACK TO in
subtransactions because that
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:03:33AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> than begin/commit for subxacts? What about savepoints?) Also, what about
> exposing this functionality in plpgsql? Seems like we need some kind of
> exception handling syntax to make this useful. What does Oracle do?
Oracle uses savep
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
The other thing we need are these two commands:
ALTER DATABASE foo SET TABLESPACE spc;
ALTER SCHEMA foo SET TABLESPACE spc;
I think these should not be considered new features but essential
functionality left out of the original patch.
Its questionable if these are t
Its questionable if these are to be interpreted as just changing the
default tablespace for subsequent creates, or also moving all objects
that were created using the previous tablespace. Since it's
indistinguishable whether an object was created using the default from
schema/database or given
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:10:23AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Would anybody object to adding an extra line at startup that shows the
> > version number of the database system?
>
> I don't really see the point. The log, if it's kept around at all,
> would be about the most difficult place to ex
25 matches
Mail list logo
