Re: [HACKERS] stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM

2006-01-27 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
Tom Lane wrote: hmm... That's true. I don't think autovacuum doesn't anything to account for the concept of rolledback inserts. I think this is the fault of the stats system design. AFAICT from a quick look at the code, inserted/updated/deleted tuples are reported to the collector in the

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and

2006-01-27 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 14:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 13:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> That line of argument leads to the suggestion that pg_dump should just > >> use something else (I'd vote for "|"), all the time, in order to pr

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and

2006-01-27 Thread Greg Stark
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 13:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> That line of argument leads to the suggestion that pg_dump should just > >> use something else (I'd vote for "|"), all the time, in order to produce > >> m

Re: [HACKERS] Segfault Exiting psql

2006-01-27 Thread Jeff Trout
On Jan 27, 2006, at 10:21 AM, Jason Essington wrote: Has there been any movement on this? as of 8.1.2 psql still whines on OS X tiger when you exit. I realize it is not significant, but I'd still rather not see it. In the interim, I've done: errno = 0; write_h

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and

2006-01-27 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 13:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> That line of argument leads to the suggestion that pg_dump should just >> use something else (I'd vote for "|"), all the time, in order to produce >> more robust dump files. I still don't see the arg

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and

2006-01-27 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 13:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I could not disagree more. The invisibility of tabs makes their use as a > > delimiter wholly evil. I have lost count of the number of corrupted > > makefiles etc. I have seen because a tab got conve

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and

2006-01-27 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I could not disagree more. The invisibility of tabs makes their use as a > delimiter wholly evil. I have lost count of the number of corrupted > makefiles etc. I have seen because a tab got converted to a space and it > was impossible to tell. > More te

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and

2006-01-27 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 13:12 -0500, Greg Stark wrote: > > Personally I find anything that would encourage people to use anything other > than tabs evil anyways. All those people who think | is somehow a reasonable > choice or want to use commas and then get all confused trying to escape them > and

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and

2006-01-27 Thread Greg Stark
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > David I don't get this... what are you copying from/to that would > wouldn't just script? If you throw into a script you can change > the delimiter on the fly using translation. I think what he's getting at is for things like, say, a contrib packag

Re: [HACKERS] Adding a --quiet option to initdb

2006-01-27 Thread Joshua D. Drake
to creating directory /home/postgres/v82/data ... ok creating subdirectories ... ok selecting default max_connections ... 100 ... Less is more :) I like it. Joshua D. Drake regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)-

Re: [HACKERS] stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question)

2006-01-27 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> My question was at a higher level, actually: *what* should we be > >> counting? > > > Oh, I see. Do you think small incremental improvements to the stat > > system will buy us much? I think we should be thinkin

Re: [HACKERS] stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question)

2006-01-27 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> My question was at a higher level, actually: *what* should we be >> counting? > Oh, I see. Do you think small incremental improvements to the stat > system will buy us much? I think we should be thinking big here, i.e. > rewrite mos

Re: [HACKERS] stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question)

2006-01-27 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> I think this is unquestionably > >> a bug, at least for autovacuum's purposes --- though it might be OK > >> for the original intent of the stats system, which was simply to track > >> activity levels. > >> > >>

Re: [HACKERS] Segfault Exiting psql

2006-01-27 Thread Jason Essington
Has there been any movement on this? as of 8.1.2 psql still whines on OS X tiger when you exit. I realize it is not significant, but I'd still rather not see it. In the interim, I've done: errno = 0; write_history(fname); /* return value is not standardized */

Re: [HACKERS] Adding a --quiet option to initdb

2006-01-27 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: >> While we can probably all agree that it's not very interesting to >> mention every single directory that initdb creates, I find it ... I took a quick look at the source and see that it would be trivial to reduce the current output from creating directory /home/postgres/v82/data ... ok

Re: [HACKERS] stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question)

2006-01-27 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> I think this is unquestionably >> a bug, at least for autovacuum's purposes --- though it might be OK >> for the original intent of the stats system, which was simply to track >> activity levels. >> >> Any thoughts about how it ought

Re: [HACKERS] Adding a --quiet option to initdb

2006-01-27 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > This warning was added because of security considerations AFAIR. If the > > intent is to make initdb super-quiet, we still have to have security in > > mind. So if you want it to not say anything by default, instead of > > throwing

Re: [HACKERS] Adding a --quiet option to initdb

2006-01-27 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This warning was added because of security considerations AFAIR. If the > intent is to make initdb super-quiet, we still have to have security in > mind. So if you want it to not say anything by default, instead of > throwing a warning it should throw

Re: [HACKERS] stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question)

2006-01-27 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote: > I think this is the fault of the stats system design. AFAICT from a > quick look at the code, inserted/updated/deleted tuples are reported > to the collector in the same way regardless of whether the sending > transaction committed or rolled back. I think this is unquestionably

Re: [HACKERS] Adding a --quiet option to initdb

2006-01-27 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Thomas Hallgren wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > > >>I get a "WARNING: enabling "trust" authentication for local connections". > >>Now this information *is* important. Unfortunately it's mixed in with > >>all the rest unless I use a special redirect of stdout. > >While we can probably all agree that

Re: [HACKERS] Adding a --quiet option to initdb

2006-01-27 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Tom Lane wrote: I get a "WARNING: enabling "trust" authentication for local connections". Now this information *is* important. Unfortunately it's mixed in with all the rest unless I use a special redirect of stdout. To apply your own argument, why is that important? Anyone with an int

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and

2006-01-27 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Those who don't use it will never see it. It does however add more maintenance to the code. Furthermore, it's quite unclear why you'd use pg_dump at all to generate a data file that you intend to feed to some other program. In my case, it's about being copy/paste friendly. Davi

Re: [HACKERS] Adding a --quiet option to initdb

2006-01-27 Thread Tom Lane
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This is how I perceive the output from initdb: > - The output lists settings for locale, encoding and buffer usage. Why > are these specific settings be of special interest? Anyone with an > interest in them knows where to find them anyway. This info

[HACKERS] stats for failed transactions (was Re: [GENERAL] VACUUM Question)

2006-01-27 Thread Tom Lane
"Matthew T. O'Connor" writes: >> Also, somebody made a real good point about rolled-back insertions. >> Even if the only command you ever apply to the table is INSERT, you >> could still have dead rows in the table if some of those transactions >> occasionally roll back. > hmm... That's true. I

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and --copy-null

2006-01-27 Thread Tom Lane
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 10:17:05PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Seems to me that "psql -c 'COPY ...'" is a more likely front-end for >> such a process. > Actually, it's not. I'm attaching my preliminary patch, as I see I > haven't explained it well enough.

[HACKERS] unsubscribe

2006-01-27 Thread Adnan DURSUN
 unsubscribe  

Re: [HACKERS] Adding a --quiet option to initdb

2006-01-27 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Jim C. Nasby wrote: On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 11:36:15AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: James William Pye wrote: Why should initdb give it [processing information] to the user if the user didn't request it in the first place? Because it shows important information that we want the