Re: [HACKERS] contrib function naming, and upgrade issues

2009-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Gierth writes: > Note that I'm talking here about the names of the C functions, not > the SQL names. > The existing hstore has some very dubious choices of function names > (for non-static functions) in the C code; functions like each(), > delete(), fetchval(), defined(), tconvert(), etc.

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Haas wrote: > I personally think that the way pgsql-hackers organizes itself using > email is completely insane. The only reason that you need to write > the release notes instead of, say, me, is because the only information > on what needs to go into them is buried in a thicket of CVS comm

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian escribi?: > > Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > > Note that during the 8.4 timeframe we've stolen a lot of work from > > > Bruce. The TODO list was moved to the wiki, for one; the "patch queue" > > > was also moved to the wiki. Now the FAQ has moved to wiki (and h

Re: [HACKERS] contrib function naming, and upgrade issues

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Andrew Gierth wrote: > Note that I'm talking here about the names of the C functions, not > the SQL names. > > The existing hstore has some very dubious choices of function names > (for non-static functions) in the C code; functions like each(), > delete(), fetchva

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed Patch to Improve Performance of Multi-BatchHash Join for Skewed Data Sets

2009-03-20 Thread Bryce Cutt
The estimation functions assume the inner relation join column is unique. But it freezes (flushes back to the main hash table) one skew bucket at a time in order of least importance so if 100 inner tuples can fit in the skew buckets then the skew buckets are only fully blown out if the best tuple

[HACKERS] contrib function naming, and upgrade issues

2009-03-20 Thread Andrew Gierth
Note that I'm talking here about the names of the C functions, not the SQL names. The existing hstore has some very dubious choices of function names (for non-static functions) in the C code; functions like each(), delete(), fetchval(), defined(), tconvert(), etc. which all look to me like prime c

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed Patch to Improve Performance of Multi-BatchHash Join for Skewed Data Sets

2009-03-20 Thread Bryce Cutt
Not necessarily true. Seeing as (when the statistics are correct) we know each of these inner tuples will match with the largest amount of outer tuples it is just as much of a win per inner tuple as when they are unique. There is just a chance you will have to give up on the optimization part way

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed Patch to Improve Performance of Multi-BatchHash Join for Skewed Data Sets

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Bryce Cutt wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> If the inner relation isn't fairly close to unique you shouldn't be >> using this optimization in the first place. > Not necessarily true.  Seeing as (when the statistics are correct) we >

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed Patch to Improve Performance of Multi-BatchHash Join for Skewed Data Sets

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Bryce Cutt wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> If the inner relation isn't fairly close to unique you shouldn't be >> using this optimization in the first place. > Not necessarily true.  Seeing as (when the statistics are correct) we >

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed Patch to Improve Performance of Multi-BatchHash Join for Skewed Data Sets

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 8:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Bryce Cutt writes: >> Here is the new patch. > > Applied with revisions.  I undid some of the "optimizations" that > cluttered the code in order to save a cycle or two per tuple --- as per > previous discussion, that's not what the performance qu

[HACKERS] mbox-to-html script with stable identifiers

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
Here's an attempt. Let me know what you think. I had thought to maybe just write a script to generate Mediawiki output and then post it on the wiki where anyone could edit it. But that's not going to work if you're going to continue adding to this, or at least not without more thought about how

Re: [HACKERS] Proposed Patch to Improve Performance of Multi-BatchHash Join for Skewed Data Sets

2009-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Bryce Cutt writes: > Here is the new patch. Applied with revisions. I undid some of the "optimizations" that cluttered the code in order to save a cycle or two per tuple --- as per previous discussion, that's not what the performance questions were about. Also, I did not like the terminology "i

Re: [HACKERS] gettext, plural form and translation

2009-03-20 Thread Sergey Burladyan
Sergey Burladyan writes: > gettext-plural-ru-test.patch: > - correct translation for "1 rows" message hmmm... encoding is broken... i post it again in gzip gettext-plural-ru-test.patch.gz Description: gettext-plural-ru-test.patch -- Sergey Burladyan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing l

