On Friday 21 May 2010 05:40:03 Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I looked a bit around for faster implementations of CRC32 and found one
> > in zlib. After adapting it (pg uses slightly different computation (non-
> > inverted)) I found that it increase
On Kam, 2010-05-20 at 23:50 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> The string "selectme" doesn't appear anywhere in my copy of the
> PostgreSQL source code, with any capitalization, or in any previous
> version of keywords.c, in any capitalization. I think this must be
> something you changed in your copy.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Mohammad Heykal Abdillah
wrote:
> I just wonder why "select" keyword token in PostgreSQL is identified as
> "selectme" (at src/backend/parser/keywords.c)?
>
> Whats it's the different between "select" and "selectme" ?
The string "selectme" doesn't appear anywhere
All,
I was trying to implement some database language into PostgreSQL. Let's
say an SQL command that using local language as it's command. I know
it's not standard, but it's not the issue for me.
I made a lot modification in "scan.l" and "gram.y" and related file in
parser (src/backend/parser). S
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> I looked a bit around for faster implementations of CRC32 and found one in
> zlib. After adapting it (pg uses slightly different computation (non-
> inverted)) I found that it increases the speed of the CRC32 calculation itself
> 3 fold.
But
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Ben Hockey wrote:
> thanks for looking into adding this feature. custom formats for parsing and
> formatting of dates would certainly be the better option if it can be done
> securely.
Well, Pavel expressed a concern about SQL injection, but I can't see
why that
On May 19, 2010, at 2:15 , Florian Pflug wrote:
> On May 17, 2010, at 3:30 , Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
>>> On May 14, 2010, at 22:54 , Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Florian Pflug writes:
>> All
On May 19, 2010, at 4:31 AM, Mike Fowler wrote:
Pavel Stehule wrote:
2010/5/19 Peter Eisentraut :
On tis, 2010-05-18 at 18:26 -0400, Ben Hockey wrote:
ecmascript 5 is the most recent specification for JavaScript and i
would think that having a DATESTYLE format to simplify
interoperability
Rosser Schwarz writes:
> Has anyone ever seen this message on non-NetApp NFS?
It's been seen on non-NFS storage:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2006-09/msg00096.php
I don't believe we implicated NFS in the other original report,
either. However, it's certainly possible that there's
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Excerpts from Justin Pasher's message of jue may 20 16:10:53 -0400 2010:
>> Whenever I clear out the stats for all of the databases, the file
>> shrinks down to <1MB. However, it only takes about a day for it to get
>> back up to ~18MB and then the stats collector proces
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> We (at Command Prompt) researched this recently for another setup and
> the common point you both have is NetApp. I then wondered about a bug
> in NetApp driver or NFS client implementation.
It's definitely not (just) NetApp, though it ma
Excerpts from Justin Pasher's message of jue may 20 16:10:53 -0400 2010:
> Whenever I clear out the stats for all of the databases, the file
> shrinks down to <1MB. However, it only takes about a day for it to get
> back up to ~18MB and then the stats collector process start the heavy
> disk wr
Excerpts from Tony Sullivan's message of jue may 20 16:54:17 -0400 2010:
> > Hello everyone,
>
> >
>
> > We are seeing the following error message occasionally in the postgres logs:
>
> >
>
> > 2010-05-13 23:49:03 PDT ERROR: unexpected data beyond EOF in block 4106698
> > of relation "custom_d
"Kevin Flanagan" writes:
> Why would adding "target_lang_code='en'" cause this error?
Hard to tell without seeing the index definitions for this table.
Also could we see the EXPLAIN plans for both queries? (If possible
... I'm not sure whether you'd get this error just from EXPLAINing
the proble
> Hello everyone,
>
> We are seeing the following error message occasionally in the postgres logs:
>
> 2010-05-13 23:49:03 PDT ERROR: unexpected data beyond EOF in block 4106698 of
> relation "custom_discoveryprofile"
> 2010-05-13 23:49:03 PDT HINT: This has been seen to occur with buggy kern
Hi Stephen,
On Thursday 20 May 2010 22:39:26 Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
> > Statement:
> > INSERT INTO blub SELECT a.i, b.i, a.i *b.i FROM generate_series(1, 1)
> > a(i), generate_series(1, 1000) b(i);
> >
> > legacy crc:
> Is this legacy crc using the
Andres,
* Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
> Statement:
> INSERT INTO blub SELECT a.i, b.i, a.i *b.i FROM generate_series(1, 1)
> a(i), generate_series(1, 1000) b(i);
>
> legacy crc:
>
> zlib:
Is this legacy crc using the function-based calls, or the macro? Do you
have statistics
Could anyone advise as to how to avoid this error? I'll describe the table
and query below.
The database contains a table 'tinytm_segments', which has two text columns,
'source_text' and 'target_text'. These are used to store sentences and their
translations. The language of the text is specifi
Hi,
I started to analyze XLogInsert because it was the major bottleneck when
creating some materialized view/cached tables/whatever.
Analyzing it I could see that content of the COMP_CRC32 macro was taking most
of the time which isn't immediately obvious when you profile because it
obviously do
On Thu, May 20, 2010 2:12 pm, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's annoying though that
> the buildfarm script didn't capture the relevant log file in this
> particular failure case. Andrew, can we get that fixed?
>
It was captured, but apparently had no new content - not surprising if it
ran out of space.
c
On Thu, May 20, 2010 3:06 pm, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> huh? that does not make any sense at all - the licence the submitter
>> chooses _IS_ displayed on the main overview page of the project (see for
>> example: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgbouncer/).
