Re: [HACKERS] PGPASSWORD and client tools

2004-12-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Please ignore- seems some old mail of mine got sent waaay late... Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: While fixing the gui for pg_dump and pg_restore, I painfully noticed there's no option for the password. After some tests, I found that using the PGPASSWORD environment variable will do the job. I'm a

Re: [HACKERS] [JDBC] Strange server error with current 8.0beta driver

2004-12-02 Thread Barry Lind
Tom, Your patch works for my test cases. Thanks to both you and Oliver for getting this fixed. --Barry -Original Message- From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 2:23 PM To: Oliver Jowett Cc: Barry Lind; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [JDBC]

Re: [HACKERS] PGPASSWORD and client tools

2004-12-02 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
While fixing the gui for pg_dump and pg_restore, I painfully noticed there's no option for the password. After some tests, I found that using the PGPASSWORD environment variable will do the job. I'm a bit irritated that it's marked "deprecated" in the docs, the .pgpass solution isn't a good one

[HACKERS] beta5 rpms

2004-12-02 Thread Joe Conway
In case anyone is interested, I've posted 8.0.0beta5 rpms here: http://www.joeconway.com/postgresql-8.0.0beta/ Note that these are not "official" PGDG rpms, just my own home brew. Also note that there is talk of an imminent RC1 -- hopefully I'll find time to update the rpms within a day or so

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Mike Mascari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Will ANALYZE continue to ignore columns whose data is composed entirely > > of NULL in 8.0? > > I had hoped to get to this before RC, but it looks like it won't happen. > Considering I've just been beating up on Bruce for committing s

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Mike Mascari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Will ANALYZE continue to ignore columns whose data is composed entirely > of NULL in 8.0? I had hoped to get to this before RC, but it looks like it won't happen. Considering I've just been beating up on Bruce for committing stuff that wasn't clearly a b

Re: [HACKERS] 7.4.6 build failures on Solaris 9 with Sun cc

2004-12-02 Thread Philip Yarra
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 01:43 pm, Michael Fuhr wrote: > gcc 3.4.2 on Solaris 9 doesn't complain about this. Yes, I found Tom's response to the issue from March here: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-ports/2004-03/msg9.php and this on the Sun CC forum, confirming that the compiler is borked: ht

Re: [HACKERS] 7.4.6 build failures on Solaris 9 with Sun cc

2004-12-02 Thread Michael Fuhr
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 11:31:19AM +1100, Philip Yarra wrote: > Hi all, before I delve too deeply into this, has anyone else tried building > 7.4.6 on Solaris 9 (sparc) ? I'm seeing build failures using Sun's cc: > > make[4]: Entering directory `/tmp/postgresql-7.4.6/src/backend/access/heap' > c

[HACKERS] Who's in charge of torrents? [was: Easy way to download all .torrents]

2004-12-02 Thread Jim C. Nasby
I've tried emailling David Fetter to no avail; anyone know who's in charge of the torrents or anyone who can answer my original question? - Forwarded message from "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:52:15 -0600 From: "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL

Re: [HACKERS] lwlocks and starvation

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Neil Conway wrote: > On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 09:59 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > OK, either you have to own the issue or I have to add something to the > > TODO list. > > Can you add it to the TODO list and assign it to me? > Done: * Fix priority ordering of read and write light-weight

Re: [HACKERS] lwlocks and starvation

2004-12-02 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 09:59 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > OK, either you have to own the issue or I have to add something to the > TODO list. Can you add it to the TODO list and assign it to me? -Neil ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/re

Re: [HACKERS] nodeAgg perf tweak

2004-12-02 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 20:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > No. The current code involves two pallocs per cycle, one inside the > aggregate function to construct its result value, and then one in > datumCopy to copy the result into the proper context. Ah, true -- missed the fact that PG_RETURN_INT64() d

Re: [HACKERS] Code documentation

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Great. Documentation of the source code helps many developers become more productive. --- Gevik Babakhani wrote: > I think the basis in understanding how PostgreSQL works depends > on the documentation to certain extend an