Re: [HACKERS] xpath processing brain dead

2009-03-20 Thread James Pye
On Mar 20, 2009, at 8:56 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: A "/" at the beginning of a path expression is an abbreviation for the initial step fn:root(self::node()) treat as document-node()/ (however, if the "/" is the entire path expression, the trailing "/" is omitted

Re: [HACKERS] gettext, plural form and translation

2009-03-20 Thread Sergey Burladyan
Alvaro Herrera writes: > Care to submit a patch? this is it, i divide it into two, first is change source and second is change ru.po file for psql. changelog: gettext-plural-test.patch - check ngettext in configure (HAVE_NGETTEXT), show warning if not. must be error, i agree with Peter, i t

Re: [HACKERS] Open 8.4 item list

2009-03-20 Thread Jaime Casanova
On 3/20/09, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Here are some of the emails I consider open for 8.4: > >http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgsql/open > Item #3 Extending grant insert on tables to sequences is not for 8.4, i haven't reviewed it to adjust the patch after column privileges was applied. i will up

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas escribió: >> I don't even understand why we're interested in doing this.  If the >> patches weren't important enough for someone to add them to the >> CommitFest wiki in October, why are we delaying the release to hunt >> for the

[HACKERS] Pilot Project: transformationHook

2009-03-20 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello I am sending samples of possible future modules based on transformationHook regards Pavel Stehule tmodules.tgz Description: GNU Zip compressed data *** ./src/backend/parser/parse_expr.c.orig 2009-03-17 16:20:18.0 +0100 --- ./src/backend/parser/parse_expr.c 2009-03-17 16:24:43.

Re: [HACKERS] Open 8.4 item list

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Merlin Moncure wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> > Here are some of the emails I consider open for 8.4: > >> > > >> > ? ? http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgsql/open > >> > > >> > (Same email, using updated subject line.

Re: [HACKERS] Open 8.4 item list

2009-03-20 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Bruce Momjian wrote: >> > Here are some of the emails I consider open for 8.4: >> > >> >     http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgsql/open >> > >> > (Same email, using updated subject line.) >> >> mbox download URL fixed. > > L

Re: [HACKERS] hstore improvements?

2009-03-20 Thread Andrew Gierth
> "Josh" == Josh Berkus writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Josh Berkus writes: >>> As an hstore user, I'd be fine with simply limiting it to 64K (or, >>> heck, 8K) and throwing an error. I'd also be fine with limiting >>> keys to 255 bytes, although we'd have to warn people. >> Yeah, 255 mi

Re: [HACKERS] Open 8.4 item list

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Here are some of the emails I consider open for 8.4: > > > > http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgsql/open > > > > (Same email, using updated subject line.) > > mbox download URL fixed. Let me add that my item tracking is more of a blob that expands an

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 16:03 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> > Robert Haas wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> >> > You can use my emails to make a mas

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 16:03 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> > You can use my emails to make a master list --- there is no need to make > >> > mine the master. >

Re: [HACKERS] Open 8.4 item list

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Here are some of the emails I consider open for 8.4: > > http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgsql/open > > (Same email, using updated subject line.) mbox download URL fixed. -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://ente

[HACKERS] Open 8.4 item list

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Here are some of the emails I consider open for 8.4: http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgsql/open (Same email, using updated subject line.) -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> > You can use my emails to make a master list --- there is no need to make >> > mine the master. >> >> OK, good enough.  Can you post a link to the raw mbox file?