>
> That doesn't happen automatically -- afte
On May 20, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Creager writes:
>> If anyone is interested, I think this failure was accompanied by the
>> following:
>> [ apparent PANIC in UpdateControlFile ]
>
> Hmm, do you have the panic message in the postmaster log? So far as I
> can tell, the pos
huh? that does not make any sense at all - the licence the submitter
chooses _IS_ displayed on the main overview page of the project (see for
example: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgbouncer/).
That doesn't happen automatically -- after acceptance, the project owner
needs to select a license
On 05/20/2010 01:58 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 05/18/2010 01:57 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> I notice that there are more than a few projects on pgfoundry that are
>> marked as "BSD licence" but then the project files don't contain any
>> mention of the licence details. In some cases, projects are al
Robert Creager writes:
> On May 20, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Was there any special environment here, like running out of disk space?
> Not that I'm aware of. I did empty trash sometime yesterday after noticing I
> was around 1Gb of free disk. Not sure if that correlates or not. M
On 05/18/2010 01:57 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
I notice that there are more than a few projects on pgfoundry that are
marked as "BSD licence" but then the project files don't contain any
mention of the licence details. In some cases, projects are also clearly
marked Copyright of people or organizatio
Robert Creager writes:
> If anyone is interested, I think this failure was accompanied by the
> following:
> [ apparent PANIC in UpdateControlFile ]
Hmm, do you have the panic message in the postmaster log? So far as I
can tell, the postmaster log isn't captured anywhere in the buildfarm
report
2010/5/20 Pavel :
>
> d) what to do when someone use INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE against MV?
> 1 - raise error? - I prefer this option
+1, FWIW
> 2 - let commands change MV? (no chance to let changes propagate to
> source tables, not for this summer :)
> if pg lets user to DML against MV, I ex
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm, I think you need to ignore RT entries that have no requiredPerms
>> bits set. (Not that it matters too much, unless you were proposing to
>> actually commit this contrib module.)
> Well, that's an easy change - just
First of all, I really appreciate you gave me change to participate on
GSoC. It's great chance for me.
For this summer I have plan to make patch inplementing snapshot
materialized views (MV). I believe it will not be end of effort to
implement more of MV. But I / we need discuss MV syntax and
If anyone is interested, I think this failure was accompanied by the following:
Process: postgres [35159]
Path:
/usr/local/src/build-farm-3.2_llvm/builds/HEAD/inst/bin/postgres
Identifier: postgres
Version: ??? (???)
Code Type: X86-64 (Native)
Parent Process:
And another one (different compiler):
Process: postgres [48669]
Path:/usr/local/src/build-farm-3.2/builds/HEAD/inst/bin/postgres
Identifier: postgres
Version: ??? (???)
Code Type: X86-64 (Native)
Parent Process: postgres [48015]
Date/Time: 2010-05-19
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> In yesterday's development meeting, we talked about the possibility of
>> a basic SE-PostgreSQL implementation that checks permissions only for
>> DML. Greg Smith offered the opinion that this could provide much of
>> the
Robert Haas writes:
> In yesterday's development meeting, we talked about the possibility of
> a basic SE-PostgreSQL implementation that checks permissions only for
> DML. Greg Smith offered the opinion that this could provide much of
> the benefit of SE-PostgreSQL for many users, while being muc
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Selena Deckelmann writes:
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Yeah, I thought the agreement was to keep the same target dates as
>>> for last year's commitfests.
>
>> Yes! However, we were going to do a "reviewfest" starting
In yesterday's development meeting, we talked about the possibility of
a basic SE-PostgreSQL implementation that checks permissions only for
DML. Greg Smith offered the opinion that this could provide much of
the benefit of SE-PostgreSQL for many users, while being much simpler.
In fact, SE-Postg
Selena Deckelmann writes:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, I thought the agreement was to keep the same target dates as
>> for last year's commitfests.
> Yes! However, we were going to do a "reviewfest" starting June 15.
> Is there a way for me to specify that differe
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Selena Deckelmann
wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas writes:
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann
>>> wrote:
Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do
that, can you info
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Selena Deckelmann
wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas writes:
>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann
>>> wrote:
Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do
that, can you info
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann
>> wrote:
>>> Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do
>>> that, can you inform me how?
>
>> I thought we agreed on 2009-07?
>
> Yeah, I thought
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner
wrote:
> On 05/20/2010 07:21 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann
>> wrote:
>>> Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do
>>> that, can you inform me how?
>>
>> I thought we agr
On 05/20/2010 07:21 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann
> wrote:
>> Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do
>> that, can you inform me how?
>
> I thought we agreed on 2009-07? Anyhow, you just hit "Edit
> CommitFest". It requir
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann
> wrote:
>> Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do
>> that, can you inform me how?
> I thought we agreed on 2009-07?
Yeah, I thought the agreement was to keep the same target dates as
for last
On 05/19/2010 05:16 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Andres Freund wrote:
>> On Wednesday 19 May 2010 22:39:32 Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> There are some limitations when migrating from 8.3 to 8.4, but not when
>>> migrating from 8.3 to 9.0, because we added a feature to 9.0. Can you
>>> give a specific ex
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Selena Deckelmann
wrote:
> Can we get that commitfest renamed? And if I should know how to do
> that, can you inform me how?
I thought we agreed on 2009-07? Anyhow, you just hit "Edit
CommitFest". It requires admin privileges, which I have now given
you.
--
R
45 matches
Mail list logo
