Re: [HACKERS] Issue: Deprecation of the XML2 module 'xml_is_well_formed' function

On fre, 2010-07-02 at 14:07 +0100, Mike Fowler wrote: > So if IS CONTENT were > to be implemented, to determine that you have something that is > malformed But that's not what IS CONTENT does. "Content" still needs to be well-formed. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@p

Re: [HACKERS] _bt_parent_deletion_safe() isn't safe

Bruce Momjian writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> A search of the archives produces no evidence that anyone has ever >> reported the "failed to delete rightmost child" error from the field. >> So while I still think this is a bug that needs to be fixed, it may >> be lower priority than I thought initiall

Re: [HACKERS] bitmap indexes - performance

On 02/07/10 20:30, Mark Kirkwood wrote: I recall that for (some/most? of) those low cardinality cases, (on disk) bitmap indexes would perform better too. I think the size saving alone is a huge win for serious data warehousing situations. On the other hand problems I recall are possibly reduc

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow copydir() to be interrupted.

Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: MSVC was looking for it and not finding it. I have committed a fix that I hope will fix the MSVC builds, by removing it from the list of files in libpgport. You'll need to do the same thing in 8.4... Darn

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow copydir() to be interrupted.

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > MSVC was looking for it and not finding it. I have committed a fix that I > hope will fix the MSVC builds, by removing it from the list of files in > libpgport. You'll need to do the same thing in 8.4... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http:/

[HACKERS] dynamically allocating chunks from shared memory

Hi, for quite some time, I've been under the impression, that there's still one disadvantage left from using processes instead of threads: we can only use statically sized chunks of shared memory. Every component that wants to use shared memory needs to pre-allocate whatever it thinks is suffi

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow copydir() to be interrupted.

Robert Haas wrote: I suspect that moving copydir.c into the backend will fix this, but I don't have an appropriate build environment to test. Can someone please test the attached patch? Andrew confirms that this works on mingw, so I'm going to go ahead and check it in and see what happ

Re: [HACKERS] _bt_parent_deletion_safe() isn't safe

Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > I realized this while thinking about Jeff Amiel's report here: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2010-06/msg00351.php > > I can't prove that this is what's causing his crashes, but it could > > produce the symptom he's reporting. > > Actually, no it ca

Re: [HACKERS] warning message in standby

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: > >>> If someone is sloppy about how they copy the WAL files around, >>> they could temporarily have a truncated file. >> >> Can you explain the scenario you're concerned about in more >> detail? > > If someone uses cp o

Re: [HACKERS] keepalives on MacOS X

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:53 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 12:42 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Yeah, a bit of rooting around in the Darwin sources shows that this >>> value is used as a per-connection override for tcp_keepidle

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Okay, I'm confused.  This patch removed an operator named %, which AFAIK >>> was not controversial.  The problematic operator is => no? > >> It used to be => > > Nevermind

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

Robert Haas writes: > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Okay, I'm confused.  This patch removed an operator named %, which AFAIK >> was not controversial.  The problematic operator is => no? > It used to be => Nevermind, I *am* confused. Obviously time to knock off for the day

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > "David E. Wheeler" writes: >>> You forgot to attach the patch.  :-) > >> Attached. > > Okay, I'm confused.  This patch removed an operator named %, which AFAIK > was not controversial.  The problematic operator is => no? It used to be => After m

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

"David E. Wheeler" writes: >> You forgot to attach the patch. :-) > Attached. Okay, I'm confused. This patch removed an operator named %, which AFAIK was not controversial. The problematic operator is => no? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (

Re: [HACKERS] Keepalive for max_standby_delay

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> In the archive case, you're presumably trying to catch up, and so it >>> makes sense to kill queries faster so you can catch up. > >> On the flip side, the timeout for the

Re: [HACKERS] Keepalive for max_standby_delay

Robert Haas writes: > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> In the archive case, you're presumably trying to catch up, and so it >> makes sense to kill queries faster so you can catch up. > On the flip side, the timeout for the WAL segment is for 16MB of WAL, > whereas the timeout f

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

On Jul 2, 2010, at 1:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> No, I removed that because that table has only operators, no functions. >> Seehttp://developer.postgresql.org/docs/postgres/hstore.html. > > The section contains two tables. Table F-5 is called "hstore > operators", and table F-6 is called "hsto

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:43 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > On Jul 2, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > >> Thanks, committed - with the exception that I reverted your change to >> the title of section F.13.2, which I believe was in error (and >> possibly accidental). > > No, I removed that beca

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

On Jul 2, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > Thanks, committed - with the exception that I reverted your change to > the title of section F.13.2, which I believe was in error (and > possibly accidental). No, I removed that because that table has only operators, no functions. See http://devel

Re: [HACKERS] Keepalive for max_standby_delay

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> I haven't been able to wrap my head around why the delay should be >> LESS in the archive case than in the streaming case.  Can you attempt >> to hit me with the clue-by-four? > > In the archive case, you're presumably tryin

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 2:39 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > On Jul 2, 2010, at 10:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > Yeah, I think the consensus is to avoid picking an operator name at all. "slice()" is OK by me. >>> >>> Will this be done for Beta 3? >> >> You forgot to attach the patch.  :-) > >

Re: [HACKERS] Keepalive for max_standby_delay

Robert Haas writes: > I haven't been able to wrap my head around why the delay should be > LESS in the archive case than in the streaming case. Can you attempt > to hit me with the clue-by-four? In the archive case, you're presumably trying to catch up, and so it makes sense to kill queries fast

Re: [HACKERS] Keepalive for max_standby_delay

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > [ Apologies for the very slow turnaround on this --- I got hit with > another batch of non-postgres security issues this week. ] > > Attached is a draft patch for revising the max_standby_delay behavior into > something I think is a bit saner.  The

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow copydir() to be interrupted.