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > You can use my emails to make a master list --- there is no need to make > > mine the master. > > OK, good enough. Can you post a link to the raw mbox file? OK, done: http://momjian.us/cgi-bin/pgsql/open --

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > You can use my emails to make a master list --- there is no need to make > mine the master. OK, good enough. Can you post a link to the raw mbox file? ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To mak

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I did offer to post my mbox file so people could see what I have as open > > 8.4 items, but the "no complaining" requirement seems to have eliminated > > volunteers. > > IIRC, the biggest problem we had last time (apar

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I did offer to post my mbox file so people could see what I have as open > 8.4 items, but the "no complaining" requirement seems to have eliminated > volunteers. IIRC, the biggest problem we had last time (apart from the complaining) was tha

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Haas wrote: > >> Of course, if this list is radically incomplete, then it doesn't help > >> much, but does anyone think that's the case? > > > > We don't know -- Bruce's list may contain something, but since it's > > hidden we can't do anything. ?Maybe it is all already-completed items, > >

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas escribió: >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> wrote: >> > Robert Haas escribió: >> >> I don't even understand why we're interested in doing this.  If the >> >> patches weren't important enough for someone to ad

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Robert Haas escribió: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > Robert Haas escribió: > >> I don't even understand why we're interested in doing this.  If the > >> patches weren't important enough for someone to add them to the > >> CommitFest wiki in October, why are we delay

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > This is about the reaction I expected, and is again so far off the mark > that I will just continue doing what I think is best. Would you like to explain WHY it's off the mark? > Why doesn't someone offer to take my mbox file and generate a

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Robert Haas escribió: > I don't even understand why we're interested in doing this. If the > patches weren't important enough for someone to add them to the > CommitFest wiki in October, why are we delaying the release to hunt > for them in March? The problem is not patches that were not committ

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> I personally think that the way pgsql-hackers organizes itself using >> email is completely insane. > Note that during the 8.4 timeframe we've stolen a lot of work from > Bruce.  The TODO list was moved to the wiki, for one; the "patch queu

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > The TODO list is already on the Wiki. I've edited it a few times when I've > spotted TODO-worthy ideas on the mailing lists. Well, Bruce and Tom both made reference to something that Bruce was going to produce along these lines... I th

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian escribi?: > > Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian escribi?: > > > > > > We do have an alternative "open items" list, > > > > > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items > > > > > However, it's incomplete. It is a bit sad that nobody can

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian escribió: > Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Bruce Momjian escribi?: > > > > We do have an alternative "open items" list, > > > > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items > > > > However, it's incomplete. It is a bit sad that nobody can complete it, > > > > because Bruce h

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian escribi?: > > Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > > Note that during the 8.4 timeframe we've stolen a lot of work from > > > Bruce. The TODO list was moved to the wiki, for one; the "patch queue" > > > was also moved to the wiki. Now the FAQ has moved to wiki (and h

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian escribió: > Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Note that during the 8.4 timeframe we've stolen a lot of work from > > Bruce. The TODO list was moved to the wiki, for one; the "patch queue" > > was also moved to the wiki. Now the FAQ has moved to wiki (and has > > already seen lots of improv

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas escribi?: > > > I personally think that the way pgsql-hackers organizes itself using > > email is completely insane. > > Note that during the 8.4 timeframe we've stolen a lot of work from > Bruce. The TODO list was moved to the wiki, for one; the "patch queue"

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
This is about the reaction I expected, and is again so far off the mark that I will just continue doing what I think is best. Why doesn't someone offer to take my mbox file and generate a list from that? --- Robert Haas wro

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Robert Haas escribió: > I personally think that the way pgsql-hackers organizes itself using > email is completely insane. Note that during the 8.4 timeframe we've stolen a lot of work from Bruce. The TODO list was moved to the wiki, for one; the "patch queue" was also moved to the wiki. Now th

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Robert Haas wrote: Similarly, the only reason we don't have a workable TODO list is because you're attempting to extract it from a disorganized jumble of email after the fact, instead of maintaining it publicly and adding and removing items along the way. It might be slightly more work to think

