Is there any interest in a basic perl script that would read through a
postgresql.conf file and calculate approximate memory (and shared
memory) usage? Also, are there any other (simple for now) things I
should look at in the process? Asking because I'm getting annoyed with
doing this by hand so...
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
What happens when the FSF inevitably removes the license clause and
makes it pure GPL?
I'm sorry but I don't follow. You're saying that it's inevitable that
FSF will remove the 'libgcc' exception from libgcj? Why on earth would
they do that? My g
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Well, assume that FSF indeed did remove the exception. It would take
me 30 minutes or so to create a substitute BSD licensed dummy JNI
library with associated headers that would allow PL/Java to be built
without any external modules at all. It's then completely up to th
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 15:57 -0400, Marko Kreen wrote:
>> Few cleanups and couple of new things [...]
> Applied, thanks for the patch.
This has broken two out of the four buildfarm members that reported
in the last half hour :-( I think kudu does not like
Well, assume that FSF indeed did remove the exception. It would take me
30 minutes or so to create a substitute BSD licensed dummy JNI library
with associated headers that would allow PL/Java to be built without any
external modules at all. It's then completely up to the user what he/she
want
On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 00:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> This has broken two out of the four buildfarm members that reported
> in the last half hour :-( I think kudu does not like // comments,
> not sure what kookaburra is on about.
BTW, you've switched your animal names :) I fixed the C++-style comm
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 12:09 -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> > no regression tests yet.
>
> We'll need some performance tests that show that lock-hold time is
> *actually* reduced, given the shenanigans needed to get there.
I'm not sure what you mean by "lock-
Josh Berkus wrote:
Thomas,
I'm starting to have second thoughts about this suggestion. I was
enthusiastic about it at the summit, but I was unaware of the sheer size
of PL/Java. 38,000 lines of code is 8% of the total size of Postgresql
... for *one* PL.
Dave Cramer acquainted me with som
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
What happens when the FSF inevitably removes the license clause and
makes it pure GPL?
I'm sorry but I don't follow. You're saying that it's inevitable that
FSF will remove the 'libgcc' exception from libgcj? Why on earth would
they do that? My guess is that it will go
Tom Lane wrote:
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Why to you persist talking about licensing issues with PL/Java? There are none. PL/Java
builds and runs just fine with gcj and the above statement is completely false.
Um ... if you use it with gcj, there may or may not be any
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why to you persist talking about licensing issues with PL/Java? There are
> none. PL/Java
> builds and runs just fine with gcj and the above statement is completely
> false.
Um ... if you use it with gcj, there may or may not be any licensing
proble
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Why to you persist talking about licensing issues with PL/Java? There
are none. PL/Java builds and runs just fine with gcj and the above
statement is completely false.
Um ... if you use it with gcj, the
Josh Berkus wrote:
Perhaps it's no surprise that I disagree when you say PL/J could be
considered in the same light as PL/Java. Then again, I'm fairly
biased ;-)
This attitude does you no credit, Thomas.
My diplomatic skills are somewhat limited :-) I might be blunt at times.
I'm sure ther
Tom,
Perhaps more, because it gives us an extra layer of insulation
from JVM licensing questions.
I really don't see licensing issues as being relevant. Your other
concern certainly is, though.
--Josh
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if po
Thomas,
I'm starting to have second thoughts about this suggestion. I was
enthusiastic about it at the summit, but I was unaware of the sheer size
of PL/Java. 38,000 lines of code is 8% of the total size of Postgresql
... for *one* PL.
Dave Cramer acquainted me with some of the difficultie
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
... equal claim to inclusion
in core. Perhaps more, because it gives us an extra layer of insulation
from JVM licensing questions.
Tom,
Why to you persist talking about licensing issues with PL/Java? There
are none. PL/Java builds and runs just fine wi
Tom Lane wrote:
... equal claim to inclusion
in core. Perhaps more, because it gives us an extra layer of insulation
from JVM licensing questions.
Tom,
Why to you persist talking about licensing issues with PL/Java? There are none. PL/Java
builds and runs just fine with gcj and the above sta
Dave Cramer wrote:
I expect to see a new release shortly.
Dave, I tried to obtain the source but whenever I try I get:
[thhal]$ cvs -d
:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/projects/plj/scm login
Logging in to
:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:2401/home/projects/plj/scm
CVS password:
/home/projects
Marc Munro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ... A better solution from my point of view would be
> to simply move the call to process_preload_libraries to a point after
> shared memory has been set up. Is there some reason this could not be
> done?