Re: [HACKERS] Code documentation

2004-12-02 Thread Gevik Babakhani
I think the basis in understanding how PostgreSQL works depends on the documentation to certain extend and the level of one's programming and database knowledge of course. At this moment I am gathering information from anywhere I can get a hold of regarding PostgresSQL. I have requested a repo

Re: [HACKERS] nodeAgg perf tweak

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > - yours would mean that int8inc() and similar aggregates wouldn't ever > need to do palloc(); mine would require a palloc() every k calls to the > transition function. No. The current code involves two pallocs per cycle, one inside the aggregate function

Re: [HACKERS] nodeAgg perf tweak

2004-12-02 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 19:07 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > True, but you still have to palloc if it returns the second argument. Is that common? In any case, I don't see how you can _ever_ avoid a palloc if the aggregate returns the second argument. The second argument is in a per-tuple memory context:

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Unicode characters above 0x10000 #2

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
I have backed out this patch. It is unclear it is a bug fix. It will be saved for 8.1. --- pgman wrote: > > Patch applied. Thanks. > > --- > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Code documentation

2004-12-02 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 10:58 +0100, Gevik Babakhani wrote: > I was wondering if there are any interests or plans for documenting > various functions in the code which currently are not documented. I don't know of any systematic effort to do this. I try to document undocumented code as necessary wh

Re: [HACKERS] Ready for RC1

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > One more issue. Until we start RC, patches that are bug fixes will > > continue to be applied. Do we want that? By going RC we are basically > > saying we need to focus on docs and packaging and we perhaps can keep > > fixes for 8.0

Re: [HACKERS] 7.4.6 build failures on Solaris 9 with Sun cc

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Philip Yarra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi all, before I delve too deeply into this, has anyone else tried building > 7.4.6 on Solaris 9 (sparc) ? I'm seeing build failures using Sun's cc: > make[4]: Entering directory `/tmp/postgresql-7.4.6/src/backend/access/heap' > cc -Xa -O -v -I../../../.

Re: [HACKERS] Ready for RC1

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > One more issue. Until we start RC, patches that are bug fixes will > continue to be applied. Do we want that? By going RC we are basically > saying we need to focus on docs and packaging and we perhaps can keep > fixes for 8.0.1. In my mind "RC" means

Re: [HACKERS] Ready for RC1

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > One more issue. Until we start RC, patches that are bug fixes will > > continue to be applied. Do we want that? By going RC we are basically > > saying we need to focus on docs and packaging and we perhaps can keep > >

Re: [HACKERS] Ready for RC1

2004-12-02 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: One more issue. Until we start RC, patches that are bug fixes will continue to be applied. Do we want that? By going RC we are basically saying we need to focus on docs and packaging and we perhaps can keep fixes for 8.0.1. critical bug fixes should be

Re: [HACKERS] Ready for RC1

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > >> I have applied all outstanding patches and I think we are ready to go > > >> for RC1. > > > > > > Considering that you just added at least three new and completely >

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: If you have something missing from here I'm especially interested in hearing from you. I think "Linux" entries are quite useless. We need to know what distribution (and version) it is. The kernel is actually a pretty uninteresting part of t

Re: [HACKERS] Ready for RC1

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> I have applied all outstanding patches and I think we are ready to go > >> for RC1. > > > > Considering that you just added at least three new and completely > > untested features, I don't think R

Re: [HACKERS] Updated open items list

2004-12-02 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: Here is an updated open items list. The first three items are the ones that are going to be closed tomorrow and moved to the TODO list. I already moved the terminal server issue to the TODO list. 'k, will watch for commits on these before doing the RC1 ...