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Robert Treat wrote: >> On Tuesday 17 March 2009 09:38:59 Bruce Momjian wrote: >> > You are assuming that only commit-fest work is required to get us to >> > beta.  You might remember the long list of open items I faced in January >> > that I

Re: [HACKERS] xpath processing brain dead

2009-03-20 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Hannu Krosing wrote: Is it just that in you _can't_ use Xpath on fragments, and you _need_ to pass full documents to Xpath ? At least this is my reading of Xpath standard. I think that's possibly overstating it., unless I have missed something (W3 standards are s

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian writes: > Robert Treat wrote: >> ... Perhaps we >> need to take a fresh look at your list of twenty things and see what can be >> delegated out to others. > Yep, I agree. The problem is that last time I put out a list that > wasn't clensed I got a lot of compaints so I am only g

Re: [HACKERS] cs_CZ vs regression tests, part N

2009-03-20 Thread Zdenek Kotala
Peter Eisentraut píše v pá 20. 03. 2009 v 15:33 +0200: > (Hmm, no one except Zdenek testing locales yet on the build farm? Can't > easily tell from the index page.) It seems to me like good idea to add column with locale list tested on a animal. Zdenek -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mai

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread David Fetter
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 09:38:59AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: > > > Well, we have been working on stuff for the past month so it was not > > > like we were waiting on SE-PG to move forward. > > > > Stuff related to the CommitFest? > > > > AFAICS, the only committer who has d

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Treat wrote: > On Tuesday 17 March 2009 09:38:59 Bruce Momjian wrote: > > You are assuming that only commit-fest work is required to get us to > > beta. You might remember the long list of open items I faced in January > > that I have whittled down, but I still have about twenty left. > > >

Re: [HACKERS] cs_CZ vs regression tests, part N

2009-03-20 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Tom Lane wrote: It's still broken: http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=gothic_moth&dt=2009-03-17%2021:06:01 I remain of the opinion that supporting the regression tests in a locale that works like this is more trouble than it's worth. We looked into

Re: [HACKERS] cs_CZ vs regression tests, part N

2009-03-20 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane wrote: It's still broken: http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=gothic_moth&dt=2009-03-17%2021:06:01 I remain of the opinion that supporting the regression tests in a locale that works like this is more trouble than it's worth. We looked into this and it turns out that thi

Re: [HACKERS] small but useful patches for text search

2009-03-20 Thread Robert Treat
On Tuesday 17 March 2009 09:38:59 Bruce Momjian wrote: > You are assuming that only commit-fest work is required to get us to > beta. You might remember the long list of open items I faced in January > that I have whittled down, but I still have about twenty left. > I think part of the perception

Re: [HACKERS] Extension of Thick Indexes

2009-03-20 Thread Shrish Purohit
Hi All, Some brief information about the thick index patch. The patch adds snapshot (MVCC) information to the indexes to enable them being used independently. With this information, the indexes need not refer to the heap data to check an index key's visibility. Various functions such as IndexTup

Re: [HACKERS] Extension of Thick Indexes

2009-03-20 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Gokulakannan Somasundaram wrote: It would be helpful to explain how this solves the lack of atomicity of visibility data updates, which last time I checked was the killer problem for this feature. Hmmm... To put it more clearly, this problem occurs when there is a thick index on a mutable funct

Re: [HACKERS] Have \d show child tables that inherit from the specified parent

2009-03-20 Thread damien clochard
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 This one is very basic, it just shows the child tables of a specific table when you type \d in psql : I'm not so jazzed about this, as I work on systems that have literally hundreds of child tables. hi everyone.

Re: [HACKERS] Extension of Thick Indexes

2009-03-20 Thread Gokulakannan Somasundaram
> It would be helpful to explain how this solves the lack of atomicity of > visibility data updates, which last time I checked was the killer > problem for this feature. > Hmmm... To put it more clearly, this problem occurs when there is a thick index on a mutable function(marked as immutable). In