That would make it impossible for a preloaded libr
On 12-Jul-06, at 10:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
"Jonah H. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On 7/12/06, David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are they mutually exclusive? I can imagine, at least for
development
purposes, that someone might want to install both.
I believe both can be insta
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 12:09 -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
>> no regression tests yet.
> We'll need some performance tests that show that lock-hold time is
> *actually* reduced, given the shenanigans needed to get there.
Reducing lock hold time is not the point
"Jonah H. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 7/12/06, David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Are they mutually exclusive? I can imagine, at least for development
>> purposes, that someone might want to install both.
> I believe both can be installed and running at the same time. I don'
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Normally, I would not suggest that we do things only for certain data
> types only. In this case however, it seems that the reason it would work
> only for INTEGER and TEXT data types is that they are simple atomic
> datatypes that have the required propert
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Magnus Hagander wrote:
There are list servers out there capable of simply ripping any
attachments to a message (possibly over a certain size) and stick it on
a website, replacing it with a link in the email. Is majordomo one of
them?
Majordomo2 has a 'hook' for it, but,
ignore ...
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.orgICQ . 7615664
---(end of broadcast)
On 7/12/06, Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jaime Casanova wrote:
>
> is anybody working on the Bernd Helmle's updateable views patch? or
> know what the status of this is?
I was just wondering about this also. If no one else is working on it,
I'd like to try to push it through to completi
"Andrew Hammond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> Also, are there any other (simple for now) things I
> should look at in the process?
>
The shared memory estimiation logic is in
ipc/ipci.c/CreateSharedMemoryAndSemaphores(). If you want to get an accurate
number, you need to consider:
(1) different Po
On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 02:18 -0300, I wrote:
> I am trying to create an initialisation function that is called using
> the preload_libraries option.
>
> The purpose of this is to set up shared memory for Veil, independant
> of postgres' own shared memory. Simple init functions work fine, but
> as
Phil Frost wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:37:37AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > Updated text:
> >
> >For schemas, allows access to objects contained in the specified
> >schema (assuming that the objects' own privilege requirements are
> >also met). Essentially
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 17:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ...
> > - add a new boolean to pg_operator to allow us to define which operators
> > offer true equality
> > ...
>
> This would be useful for other purposes too, as we keep coming up
> against "what's
On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 12:09 -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> no regression tests yet.
We'll need some performance tests that show that lock-hold time is
*actually* reduced, given the shenanigans needed to get there.
We may need to have usage recommendations in the docs.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseD
"Jim Buttafuoco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The check constraints on table s are not like the original, I have an extra
> t_a_check constraint. Is this correct?
I wouldn't say it's correct but it is known.
I think the plan is to have such constraints be marked so you *can't* drop
them as long
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 11:37:37AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Updated text:
>
>For schemas, allows access to objects contained in the specified
>schema (assuming that the objects' own privilege requirements are
>also met). Essentially this allows the grantee to look
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Well I know it isn't an API per say, but one interesting tid bit as an example
is that PLphp does not need the PostgreSQL source to compile. It only needs
pgxs and the relevant headers etc...
Perhaps that is one way to go... All PLs use pgxs?
PL/Java does. No sourc
> > I have the additional complaint that this doesn't actually
> solve most
> > of my original complaints and might reduce the pressure to
> find a better solution.
> > The patches announcements themselves would still be basically
> > invisible within the community.
>
> I'm with Greg on this o
> I concur with this. The needs for a module like PL/Java is very different
> then the needs of PL/Perl so let's get some more PL's in before we do a
> refactoring effort to create common API's. Personally, I'm not sure what
> would be included. The call handler API's together with the SPI API's a
Jaime Casanova wrote:
is anybody working on the Bernd Helmle's updateable views patch? or
know what the status of this is?
I was just wondering about this also. If no one else is working on it,
I'd like to try to push it through to completion for 8.2 myself. Can
anyone summarize what the ope
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 10:14:53AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Hannu Krosing wrote:
> >Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-07-12 kell 09:49, kirjutas Kaare Rasmussen:
> >
> >>>There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the
> >>>PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core t
On 7/12/06, Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
it didn't seem anywhere close production readiness.
Perhaps it's no surprise that I disagree when you say PL/J could be
considered in the same light as PL/Java.
Having used both systems, I have to agree with Thomas; PL/Java is far
ahead of
I just sent in the patch for online index builds to -patches.
. The work to combine the two phases into a single non-transactional command
is done. I'm not sure how long to wait between lock checks or how verbose to
be about why it's taking so long. I do think we have to print something or
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
There is in effect no API at all, other than what is available to all
backend modules. If someone wants to create an API which will be both
sufficiently stable and sufficiently complete to meet the needs of the
various PLs (especially, as Hannu rightly observes, any new PL
Updated text:
For schemas, allows access to objects contained in the specified
schema (assuming that the objects' own privilege requirements are
also met). Essentially this allows the grantee to look up
objects within the schema. Without this permission, it is still
On 7/12/06, David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are they mutually exclusive? I can imagine, at least for development
purposes, that someone might want to install both.
I believe both can be installed and running at the same time. I don't
really think anyone would want to run both, but tha
On Wednesday 12 July 2006 04:15, Dave Cramer wrote:
> Absolutely PL/J should be considered in the same light as PL/Java.
>
> Consider this a request for PL/J to be included in the core.
Frankly I don't care which one is used, as long as the one (and ONLY one) that
is included is the most mature a
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 07:29:52AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 July 2006 04:15, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > Absolutely PL/J should be considered in the same light as PL/Java.
> >
> > Consider this a request for PL/J to be included in the core.
>
> Frankly I don't care which one is u
Hannu Krosing wrote:
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-07-12 kell 09:49, kirjutas Kaare Rasmussen:
There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the
PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points to it
(README.procedural_languages, if nothing else) ...
I th
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 12. Juli 2006 04:38 schrieb Joe Conway:
gcc -O -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing -g
-pthread -D_REENTRANT -D_THREAD_SAFE -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS -fpic
-DFRONTEND -I. -I..
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-07-12 kell 09:49, kirjutas Kaare Rasmussen:
> > There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the
> > PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points to it
> > (README.procedural_languages, if nothing else) ...
>
> I thought that the ge
Am Dienstag, 11. Juli 2006 23:31 schrieb Tom Lane:
> We could invent some more-complex concept involving "well, this is
> equality, but there are some functions for which f(x) might differ
> from f(y) anyway" and then mark the presumably-few functions that
> could produce divergent results --- exam
Hi,
is anybody working on the Bernd Helmle's updateable views patch? or
know what the status of this is?
--
regards,
Jaime Casanova
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs and the universe trying
to produce bigger and bett
I have an issue with pg_dump and inherits with pg 8.1.3 and 8.1.4
if I run the following SQL
create table t (a text check (a = '*'));
create table s () inherits (t);
alter table s drop constraint t_a_check;
alter table s add constraint a_check check (a='s');
I get the following
Table "public
Am Mittwoch, 12. Juli 2006 04:38 schrieb Joe Conway:
> > gcc -O -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline
> > -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing -g
> > -pthread -D_REENTRANT -D_THREAD_SAFE -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS -fpic
> > -DFRONTEND -I. -I../../../src/i
Am Dienstag, 11. Juli 2006 17:40 schrieb Alvaro Herrera:
> We've discussed this before, regarding PL/php IIRC. The conclusions the
> last time around, as far as I remember, was that we wanted the PLs to be
> in the same CVS repo, but able to be compiled separately from the whole
> source tree.
Th
Hi Dave,
Sorry I missed you at the Summit. I would've liked to discuss PL/J
versus PL/Java with you.
What is the status of PL/J? I haven't seen much activity there over the
last 10 months. Does it run on Windows yet? Are you planning a first
release anytime soon? Do you have any active users?
Kaare Rasmussen wrote:
There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the
PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points to it
(README.procedural_languages, if nothing else) ...
I thought that the general consensus was that only plpgsql ought to be in
co
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of
the PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points to it
(README.procedural_languages, if nothing else) ...
This was a bad idea last time it was proposed and is still a bad idea
for t
Absolutely PL/J should be considered in the same light as PL/Java.
Consider this a request for PL/J to be included in the core.
Dave
On 11-Jul-06, at 12:50 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
David,
It's good to integrate things with the core as needed. What plans do
we have to integrate PL/J?
None, i
> There should be a Procedural Language section on pgfoundry for all of the
> PLs, IMHO, and a README in contrib within core that points to it
> (README.procedural_languages, if nothing else) ...
I thought that the general consensus was that only plpgsql ought to be in
core, the rest should be in
Hi Hackers,
Can we resurrect the patch proposed by Junji TERAMOTO?
It removes unnecessary items before btree pages split.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-01/msg00301.php
There was a problem in the patch when we restarted scans from deleted tuples.
But now we scan pages at-a-ti
59 matches
Mail list logo
