[HACKERS] how to use eclipse when debugging postgreSQL backend

Hello hackers, I really appreciate Mr. Cecchet’s effort to establish the wiki page (working_with_eclipse, http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008- 10/msg00312.php). I set up my PostgreSQL development environment with Eclipse, following the page’s instructions. However, I’m

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Largeobject access controls

2009/9/24 KaiGai Kohei : > The attached patch is revised from the previous revision at the following > points: > > - The "largeobject_compat_acl" is renamed to "largeobject_check_acl". >  Its default is on, and turning it off means the largeobject stuff >  performs in compatible mode for the v8.4.

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE LIKE INCLUDING COMMENTS and STORAGES

2009/9/28 Itagaki Takahiro : > Brendan Jurd wrote: >> patching file src/bin/psql/sql_help.c >> Hunk #1 FAILED at 3. >> Hunk #2 FAILED at 1279. >> 2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/bin/psql/sql_help.c.rej > > Oops, sql_help.c is an automatic generated file. Please ignore the par

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE LIKE INCLUDING COMMENTS and STORAGES

Brendan Jurd wrote: > patching file src/bin/psql/sql_help.c > Hunk #1 FAILED at 3. > Hunk #2 FAILED at 1279. > 2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/bin/psql/sql_help.c.rej > > I have attached the rejects file. Oops, sql_help.c is an automatic generated file. Please ignore the

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE LIKE INCLUDING COMMENTS and STORAGES

2009/9/28 Itagaki Takahiro : > Thank you for reviewing. > I merged your fix and add INCLUDING ALL option to the new patch. > I changed InhRelation.options to be a bitmap of CreateStmtLikeOption. > INCLUDING just adds bits, and EXCLUDING drops bits. I had two hunks fail trying to apply your new pat

Re: [HACKERS] operator exclusion constraints

On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 22:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > Apparently, CommitFest > no longer means a time when people put aside their own patches to > review those of others; it seems now to mean a time when 87% of the > patch authors either continue development or ignore the CommitFest > completely.

Re: [HACKERS] operator exclusion constraints

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 21:38 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> In that case, I think we should target this for the next CommitFest. >> Especially given the number and complexity of the patches remaining >> for this CommitFest, I feel very uncomfortab

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE LIKE INCLUDING COMMENTS and STORAGES

Brendan Jurd wrote: > I am doing an initial review of your patch. Thank you for reviewing. I merged your fix and add INCLUDING ALL option to the new patch. I changed InhRelation.options to be a bitmap of CreateStmtLikeOption. INCLUDING just adds bits, and EXCLUDING drops bits. Now this patch a

Re: [HACKERS] TODO item: Allow more complex user/database default GUC settings

Robert Haas writes: > That seems to me to be just confusing the issue. Now the table name > and the view name are just totally different with no obvious > connection between them. We have enough nonsense of this type already > (e.g. pg_stats vs. pg_statistic; pg_authid vs. pg_roles vs. > pg_shad

Re: [HACKERS] operator exclusion constraints

On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 21:38 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > In that case, I think we should target this for the next CommitFest. > Especially given the number and complexity of the patches remaining > for this CommitFest, I feel very uncomfortable with the idea of > waiting another week for a new patch

Re: [HACKERS] Unicode UTF-8 table formatting for psql text output

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 9:24 PM, Selena Deckelmann wrote: > Hi! > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:16 AM, Roger Leigh wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:30:05AM -0700, Selena Deckelmann wrote: >>> Brad says: >>> >>>        The patched code compiles without any additional warnings. >>> Lint gripes ab

Re: [HACKERS] TODO item: Allow more complex user/database default GUC settings

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Alvaro Herrera escribió: > >> I think it can be solved by splitting OptRoleElem in a set of >> productions for ALTER and a superset of that for ALTER.  I'll go try >> that. > > Right, that works.  Updated patch attached; should solve the iss

Re: [HACKERS] TODO item: Allow more complex user/database default GUC settings

On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas escribió: > >> The problem of having both a table and a closely related view is, >> IME, one that comes up a lot. I think you just need to pick a >> convention and stick with it.  Mine is to append "_view" to the >> table name.