Re: [HACKERS] Ready for RC1

2004-12-02 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: I have applied all outstanding patches and I think we are ready to go for RC1. Considering that you just added at least three new and completely untested features, I don't think RC1 is the way to go. I have to agree here ... I'd do a

[HACKERS] 7.4.6 build failures on Solaris 9 with Sun cc

2004-12-02 Thread Philip Yarra
Hi all, before I delve too deeply into this, has anyone else tried building 7.4.6 on Solaris 9 (sparc) ? I'm seeing build failures using Sun's cc: make[4]: Entering directory `/tmp/postgresql-7.4.6/src/backend/access/heap' cc -Xa -O -v -I../../../../src/include -c -o tuptoaster.o tuptoaster.c "

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > If you have something missing from here I'm especially interested in > hearing from you. I think "Linux" entries are quite useless. We need to know what distribution (and version) it is. The kernel is actually a pretty uninteresting part of the porting process. -- Pet

Re: [HACKERS] multiline CSV fields

2004-12-02 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: + if (!embedded_line_warning && (c == '\n' || c == '\r') ) + { + embedded_line_warning = true; + elog(WARNING, + "CSV fields with embedded linefeed or carriage return " + "characters might not be able to be reimport

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane wrote: > We never really issued a "call for port reports" as has been past > practice. I think that Andrew Dunstan's build farm has partially > obsoleted that custom, but if you have access to a platform that > is not represented in the build farm, please do give it a try soon. The platf

Re: [HACKERS] Ready for RC1

2004-12-02 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian wrote: > I have applied all outstanding patches and I think we are ready to go > for RC1. Considering that you just added at least three new and completely untested features, I don't think RC1 is the way to go. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Travis P wrote: On Dec 2, 2004, at 5:44 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgbuildfarm/ I started work today on a page that lists all the members. Ah, good. I'm not seeing it immediately, but I'll keep my eye out. I've an AIX 5.1 system on which I could try to compile if y

Re: [HACKERS] multiline CSV fields

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > + if (!embedded_line_warning && (c == '\n' || c == '\r') ) > + { > + embedded_line_warning = true; > + elog(WARNING, > + "CSV fields with embedded linefeed or c

Re: [HACKERS] nodeAgg perf tweak

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 10:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> (2) I think you lose much of the performance >> benefit as soon as you have to distinguish cases (b) and (c). > Why wouldn't a simple comparison work? We're passing two arguments into > the aggregate fu

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] multiline CSV fields

2004-12-02 Thread Andrew Dunstan
I wrote: If it bothers you that much. I'd make a flag, cleared at the start of each COPY, and then where we test for CR or LF in CopyAttributeOutCSV, if the flag is not set then set it and issue the warning. I didn't realise until Bruce told me just now that I was on the hook for this. I guess

Re: [HACKERS] nodeAgg perf tweak

2004-12-02 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 10:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > (2) I think you lose much of the performance > benefit as soon as you have to distinguish cases (b) and (c). Ideally > you would use MemoryContextContains for this, but that doesn't work > reliably on pointers that point to fields of a tuple. W

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Travis P
On Dec 2, 2004, at 5:44 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgbuildfarm/ I started work today on a page that lists all the members. Ah, good. I'm not seeing it immediately, but I'll keep my eye out. I've an AIX 5.1 system on which I could try to compile if you don't have one

Re: [HACKERS] Fix for "q" with psql display paging dumps out of psql

2004-12-02 Thread Jim Seymour
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You will be glad to know that 8.0 will use a different implementation > for thread handling of SIGPIPE, though your asynchronous handling of > SIGPIPE will still cause problems. So-noted. Jim ---(end of broadcast)--

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Open Items

2004-12-02 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD
> I am going to discard these emails. We haven't solve the Win32 terminal > server problem and I think it needs to be moved to the TODO list instead. Yes, please do that. I do not think there is a problem on TS other than some missing permissions. The patch was only intended to avoid starting 2

Re: [HACKERS] Fix for "q" with psql display paging dumps out of psql

2004-12-02 Thread Jim Seymour
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Seymour) writes: > > I'm kind of wondering if anybody on the dev team noticed this and > > what, if anything, they planned to do with it? > > Can we make it "#ifdef SOLARIS7" somehow? I'm uneager to put a > performance penalty on eve

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Travis P <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: What platforms are covered by the build farm? See http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_status.pl Also I think there is a gborg project page for it. s/gborg/pgfoundry/ http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgbuildfarm/ I started work today

