On 08/03/2008, Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think we'll have more success convincing patch authors to update a
> wiki page, than we'll have to convince reviewers to do so. I know that's
> true at least for me. If I want people to review my patch, I'm ready to
> sing and dan
This is reasonable for the sort of medium-to-large patch that the author
has put a lot of time into. But we also get a lot of small one-off
patches where it's not so reasonable. Now of course many of those get
applied right away, but not all.
Just a thought... maybe a distinction should be
Tom Lane wrote:
This is reasonable for the sort of medium-to-large patch that the author
has put a lot of time into. But we also get a lot of small one-off
patches where it's not so reasonable. Now of course many of those get
applied right away, but not all. One of the services that Bruce's pa
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Why do we keep the TODO file with the source code? Wouldn't it make
>> more sense to store it separately?
> No idea --- it has always been there because it relates directly to the
> source.
I kinda like the fact that the diffs
Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 07:25:25PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> What's the problem with setting it to ten million if I have ten million
>> values
>> in the table and I am prepared to spend the resources to maintain those
>> statistics?
>
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sure, we can refine that later. making it easier for patch authors as
> well, but I don't think it's an unreasonable amount of work to keep one
> line per patch up-to-date in a wiki. The line doesn't need to contain
> anything else than title of
On Fri, 7 Mar 2008, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
If I want people to review my patch, I'm ready to sing and dance if
that's what it takes.
Great timing, there's even a suitable song available for you today:
http://use.perl.org/~grantm/journal/35855
--
* Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Added to TODO:
> * Allow text search dictionary to filter out only stop words
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-11/msg00081.php
That's a poor description. I thought the TODO was something more like
"allow dictionaries to change the
Andrew Chernow wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
The main point of my proposal is: let's make the *authors* who want
their stuff to be reviewed as part of a commitfest do the extra work.
There would be no extra work required for patch reviewers.
I think this makes the most sense. It dis
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
The main point of my proposal is: let's make the *authors* who want
their stuff to be reviewed as part of a commitfest do the extra work.
There would be no extra work required for patch reviewers.
I agree with Heikki that for the process to be successful, it should
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 18:46:24 +
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think we'll have more success convincing patch authors to update a
wiki page, than we'll have to convince reviewers to do so. I know
th
Added to TODO:
o Prevent autovacuum from running if an old transaction is still
running from the last vacuum
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00899.php
---
Christopher Br
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
The main point of my proposal is: let's make the *authors* who want
their stuff to be reviewed as part of a commitfest do the extra work.
There would be no extra work required for patch reviewers.
I think this makes the most sense. It distributes the work to auth
Added to TODO:
* Allow text search dictionary to filter out only stop words
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-11/msg00081.php
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Oleg Bartunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Let's con
Added to TODO:
>
> * Consider allowing higher priority queries to have referenced buffer
> cache pages stay in memory longer
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00562.php
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> De
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 18:46:24 +
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think we'll have more success convincing patch authors to update a
wiki page, than we'll have to convince reviewers to do so. I know
that's true at least for me.
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 18:46:24 +
> "Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I think we'll have more success convincing patch authors to update a
> > wiki page, than we'll have to convince reviewers to do so. I know
> > that's true at least for me. If I wan
Added to TODO:
o Store per-table autovacuum settings in pg_class.reloptions.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg01440.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00724.php
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 18:46:24 +
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think we'll have more success convincing patch authors to update a
> wiki page, than we'll have to convince reviewers to do so. I know
> that's true at least for m
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Freitag, 7. M?rz 2008 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
> > OK, you asked for it. ?All emails have been moved from pgpatches_hold to
> > pgpatches. ?There are 19 pages. ?Let the pain begin!
> >
> > http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgpatches
>
> OK, now how about moving this dire
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:33:02 +
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's not clear how this commitfest thing is supposed to work in
practice. May I suggest that:
1. When a patch author wants to have a patch r
Am Freitag, 7. März 2008 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
> OK, you asked for it. All emails have been moved from pgpatches_hold to
> pgpatches. There are 19 pages. Let the pain begin!
>
> http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgpatches
OK, now how about moving this directory to developer.postgresql.org, do
* Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080307 13:11]:
> > Ideas and discussion are important (actually vital). But the
> > commit-fest is a period that reviewers and committers set apart time to
> > process the *products* of ideas and proposals that have come about so
> > far.