Re: [HACKERS] new version of PQconnectdb was:(Re: [HACKERS] Determining client_encoding from client locale)

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Jaime Casanova writes: >> i extracted the functions to connect that Heikki put on psql in his >> patch for determining client_encoding from client locale and put it in >> libpq so i follow the PQconnectdbParams(* params[]) approach. > > I got aro

Re: [HACKERS] operator exclusion constraints

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > Attached is a new patch. I ran it through filterdiff, but in case that > didn't work for some reason, I attached a gzipped version of the > original unified diff produced by git. > >  * Changed underlying algorithm to match Tom's suggestion: do

Re: [HACKERS] Unicode UTF-8 table formatting for psql text output

Hi! On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:16 AM, Roger Leigh wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:30:05AM -0700, Selena Deckelmann wrote: >> Brad says: >> >>        The patched code compiles without any additional warnings. >> Lint gripes about a trailing ',' in 'typedef enum printTextRule' in >> print.h.  Ot

Re: [HACKERS] handlers for inline code

Andrew Dunstan writes: > I'm looking at creating a plperl inline code handler. I'd like to modify > the new InlineCodeBlock structure slightly by adding a "trusted" flag > and having the calling code in src/backend/commands/functioncmds.c fill > it in. This will save every language handler that

[HACKERS] handlers for inline code

I'm looking at creating a plperl inline code handler. I'd like to modify the new InlineCodeBlock structure slightly by adding a "trusted" flag and having the calling code in src/backend/commands/functioncmds.c fill it in. This will save every language handler that implements both trusted and

Re: [HACKERS] syslog_line_prefix

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 16:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Peter Eisentraut writes: >> > Then why not send everything to syslog and have syslog filter it to the >> > places you want to?  That is what syslog is for, after all. >> >> We send all

Re: [HACKERS] syslog_line_prefix

On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 16:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut writes: > > Then why not send everything to syslog and have syslog filter it to the > > places you want to? That is what syslog is for, after all. > > We send all syslog output with the same identifier/priority/facility, > so

Re: [HACKERS] syslog_line_prefix

Peter Eisentraut writes: > On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 14:58 -0600, Joshua Tolley wrote: >> Actually the thing I want is to be able to send some stuff to syslog, >> and some to a file, and other stuff to another file. This patch >> doesn't do all that, but lays the necessary groundwork. > Then why not

Re: [HACKERS] syslog_line_prefix

On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 14:58 -0600, Joshua Tolley wrote: > Actually the thing I want is to be able to send some stuff to syslog, > and some > to a file, and other stuff to another file. This patch doesn't do all > that, > but lays the necessary groundwork. Then why not send everything to syslog and

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba.conf: samehost and samenet [REVIEW]

Robert Haas wrote: >> Attached patch contains a fix. > > So is this one Ready for Committer? Not yet. Two more things to do. Will work on them early next week: * On Solaris the ioctl used only returns IPv4 addresses. * Don't use hard coded buffers on win32 and ioctl. Cheers, Stef -- Sen

Re: [HACKERS] Join optimization for inheritance tables

On 9/26/09 3:00 PM, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote: > Hi Simon, > > Thanks for the insight. I might take that as a long term project. I have > to discuss that with my colleagues at Aster. It would certainly help to > put together a wiki page with the key insights on the design of such > implementation to

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba.conf: samehost and samenet [REVIEW]

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Stef Walter wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 20:12, Stef Walter wrote: >> This patch does not build on Windows, the error is: >> ip.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __imp__wsaio...@36 >> referenced >>  in function _pg_fore

Re: [HACKERS] Linux LSB init script

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:20 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On Sun, 2009-09-20 at 22:54 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> It seems like there is some support for what this patch is trying to >> do, but much disagreement about the details of how to get there. >> Where do we go from here? > > I think the

Re: [HACKERS] Issues for named/mixed function notation patch

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > 2009/9/27 Robert Haas : >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Pavel Stehule >> wrote: "However, a named variadic argument can only be called the way shown in the example above. The VARIADIC keyword must not be specified and a

Re: [HACKERS] operator exclusion constraints [was: generalized index constraints]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I think that USING is just about as content-free as WITH in this >>> particular example --- it doesn't give you any hint about what the >>> purpose of the operator is. >

Re: [HACKERS] SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5

Robert Haas writes: > As to #1, personally, I think it's quite useful. The arguments that > have been made that lock_timeout is redundant with statement_timeout > don't seem to me to have much merit. > ... > As to #2, I was initially thinking dedicated syntax would be better > because I hate "SET