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Travis P <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What platforms are covered by the build farm? See http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_status.pl Also I think there is a gborg project page for it. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Travis P
On Dec 2, 2004, at 11:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote: We never really issued a "call for port reports" as has been past practice. I think that Andrew Dunstan's build farm has partially obsoleted that custom, but if you have access to a platform that is not represented in the build farm, please do give it a

[HACKERS] Updated open items list

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Here is an updated open items list. The first three items are the ones that are going to be closed tomorrow and moved to the TODO list. I already moved the terminal server issue to the TODO list. ---

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Open Items

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
I am going to discard these emails. We haven't solve the Win32 terminal server problem and I think it needs to be moved to the TODO list instead. --- Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD wrote: > > > o fix shared memory on Win2k

[HACKERS] Ready for RC1

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
I have applied all outstanding patches and I think we are ready to go for RC1. These are the open items. I think we will just have to move them to the TODO list tomorrow, except for the documentation items. ---

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-hackers-win32] [BUGS] pg_autovacuum in 8beta-dev3 small bug

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Patch applied. Thanks. --- Dave Page wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > > Of Bruce Momjian > > Sent: 27 November 2004 04:33 > > To: [EMAIL P

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Unicode characters above 0x10000 #2

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Patch applied. Thanks. --- John Hansen wrote: > 3 times lucky? > > Last one broke utf8 G > > This one works, Too tired, sorry for the inconvenience.. > > ... John Content-Description: cvs.diff [ Attachment

Re: [HACKERS] readline/libedit selection

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Kris Jurka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Tom Lane wrote: >> Reading between the lines, I wonder if your problem is that your copy of >> editline puts its headers in include/readline rather than >> include/editline? > Yes, this is the actual problem readline.h is indeed in > /u

Re: [HACKERS] readline/libedit selection

2004-12-02 Thread Kris Jurka
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Tom Lane wrote: > Reading between the lines, I wonder if your problem is that your copy of > editline puts its headers in include/readline rather than > include/editline? > Yes, this is the actual problem readline.h is indeed in /usr/include/readline.. The missing symbols

Re: [HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Mike Mascari
Tom Lane wrote: The core committee has agreed that it's about time to advance to Release Candidate status (which we define as "code is frozen, but not docs nor message translation work"). Barring surprises, 8.0RC1 will be wrapped tomorrow (Friday). We never really issued a "call for port reports"

Re: [HACKERS] Error handling in plperl and pltcl

2004-12-02 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Jan, ... plus that the catch-nesting automatically represents the subtransaction nesting. I can't really see any reason why those two should not be bound together. Does anybody? That depends on what you mean. As a stop-gap solution, cerntanly. But in the long run, I still think that savepoints a

Re: [HACKERS] readline/libedit selection

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Kris Jurka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This recent change to readline/libedit selection isn't quite right. > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2004-11/msg00330.php I found the reason for not linking to libtermcap --- there was an ancient netbsd-specific hack that wasn't general-pur

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] plperl Safe restrictions

2004-12-02 Thread Rod Taylor
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 02:21 -0500, Greg Stark wrote: > "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > John wanted us to allow use of the 'locale' and 'utf8' pragmas in trusted > > code. > > You know, there's something twisted in postgres's naming scheme here. How is > it that "trusted" langu

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] plperl Safe restrictions

2004-12-02 Thread Greg Stark
"Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > John wanted us to allow use of the 'locale' and 'utf8' pragmas in trusted > code. You know, there's something twisted in postgres's naming scheme here. How is it that "trusted" languages the ones that need a sandbox? and "untrusted" languages the o

Re: [HACKERS] psql and schemas

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Neil Conway wrote: > On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 23:11 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Is there a TODO here? Or a few? > > Sure: you could add a TODO item like "Improve psql schema behavior", and > assign it to me. I'll send in a patch that implements the behavior I > proposed for 8.1 Added to TODO:

Re: Re: [HACKERS] lwlocks and starvation

2004-12-02 Thread simon
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 02.12.2004, 05:55:43: > On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 21:51 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Neil, where are we on this? Should we add comments? Add a TODO? A patch? > > I'm not sure what the right resolution is. As I said, I don't think it's > wise to apply a p

