Qingqing Zhou wrote:
> I am really interested in the concurrency control part of the PostgreSQL. I
> can see the MVCC/lock rules there, and basically I can follow them -- but
> there are so many if-else in the rules, so the problem always for me is: how
> can we gaurantee that the rules are comple
Ühel kenal päeval, L, 2006-03-18 kell 12:38, kirjutas Rod Taylor:
> This will, presumably, be a very PostgreSQL friendly group so a sales
> pitch isn't really required.
>
> How about the opposite? Tom Lanes list of areas that PostgreSQL does a
> poor job and a detailed explanation as to how that
Seeing failure on 8.1 as well.
BTW, I keep forwarding these, but is there any need? Are enough hackers on the
status change lists anyway?
/D
-Original Message-
From: "PG Build Farm"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 18/03/06 02:13:19
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Luke Lonergan wrote:
Tom,
On 3/17/06 9:59 PM, "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This would buy what exactly?
I guess you didn't read the other 80% of the post.
In short, faster performance through more aggressive runtime compilation. A
JIT for the database kernel. It's not like I'm o
On Mar 18, 2006, at 1:39 PM, Neil Conway wrote:
On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 22:36 +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
Yes, there have been reports that it builds. You can check the
archives for details.
Are we prepared to declare that OS/X on Intel is an officially
supported
platform for the 8.1 r
On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 22:36 +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> Yes, there have been reports that it builds. You can check the
> archives for details.
Are we prepared to declare that OS/X on Intel is an officially supported
platform for the 8.1 release series? If so, we should add that
informatio
Satoshi,
> I'm *really* *really* interested in making PostgreSQL to be vacuum-less.
> Can we have a vacuum-less PostgreSQL in the future? How?
I've heard a couple other requests for dealing with vaccuum. I think a
"Fixing Vacuum Round-Table" might be a valuable session if we have someone to
le
Tom,
On 3/17/06 12:18 PM, "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One user with ability to enter arbitrary SQL commands can *always* blow
> your resource planning away. Blaming such things on work_mem is
> seriously misguided.
Agreed - that's why we need to split this discussion into the two ca
Tom,
On 3/17/06 9:59 PM, "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This would buy what exactly?
I guess you didn't read the other 80% of the post.
In short, faster performance through more aggressive runtime compilation. A
JIT for the database kernel. It's not like I'm on shaky ground here - o
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 22:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus writes:
> > -- There are only 13 days left to submit a proposal. Please do so. We'd
> > rather not be forced into a last-minute rush to evaluate all of the stuff
> > in April. Remember this is a "family" event so you don't have
Satoshi Nagayasu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm *really* *really* interested in making PostgreSQL to be vacuum-less.
> Can we have a vacuum-less PostgreSQL in the future? How?
I don't foresee that ever happening. AFAICS a non-vacuuming MVCC system
would have to be implemented just like Oracle
On Mar 18, 2006, at 22:17 , Dave Cramer wrote:
Has anyone built postgresql on this platform ?
Yes, there have been reports that it builds. You can check the
archives for details.
Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com
---(end of broadcast)---
Has anyone built postgresql on this platform ?
Does it work ?
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
-Original Message-
From: "Josh Berkus"
Sent: 18/03/06 01:55:04
To: "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org"
Cc: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Anniversary Proposals -- Important Update
> Heck, if you have
> an idea for a talk you'd really, really, really like
14 matches
Mail list logo