Re: [HACKERS] Issues for named/mixed function notation patch

2009/9/27 Robert Haas : > On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: >>> "However, a named variadic argument can only be called the way shown in >>> the example above. The VARIADIC keyword must not be specified and a >>> variadic notation of all arguments is not supported. To use va

Re: [HACKERS] SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 6:07 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: > Jeff Janes írta: >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 6:47 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan > > wrote: >> >>     Boszormenyi Zoltan írta: >>     > Alvaro Herrera írta: >>     > >>     >> Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: >>     >> >>     >>

Re: [HACKERS] Issues for named/mixed function notation patch

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> "However, a named variadic argument can only be called the way shown in >> the example above. The VARIADIC keyword must not be specified and a >> variadic notation of all arguments is not supported. To use variadic >> argument lists you mus

Re: [HACKERS] GRANT ON ALL IN schema

Robert Haas napsal(a): Abhijit, If this patch looks good now, can you mark it Ready for Committer in the CommitFest app? If there are any remaining issues, please post a further review. I believe he'll be out for two more days. -- Regards Petr Jelinek (PJMODOS) -- Sent via pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] operator exclusion constraints [was: generalized index constraints]

Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I think that USING is just about as content-free as WITH in this >> particular example --- it doesn't give you any hint about what the >> purpose of the operator is. > USING might be just as content-free as WITH, but USING

Re: [HACKERS] operator exclusion constraints [was: generalized index constraints]

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Jeff Davis writes: >> We can either eliminate the USING variant from opt_class (unless it's >> necessary for some reason or I missed it in the documentation), or we >> can use another word (e.g. WITH or WITH OPERATOR) if you don't like >> CHECK.

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Largeobject access controls

2009/9/24 KaiGai Kohei : > The attached patch is revised from the previous revision at the following > points: Jaime, Do you think this is Ready for Committer review at this point? If so, please mark it that way; otherwise, what do you think are the outstanding issues? ...Robert -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Reworks for Access Control facilities (r2311)

2009/9/24 KaiGai Kohei : > I noticed that the previous patch (r2311) fails to apply on the CVS HEAD. > The attached patch is only rebased to the latest CVS HEAD, without any > other changes. Stephen, Are you planning to post a review for this? We are 12 days into the CommitFest so we need to giv

Re: [HACKERS] GRANT ON ALL IN schema

2009/9/21 Petr Jelinek : > Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote: > > I have not yet been able to do a complete review of this patch, but I am > posting this because I'll be travelling for a week starting tomorrow. My > comments are based mostly on reading the patch, and not on any intensive > testing of the fea

Re: [HACKERS] Using results from INSERT ... RETURNING

Robert Haas writes: > Heh. I was actually asking an even stupider question, which is why do > we need to keep all of them in ANY centrally known data structure? > What operation do we perform that requires us to find all of the > exstant TTS? ExecDropTupleTable is used to release slot-related bu

Re: [HACKERS] Using results from INSERT ... RETURNING

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 12:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> Well, part of the problem is that I've not had a lot of luck trying to >> understand how the executor really works (what's a tuple table slot >> and why do we need to know in advance how many of them there are?). > > You k

Re: [HACKERS] Hot Standby 0.2.1

TransactionIdIsInProgress() doesn't consult the known-assigned-xids structure. That's a problem: in the standby, TransactionIdIsInProgress() can return false for a transaction that is still running in the master. HeapTupleSatisfies* functions can incorrectly set HEAP_XMIN/XMAX_INVALID hint bits for

Re: [HACKERS] Hot Standby 0.2.1

The locking in smgr_redo_commit and smgr_redo_abort doesn't look right. First of all, smgr_redo_abort is not holding XidGenLock and ProcArrayLock while modifying ShmemVariableCache->nextXid and ShmemVariableCache->latestCompletedXid, respectively, like smgr_redo_commit is. Attached patch fixes that

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] 8.5 TODO: Add comments to output indicating version of pg_dump and of the database server

On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 6:48 PM, David Fetter wrote: > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 11:02:55PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 16:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> > "shakahsha...@gmail.com" writes: >> > > From pg_dump/pg_restore section (9.2 of the Todo page on the >> > > PostgreSQ

Re: [HACKERS] Hot Standby on git

ki/postgres.git. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com hs-riggs-branch-20090927.tar.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers