On Sep 25, 2011, at 9:58 PM, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> I'd like to support UTF-8 text or csv files that has BOM (byte order mark)
> in COPY FROM command. BOM will be automatically detected and ignored
> if the file encoding is UTF-8. WIP patch attached.
By my reading of http://unicode.org/faq/utf
Hi,
I'd like to support UTF-8 text or csv files that has BOM (byte order mark)
in COPY FROM command. BOM will be automatically detected and ignored
if the file encoding is UTF-8. WIP patch attached.
I'm thinking about only COPY FROM for reads, but if someone wants to add
BOM in COPY TO, we might
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 12:06 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Then we
>> could get rid of the associated configure option, which no longer
>> serves any other purpose, and just say that if you want to build (or
>> regression-test) sepgsql, well, you gotta go to that directory and do
>> it by hand.
>
> The
Robert Haas writes:
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> As a stopgap, what about removing sepgsql from the list of contrib
>> modules tested by "make -C contrib check"?
> +1.
> In fact, I've been wondering if we ought to go a step further and not
> recurse into the sepgsql dir
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> As a stopgap, what about removing sepgsql from the list of contrib
> modules tested by "make -C contrib check"?
+1.
In fact, I've been wondering if we ought to go a step further and not
recurse into the sepgsql directory for *any* of the targets
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 10:12 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> [ new results ]
Nice results. I think these are far more convincing than the last
set, because (1) the gains are bigger and (2) they survive -O2 and (3)
you tested an actual query, not just qsort() itself.
I don't want to take time to r
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 11:22:03AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> Robert Haas 09/25/11 10:58 AM >>>
>>
>> > I'm not sure we've been 100% consistent about that, since we
>> > previously made CREATE OR REPLACE LANGUAGE not replace the owner
>>
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 11:22:03AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Robert Haas 09/25/11 10:58 AM >>>
>
> > I'm not sure we've been 100% consistent about that, since we
> > previously made CREATE OR REPLACE LANGUAGE not replace the owner
> > with the current user.
>
> I think we've been consisten
On 11-09-22 09:24 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
2011/9/13 Jun Ishiduka:
Update patch.
Changes:
* set 'on' full_page_writes by user (in document)
* read "FROM: XX" in backup_label (in xlog.c)
* check status when pg_stop_backup is executed (in
> Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" writes:
>> This is a review of the patch at this CF location:
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=598
>> as posted here:
>>
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4e04c099.3020...@enterprisedb.com
>
> Hmm, why is that patch the one p
"Kevin Grittner" writes:
> This is a review of the patch at this CF location:
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=598
> as posted here:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4e04c099.3020...@enterprisedb.com
Hmm, why is that patch the one posted for review, when several
So I thought it would be a good idea to enable contrib/sepgsql in the
Fedora build of 9.1. This soon crashed and burned, though, because
(1) if you build sepgsql, there is no way to omit the sepgsql regression
tests, other than by not regression-testing contrib at all. I didn't
see that as a ste
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>> I'm a bit nervous about storing security_barrier in the RTE. What
>> happens to stored rules if the security_barrier option gets change
>> later?
>>
> The rte->security_barrier is evaluated when a query referencing security
> views get expan
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 00:31, Heikki Linnakangas
> wrote:
>> That is somewhat compensated by the fact that tuples that are accessed more
>> often are also more likely to be in cache. Fetching the heap tuple to check
>> visibility is very c
This is a review of the patch at this CF location:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=598
as posted here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4e04c099.3020...@enterprisedb.com
This patch applied cleanly and compiled without warning. It
performed correctly. Since
panam wrote:
> OK, i started once again:
>
>
> I hope the following is the correct way of querying the table corresponding
> to a relid:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/fix-for-pg-upgrade-tp3411128p4838427.html
Yes, that
Hi,
Kohei KaiGai writes:
> 2011/8/15 Kohei KaiGai :
>> The attached three patches try to consolidate code path of DROP
>> statement on various kind of object classes.
>
> These are rebased to the latest tree, and the part-3 portion also consolidates
> DROP OPERATOR FAMILY/CLASS routines that I fo
Joshua Berkus writes:
> include_if_exists certainly solves the recovery.conf/recovery.done problem.
> We can even phase it out, like this:
> 9.2: include_if_exists = 'recovery.conf' in the default postgresql.conf file.
> 9.3: include_if_exists = 'recovery.conf' commented out by default
> 9.4: r
> I rather like Tom's suggestion of include_if_exists.
include_if_exists certainly solves the recovery.conf/recovery.done problem. We
can even phase it out, like this:
9.2: include_if_exists = 'recovery.conf' in the default postgresql.conf file.
9.3: include_if_exists = 'recovery.conf' commen
2011/9/23 Robert Haas :
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:45 AM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>> The attached patch is a portion that we splitted off when we added
>> pg_shseclabel system catalog.
>>
>> It enables the control/sepgsql to assign security label on pg_database
>> objects that are utilized as a basis
2011/9/24 Robert Haas :
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>> I updated the patches of fix-leaky-view problem, according to the
>> previous discussion.
>> The "NOLEAKY" option was replaced by "LEAKPROOF" option, and several
>> regression
>> test cases were added. Rest of stuff
All,
I'd love to see someone evaluate the impact of Marti's patch on JDBC
applications which use named prepared statements. Anyone have a benchmark
handy?
--Josh
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql
> > Reminder: BETWEEEN supports the SYMMETRIC keyword, so there is
> > a precedent for this.
>
> And I don't see it as valuable enough to justify changing the
> grammar.
I agree that we should leave symmetry until 9.3.
--Josh Berkus
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postg
On Sat, 2011-09-24 at 10:49 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I'll add that it would also cause a little confusion with inclusivity.
> > What if you do: '[5,2)'::int4range? Is that really '[2,5)' or '(2,5]'?
>
> Reminder: BETWEEEN supports the SYMMETRIC keyword, so there is
> a precedent for this.
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 00:31, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> That is somewhat compensated by the fact that tuples that are accessed more
> often are also more likely to be in cache. Fetching the heap tuple to check
> visibility is very cheap when the tuple is in cache.
>
> I'm not sure how far that
> There might be a use case for a separate directive include_if_exists,
> or some such name. But I think the user should have to tell us very
> clearly that it's okay for the file to not be found.
Better to go back to include_directory, then.
--Josh Berkus
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing l
Joshua Berkus writes:
> What happens currently if we have an \include in postgresql.conf for a file
> which doesn't exist? Is it ignored, or do we error out?
It's an error, and I think changing that would be a really bad idea.
> If it could just be ignored, maybe with a note in the logs, then
Folks,
What happens currently if we have an \include in postgresql.conf for a file
which doesn't exist? Is it ignored, or do we error out?
If it could just be ignored, maybe with a note in the logs, then we could be a
lot more flexible.
--Josh Berkus
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
Robert Haas writes:
> On Sep 24, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't exactly buy this argument. If postgresql.conf is hard to
>> machine-edit, why is recovery.conf any easier?
> Because you generally just write a brand-new file, without worrying
> about preserving existing settings. Yo
Simon Riggs writes:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Okay, so you do agree that eventually we want to be rid of
>> recovery.conf? I think everyone else agrees on that. But if we are
>> going to remove recovery.conf eventually, what is the benefit of
>> postponing doing so?
Kerem Kat writes:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 19:51, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Why? CORRESPONDING at a given set-operation level doesn't affect either
>> sub-query, so I don't see why you'd need a different representation for
>> the sub-queries.
> In the planner to construct a subquery out of SetOperati
> Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> I'm not clear the reason why the argument of
> CheckForSerializableConflictIn() was changed from the one in
> heap_insert().
The code was probably just based on heap_insert() before this recent
commit:
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=9d30
Robert Haas 09/25/11 10:58 AM >>>
> I'm not sure we've been 100% consistent about that, since we
> previously made CREATE OR REPLACE LANGUAGE not replace the owner
> with the current user.
I think we've been consistent in *not* changing security on an
object when it is replaced.
test=# create
That's it: a check constraint I was not aware of...
Thanks!
Edson
-Mensagem original-
De: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] Em nome de Tom Lane
Enviada em: domingo, 25 de setembro de 2011 13:04
Para: pgsql-gene...@postgresql.org; pgsql-hackers@
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn_H=E4user?= writes:
> Am 25.09.2011 um 17:17 schrieb Edson Carlos Ericksson Richter:
>> alter table usuario alter column ativo type smallint using (case when ativo
>> then 1 else 0 end);
>> ERROR: argument of IS FALSE must be type boolean, not type smallint
> you could che
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
>> Why do you need new WAL replay routines? Can't you just use the existing
>> XLOG_HEAP_NEWPAGE support?
>>
>> By any large, I think we should be avoiding special-purpose WAL entries
>> as much as possible.
>
> I tried that, but most of
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Joshua Berkus wrote:
>> Since we haven't yet come up with a reasonable way of machine-editing
>> postgresql.conf, this seems like a fairly serious objection to
>> getting
>> rid of recovery.conf. I wonder if there's a way we can work around
>> that...
>
> Well, we
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 06:25:01PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>> > The Part-1 implements corresponding SQL syntax stuffs which are
>> > "security_barrier"
>> > reloption of views, and "LEAK
Hi Greg,
On Sunday, September 25, 2011 03:25:50 AM Greg Stark wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Magnus Hagander
wrote:
> > I was assuming the kernel was smart enough to read this as "*this*
> > process is not going to be using this file anymore", not "nobody in
> > the whole machine is g
On 24 September 2011 11:59, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> TABLE tab completion in psql only completes to tables, not views. but
> the TABLE command works fine for both tables and views (and also
> sequences).
>
> Seems we should just complete it to relations and not tables - or can
> anyone see a parti
OK, i started once again:
I hope the following is the correct way of querying the table corresponding
to a relid:
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/fix-for-pg-upgrade-tp3411128p4838427.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at
On 25 September 2011 09:43, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> Hi Heikki,
>
> I checked your patch, then I have a comment and two questions here.
>
> 2011/9/14 Heikki Linnakangas :
>>
>> Attached is a new version of the patch. It is now complete, including WAL
>> replay code.
Hi,
I had a quick look at the pa
Hi Heikki,
I checked your patch, then I have a comment and two questions here.
The heap_prepare_insert() seems a duplication of code with earlier
half of existing heap_insert(). I think it is a good question to
consolidate these portion of the code.
I'm not clear the reason why the argument of
C
43 matches
Mail list logo