>
> Well, when do we
On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 07:25:25PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> What's the problem with setting it to ten million if I have ten million
> values
> in the table and I am prepared to spend the resources to maintain those
> statistics?
That it'll probably take 10 million seconds to calculate t
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Merlin Moncure escribi?:
ISTM if we move to a 'wiki style' patch management, or something more
formal like a bug tracker the work becomes more decentralized and the
patch developer becomes more involved in keeping the patch list up to
date with the la
Related to the concurrent discussion about selectivity estimations ...
What is the reason the statistics target is limited to 1000? I've seen more
than one case where increasing the statistics target to 1000 improved results
and one would have wanted to increase it further.
What's the problem
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Add:
> >
> > > o Add SQLSTATE severity to PGconn return status
> > >
> > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-interfaces/2007-11/msg00015.php
>
> Why do we keep the TODO file with the source code? Wouldn't it make
> more sense to store
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:33:02 +
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's not clear how this commitfest thing is supposed to work in
> practice. May I suggest that:
>
> 1. When a patch author wants to have a patch reviewed in the nex
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Merlin Moncure escribi?:
>
> > ISTM if we move to a 'wiki style' patch management, or something more
> > formal like a bug tracker the work becomes more decentralized and the
> > patch developer becomes more involved in keeping the patch list up to
> > date with the latest
Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> > > Only 150 "patches" in that queue, if you eliminate all the discussions
> > > and threads:
> > > http://people.ifax.com/~aidan/pg/patches.mbox
> >
> > True, but we can't just discard all the ideas we had --- we need to
> > decide if they are worth persuing or adding to
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Add:
>
> > o Add SQLSTATE severity to PGconn return status
> >
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-interfaces/2007-11/msg00015.php
Why do we keep the TODO file with the source code? Wouldn't it make
more sense to store it separately?
--
Alvaro Herrera
Merlin Moncure escribió:
> ISTM if we move to a 'wiki style' patch management, or something more
> formal like a bug tracker the work becomes more decentralized and the
> patch developer becomes more involved in keeping the patch list up to
> date with the latest stuff. I think the wiki, being a
* Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080307 12:29]:
> Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> -- Start of PGP signed section.
> > * Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080307 11:46]:
> >
> > > Since there are 19 pages and probably less than 19 interested hackers,
> > > maybe we could just each take a page of the list a
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> -- Start of PGP signed section.
> > Only 150 "patches" in that queue, if you eliminate all the discussions
> > and threads:
> > http://people.ifax.com/~aidan/pg/patches.mbox
>
> True, but we can't just discard all the ideas we had --- we need to
>
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 11:48 AM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Since there are 19 pages and probably less than 19 interested hackers,
> > maybe we could just each take a page of the list as it stands and go
> > through it at that level? Although many of the threads cross pages, s
Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> * Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080307 11:46]:
>
> > Since there are 19 pages and probably less than 19 interested hackers,
> > maybe we could just each take a page of the list as it stands and go
> > through it at that level? Although many
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Since there are 19 pages and probably less than 19 interested hackers,
> >> maybe we could just each take a page of the list as it stands and go
> >> through it at that level? Although many of the threads cross pa
* Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080307 11:46]:
> Since there are 19 pages and probably less than 19 interested hackers,
> maybe we could just each take a page of the list as it stands and go
> through it at that level? Although many of the threads cross pages, so
> that's not ideal. Any other i
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Since there are 19 pages and probably less than 19 interested hackers,
>> maybe we could just each take a page of the list as it stands and go
>> through it at that level? Although many of the threads cross pages, so
>> that's not idea
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Bruce, you are putting too much of the work on your own shoulders and
> >> bottlenecking the whole process. Just dump stuff into the queue, don't
> >> trim and for heavens sake stop fixing "simple" things as you g
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce, you are putting too much of the work on your own shoulders and
>> bottlenecking the whole process. Just dump stuff into the queue, don't
>> trim and for heavens sake stop fixing "simple" things as you go. Once
>> the queue is t
I agree with Greg's suggested improvement, and would also like to see
the ability to drop a column or change a column's datatype. Right now
it is a pretty time consuming process to 'alter' a view (i.e. figure out
the dependent views, drop the dependent views, modify the base view, add
back the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 12:29:13 -0300
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > > Right at the moment the raw data is still in Bruce's patch queue.
> > > It's becoming increasingly obvious that that isn't
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The bottom line is that this going to be painful no matter how we go at
> > it:
> > http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgpatches
>
> Yup.
>
> > There are nine pages now. The patch queue will be twice that size once
> > I am done. I am t
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The bottom line is that this going to be painful no matter how we go at
> it:
> http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgpatches
Yup.
> There are nine pages now. The patch queue will be twice that size once
> I am done. I am trying to trim but it is difficul
I assume don't want a TODO for this? (Suppress UPDATE no changed
columns)
---
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Michael Glaesemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> What would be the disadvantages of a
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > > Right at the moment the raw data is still in Bruce's patch queue.
> > > It's becoming increasingly obvious that that isn't going to work;
> > > we can't have one man being a complete bottleneck for the entire
> > > process.
Fixed for CVS HEAD and 8.3, will fix for previous versions too.
Richard Huxton wrote:
Teodor Sigaev wrote:
So - is this a bug, feature, "feature"?
It's definitely a bug:
select count(*), query from queries group by query;
count | query
---+--
3 | 'tender'
4 | 'tender'
Added to TODO:
o Have \l+ show database size, if permissions allow
Ideally it will not generate an error for invalid permissions
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Brendan Jurd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'd f
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Right at the moment the raw data is still in Bruce's patch queue.
> > It's becoming increasingly obvious that that isn't going to work;
> > we can't have one man being a complete bottleneck for the entire
> > process. I concur with your other suggestion
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The first commitfest has been on for about a week now, but I haven't
> > seem much festivities going on.
>
> Yeah, we are a bit behind on starting it :-(. Bruce was traveling
> until the end of February and is still not caugh
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The first commitfest has been on for about a week now, but I haven't
> seem much festivities going on.
Yeah, we are a bit behind on starting it :-(. Bruce was traveling
until the end of February and is still not caught up on updating
his list of
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 01:03:20PM +0200, Dawid Kuroczko wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > I think it could be a nice idea to put descriptions from
> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/catalogs.html
> > into system catalogs itself. I.e., make
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> The first commitfest has been on for about a week now, but I haven't
> seem much festivities going on.
>
> Do we plan to drain Bruce's patch queue completely during this
> commitfest? Or the items on the developer wiki TODO:PatchStatus list?
> When do we declare the
It's not clear how this commitfest thing is supposed to work in
practice. May I suggest that:
1. When a patch author wants to have a patch reviewed in the next
commitfest, he posts it to pgsql-patches as usual, and then adds it to
the list on the Todo:PatchStatus page (or perhaps even better,
The first commitfest has been on for about a week now, but I haven't
seem much festivities going on.
Do we plan to drain Bruce's patch queue completely during this
commitfest? Or the items on the developer wiki TODO:PatchStatus list?
When do we declare the commitfest to be over?
Bruce's queu
Tom Lane escribió:
> Not sure about a clean solution to this. I don't really want to
> bastardize inval.c by making it deal with nontransactional semantics,
> but there may be no other way.
FWIW IIRC we hit precisely this problem while trying to do the
pg_class_nt stuff awhile ago, so if it's ov
"Pavan Deolasee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The WIP patch looks good to me. I haven't yet tested it (will wait for the
> final version). The following pointer arithmetic caught my eye though.
> ! nunused = (end - nowunused);
> Shouldn't we typecast them to (char *) first ?
No ... we want the
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Heikki, are you going to revise this for 8.4?
Probably not. I have other features I want to work on at the moment.
---
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I've brought the GIT patch up-to-date with CVS head. T
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is this something that happens only with concurrent VACUUM FULLs ?
>
No, its about VACUUM FULL on a system catalog which fails for some reason.
The VACUUM FULL may have changed CTID of a tuple because of line
pointer re
On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 20:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Not sure about a clean solution to this. I don't really want to
> bastardize inval.c by making it deal with nontransactional semantics,
> but there may be no other way.
Is this something that happens only with concurrent VACUUM FULLs ?
If so
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think that just makes things more complex and fragile. I like
> Heikki's idea, in part because it makes the normal path and the WAL
> recovery path guaranteed to work alike. I'll attach my work-in-progress
> patch for
62 matches
Mail list logo
