Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 04:53:53PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>
>
>>Sounds really good.
>>
>>
>
>
>There's a message on the pgsql-odbc mailing list[1] with some reasons
>for not using libpq:
>
>1. The driver sets some session default parameters(DateSt
"yy h" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I was trying to modify the physical page layout in PostgreSQL.
Uh, why?
> I understand the source code for physical page organization is located
> at bufpage.c but I wonder what is the external interface for this
> physical page organization. Interface like I
Hi,
I was trying to modify the physical page layout in PostgreSQL. I understand the source code for physical page organization is located at bufpage.c but I wonder what is the external interface for this physical page organization. Interface like InsertRecToPage, DeleteRecFromPage, GetAttr, GetRe
On Saturday 15 April 2006 19:25, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 4/15/06, Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Doing the latter is a precondition for implementing the former in a
> > reasonable way, I believe.
> >
> >
> > BTW, these two web log entries summarizing Mono and Mozilla's
> > experienc
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> ?hel kenal p?eval, L, 2006-04-15 kell 11:49, kirjutas Tom Lane:
> > Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > If I'm desperate enough to get the 2x reduction of WAL writes, I may
> > > even write my own backup solution.
> >
> > Given Florian's concern, sounds like you
On 4/15/06, Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Doing the latter is a precondition for implementing the former in a
> reasonable way, I believe.
> BTW, these two web log entries summarizing Mono and Mozilla's
> experiences with SoC might make interesting reading:
Thanks for the reading mate
Ühel kenal päeval, L, 2006-04-15 kell 11:49, kirjutas Tom Lane:
> Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If I'm desperate enough to get the 2x reduction of WAL writes, I may
> > even write my own backup solution.
>
> Given Florian's concern, sounds like you might have to write your own
> ke
On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 21:24 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> one to allow a message to be sent with the notify, and one to move
> from a table based design to shared mem/disk.
Doing the latter is a precondition for implementing the former in a
reasonable way, I believe.
BTW, these two web log entries su
-Original Message-
From: "Jonah H. Harris"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 15/04/06 20:06:27
To: "Pgsql Hackers"
Subject: [HACKERS] Google SoC--Idea Request
> As such, we need to quickly put together a list of oh, 15-20 midlevel
> project ideas.
There's a couple of listen/notify todos iirc
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 12:51:24AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I had an epiphany that might serve as illustration of the above. We
>> have traditionally thought of COUNT(*) as an "aggregate over any base
>> type". But wouldn't it be cleaner to think of i
On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 12:51:24AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > ... Polya's Inventors' Paradox states that
> > "the more general problem may be easier to solve", and I've found that
> > usually holds up in program design too.
>
> While fooling around with the grammar patch that I showed e
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Perhaps an easy means would be to put a PG_VERSION file in each
> tablespace when it's created and then check all of them. Tablespaces
> arguably make it slightly easier to accidentally try and mount something
> from a different version...
I believe we
On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 02:03:50PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Perhaps an easy means would be to put a PG_VERSION file in each
> tablespace when it's created and then check all of them. Tablespaces
> arguably make it slightly easier to accidentally try and mount something
> from a different versio
Hey everyone,
I know we started a discussion a month or so ago regarding ideas for
SoC projects. However, after reading through the thread, I didn't see
us nail down any actual items.
As such, we need to quickly put together a list of oh, 15-20 midlevel
project ideas. I'm sure we can pull some
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 11:10:34AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > As for adding checks to startup scripts, that's a PITA because
> > those scripts will have no idea of where tablespaces might be defined,
> > so you'd have to hard-code that info in.
> OTOH
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Devrim GUNDUZ wrote:
Hi,
It's been quite a long time since the latest dot releases. Do you think
it is time for the new releases? There are several bugfixes since then.
Any that warrant a new dot release?
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http
Hi,
It's been quite a long time since the latest dot releases. Do you think
it is time for the new releases? There are several bugfixes since then.
Regards,
--
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.503.667.4564
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Manag
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > I am thinking we should throw an error on pg_start_backup() and
> > pg_stop_backup if full_page_writes is off.
>
> No, we'll just change the test in xlog.c so that fullPageWrites is
> ignored if XLogArchivingActive.
We should probably throw a LOG messa
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I'm desperate enough to get the 2x reduction of WAL writes, I may
> even write my own backup solution.
Given Florian's concern, sounds like you might have to write your own
kernel too. In which case, generating a variant build of Postgres
that allows
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I am thinking we should throw an error on pg_start_backup() and
> pg_stop_backup if full_page_writes is off.
No, we'll just change the test in xlog.c so that fullPageWrites is
ignored if XLogArchivingActive.
> Seems archive_command and
> full_page_writes can still be used
Tom Lane wrote:
> Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ??hel kenal p??eval, R, 2006-04-14 kell 16:40, kirjutas Tom Lane:
> >> If the backup-taker reads, say, 4K at a time then it's
> >> certainly possible that it gets a later version of the second half of a
> >> page than it got of the fir
Ühel kenal päeval, R, 2006-04-14 kell 17:31, kirjutas Tom Lane:
> Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Ühel kenal päeval, R, 2006-04-14 kell 16:40, kirjutas Tom Lane:
> >> If the backup-taker reads, say, 4K at a time then it's
> >> certainly possible that it gets a later version of the sec
* Tom Lane:
> I think we had originally argued that there was no problem anyway
> because the kernel should cause the page write to appear atomic to other
> processes (since we issue it in a single write() command).
I doubt Linux makes any such guarantees. See this recent thread on
linux-kernel:
Hi,
[Sending this message (first) to -hackers for discussion about the
extension and followed implementation.]
On Apr 01 09:39, Volkan YAZICI wrote:
> I've prepared a patch for the Describe <-> ParameterDescription
> messaging which is available via current extended query protocol.
Here's a writ
24 matches
Mail list logo