[HACKERS] 8.0RC1 tomorrow

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
The core committee has agreed that it's about time to advance to Release Candidate status (which we define as "code is frozen, but not docs nor message translation work"). Barring surprises, 8.0RC1 will be wrapped tomorrow (Friday). We never really issued a "call for port reports" as has been pas

[HACKERS] tsearch2 documentation additions

2004-12-02 Thread Oleg Bartunov
Hi there, there are several new contributed docs on tsearch2 page: # How to use tsearch2 in Japanese # Tsearch2 and Unicode/UTF-8 # Howto write my own parser for tsearch2 Thanks to Junji TERAMOTO, Markus Wollny and Valli for their work ! Regards, Oleg _

Re: Please release (was Re: [HACKERS] nodeAgg perf tweak)

2004-12-02 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 10:04:43PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I've raised this before, but would like to suggest again that there might be > > virtue in branching earlier in the dev cycle - maybe around the time of the > > first beta. > > Given the am

Re: Re: Please release (was Re: [HACKERS] nodeAgg perf tweak)

2004-12-02 Thread simon
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 02.12.2004, 05:05:12: > On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 19:34 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I regard performance testing as an essential part of the > > release process of any performance critical software. Most earlier beta > > releases were fixing functional

[HACKERS] Code documentation

2004-12-02 Thread Gevik Babakhani
Dear People, I was wondering if there are any interests or plans for documenting various functions in the code which currently are not documented. I would like to start this discussion to see if we want to do this. If I am the first one with this suggestion (I can't imagine) then I am very in

Re: [HACKERS] libpq and psql not on same page about SIGPIPE

2004-12-02 Thread Manfred Spraul
Tom Lane wrote: Not really: it only solves the problem *if you change the application*, which is IMHO not acceptable. In particular, why should a non-threaded app expect to have to change to deal with this issue? But we can't safely build a thread-safe libpq.so for general use if it breaks non-th

[HACKERS] Code documentation

2004-12-02 Thread gevik
Dear People, I was wondering if there are any interests or plans for documenting various functions in the code which currently are not documented. I would like to start this discussion to see if we want to do this. If I am the first one with this suggestion (I can't imagine) then I am very intere

Re: Please release (was Re: [HACKERS] nodeAgg perf tweak)

2004-12-02 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I've raised this before, but would like to suggest again that there might be virtue in branching earlier in the dev cycle - maybe around the time of the first beta. Given the amount of patching that's gone on, branching 8.1 earli

Re: [HACKERS] libpq and psql not on same page about SIGPIPE

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Manfred Spraul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Not really: it only solves the problem *if you change the application*, > >> which is IMHO not acceptable. > > > No. non-threaded apps do not need to change. The default is the old, 7.3 > > code: change the sign

Re: [HACKERS] libpq and psql not on same page about SIGPIPE

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Manfred Spraul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Not really: it only solves the problem *if you change the application*, >> which is IMHO not acceptable. > No. non-threaded apps do not need to change. The default is the old, 7.3 > code: change the signal handler around the write ca

Re: [HACKERS] nodeAgg perf tweak

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ISTM it would be reasonable to mandate that aggregate authors return one > of three things from their state transition functions: > (a) return the previous state value > (b) return the "next data item" value > (c) return some other value; if by a pas

Re: [HACKERS] readline/libedit selection

2004-12-02 Thread Tom Lane
Kris Jurka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This recent change to readline/libedit selection isn't quite right. If you see a problem you'll have to give more details ... > It doesn't link in libtermcap with libedit which leads to: Certainly it tries that. > checking for readline.h... no > configur

Re: [HACKERS] lwlocks and starvation

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, either you have to own the issue or I have to add something to the TODO list. --- Neil Conway wrote: > On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 21:51 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Neil, where are we on this? Should we add comments? Add

Re: [HACKERS] libpq and psql not on same page about SIGPIPE

2004-12-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
Manfred Spraul wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > >Not really: it only solves the problem *if you change the application*, > >which is IMHO not acceptable. In particular, why should a non-threaded > >app expect to have to change to deal with this issue? But we can't > >safely build a thread-safe libpq