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Robert Haas writes: >>> This appears to have broken MinGW and Cygwin bu

Re: [HACKERS] Keepalive for max_standby_delay

[ Apologies for the very slow turnaround on this --- I got hit with another batch of non-postgres security issues this week. ] Attached is a draft patch for revising the max_standby_delay behavior into something I think is a bit saner. There is some unfinished business: * I haven't touched the d

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

On Jul 2, 2010, at 10:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> Yeah, I think the consensus is to avoid picking an operator name at all. >>> "slice()" is OK by me. >> >> Will this be done for Beta 3? > > You forgot to attach the patch. :-) Attached. Only thing that gave me pause is the presence of the un

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 12:36 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > On Jun 28, 2010, at 12:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> While I would personally prefer to have an operator for the slicing >>> opeeration, I'm not willing to spend time arguing about it.  So, +1 to >>> implement the subset operation as the fu

Re: [HACKERS] server authentication over Unix-domain sockets

Peter Eisentraut wrote: Is there any possibilities that both WIN32 and HAVE_UNIX_SOCKETS are set concurrently? If possible, the libpq may try to call undefined function, then build will be failed. Win32 never has HAVE_UNIX_SOCKET. Cygwin might though, I recall some old discussion about

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow copydir() to be interrupted.

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Robert Haas writes: >> This appears to have broken MinGW and Cygwin builds on the buildfarm. Well, that's not awesome.

Re: [HACKERS] hstore ==> and deprecate =>

On Jun 28, 2010, at 12:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> While I would personally prefer to have an operator for the slicing >> opeeration, I'm not willing to spend time arguing about it. So, +1 to >> implement the subset operation as the function slice(), and defer having >> an operator until later. >

Re: [HACKERS] server authentication over Unix-domain sockets

On fre, 2010-07-02 at 09:16 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 8:35 AM, KaiGai Kohei wrote: > > (2010/07/01 11:30), Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > I have a question. > > > > The pqGetpwuid() is enclosed by #ifndef WIN32 ... #endif, although > > this patch encloses the section to o

Re: [HACKERS] get_whatever_oid, part 1: object types with unqualifed names

2010/7/2 KaiGai Kohei : > The transitions from object name to its oid are widely used in > the routines of the backend, so I also think this reworks will > enough worthwhile to keep the code clean. > > So, I marked it as "ready for committer". Thanks. Are you planning to review the part 2 patch a

Re: [HACKERS] Adding regexp_match() function

On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 4:25 AM, Jim Nasby wrote: > This seems like it'd be useful. Anyone else have thoughts on it? +1. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make chang

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow copydir() to be interrupted.

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Robert Haas writes: > This appears to have broken MinGW and Cygwin builds on the buildfarm. >>> >>> Well, that's not awesome. IM-ing with Magnus now.  I'm wondering if >>> this is a link

Re: [HACKERS] Adding regexp_match() function

This seems like it'd be useful. Anyone else have thoughts on it? On May 31, 2010, at 4:09 AM, Daniele Varrazzo wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to contribute a "regexp_match()" function as discussed in bug > #5469 [1] The aim is to overcome the limitation outlined in the thread > above

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow copydir() to be interrupted.

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: This appears to have broken MinGW and Cygwin builds on the buildfarm. >> >> Well, that's not awesome. IM-ing with Magnus now.  I'm wondering if >> this is a link-ordering problem of some kind. > > Possibly an #ifndef FRON

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow copydir() to be interrupted.

Robert Haas writes: >>> This appears to have broken MinGW and Cygwin builds on the buildfarm. > > Well, that's not awesome. IM-ing with Magnus now.  I'm wondering if > this is a link-ordering problem of some kind. Possibly an #ifndef FRONTEND will fix it. regards, tom la

Re: [HACKERS] Issue: Deprecation of the XML2 module 'xml_is_well_formed' function

Quoting Robert Haas : I think the point if "IS DOCUMENT" is to distinguish a document: some stuff from a document fragment: A document is allowed only one toplevel tag. It'd be nice, I think, to have a function that tells you whether something is legal XML without throwing an error if it

[HACKERS] gincostestimate

Patch implements much more accuracy estimation of cost for GIN index scan than generic cost estimation function. Basic idea is described on PGCon-2010: http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/talks/pgcon-2010-1.pdf, pages 48-54. After discussion on PGCon, the storage of additional statistic info

[HACKERS] hello

hello: I have Order china Product Apple iPad Wi-Fi 32GB I have received the product! this website:Toradeo.com I believe you will find what you want there and have an good experience on shopping from them. Regards! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make chang

Re: [HACKERS] bitmap indexes - performance

On 02/07/10 13:31, Bruce Momjian wrote: Leonardo F wrote: I'm trying to find more docs that explain the "improvements" of bitmap indexes in other products... but most of what I've found talks about bitmapAND/OR which is something that is very cool, but that postgres already does even wit

Re: [HACKERS] server authentication over Unix-domain sockets

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 8:35 AM, KaiGai Kohei wrote: > (2010/07/01 11:30), Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I have a question. > > The pqGetpwuid() is enclosed by #ifndef WIN32 ... #endif, although > this patch encloses the section to obtain user id of the peer by > #ifdef HAVE_UNIX_SOCKETS ... #endif. >

Re: [HACKERS] server authentication over Unix-domain sockets

(2010/07/01 11:30), Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On tis, 2010-06-22 at 09:37 +0900, KaiGai Kohei wrote: >> As you described at the source code comments as follows, >> it is not portable except for Linux due to the getsockopt() API. >> >> + // TODO: currently Linux-only code, needs to be