Magnus Hagander writes:
> Basically, I'd like to combine a recursive and a non-recursive CTE in
> the same query.
Just mark them all as recursive. There's no harm in marking a CTE as
recursive when it isn't really.
> Trying something like:
> WITH t1 (z,b) AS (
>SELECT a,b FROM x
> ),
> RECU
On Jun 16, 2012, at 8:27 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is something I don't know how to do, or if it's
> something we simply can't do, or if it's something we could do but the
> syntax can't handle :-)
>
> Basically, I'd like to combine a recursive and a non-recursive CTE in
>
Amit kapila writes:
>> AFAIR pg_controldata fit on a disk sector so it can not be half written.
>It can be corrupt due to some other reasons as well like torn disk sector.
"Torn disk sector"? Please, this is nonsense. Disks cannot write half
a sector and then stop. A sufficiently badly de
I'm not sure if this is something I don't know how to do, or if it's
something we simply can't do, or if it's something we could do but the
syntax can't handle :-)
Basically, I'd like to combine a recursive and a non-recursive CTE in
the same query. If I do it non-recursive, I can do something lik
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Marko Kreen writes:
>> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Fair enough if we decide that - but we should make that decision
>>> knowing that we're leaving the JDBC and .Net people in a bad position
>>> where they are not
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
>> Yes, but there's also a lot of such awkward logic we need to add if we
>> *do* go with the SSL library doing the compression:
>
>> For example, we can no longer trust the SSL library to always do
>> encryption, since w
> I don't think so. C doesn't ref count its pointers.
You are right I have misunderstood.
> I don't think that lock tags have good human readable formats, and just
> a pointer dump probably wouldn't be much use when something that can
> never happen has happened. But I'll at least add a referenc
> > > I guess my first question is: why do we need this? There are lots of
> > > things in the TODO list that someone wanted once upon a time, but
> > > they're not all actually important. Do you have reason to believe
> > > that this one is? It's been six years since that email, so it's worth
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:45:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have updated the pgindent README to use
> these Perl indent instructions:
>
> find . -name \*.pl -o -name \*.pm | xargs perltidy \
> --backup-and-modify-in-place --opening-brace-on-new-line \
> --vertical-ti
Magnus Hagander writes:
> Yes, but there's also a lot of such awkward logic we need to add if we
> *do* go with the SSL library doing the compression:
> For example, we can no longer trust the SSL library to always do
> encryption, since we specifically want to support null encryption.
True, but
Marko Kreen writes:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Fair enough if we decide that - but we should make that decision
>> knowing that we're leaving the JDBC and .Net people in a bad position
>> where they are not likely to be able to implement his.
>>
>> The JDBC peop
On 06/14/2012 11:59 PM, Dave Page wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Dave Page wrote:
I'll have a play with it and see if a simple switch to NetworkService
seems feasible.
OK, I worked up a patch which uses "NT AUTHORITY\NetworkService" as
the service account by default. This doesn't nee
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Euler Taveira wrote:
>> On 15-06-2012 11:39, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> As long as a free implementation exists, it can be ported to
>>> Java/.Net. Sure, it takes more work, but it *can be done*.
>>>
>> Goo
On 16-06-2012 00:43, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> For example, we can no longer trust the SSL library to always do
> encryption, since we specifically want to support null encryption.
> Meaning we need to teach pg_hba to treat a connection with null
> encryption as hostnossl, even if it's an openssl-ba
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:53 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 10 June 2012 19:47, Joshua Berkus wrote:
>
>> So currently we have a major limitation in binary replication, where it is
>> not possible to "remaster" your system (that is, designate the most
>> caught-up standby as the new master) based
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> On 15.06.2012 17:54, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Robert Haas
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Magnus Hagander
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Robert Haas
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:37 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Euler Taveira writes:
>>> I see the point in not adding another dependencies or reinventing the wheel
>>> but I see more drawbacks than benefits in adopting a SSL-based compression.
>
>> In the end, judging this tradeoff is a matter o
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Euler Taveira wrote:
> On 15-06-2012 11:39, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> As long as a free implementation exists, it can be ported to
>> Java/.Net. Sure, it takes more work, but it *can be done*.
>>
> Good point. IMHO, if there isn't a solution that cover all PostgreS
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 12:03 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> On 15.06.2012 18:28, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15.06.2012 17:58, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:48:27PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > OK, based on this feedback, I have updated the pgindent README to use
> > these Perl indent instructions:
>
> > find . -name \*.pl -o -name \*.pm | xargs perltidy \
> > --backup-and-modify-in-pla
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 4:39 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
>> - The procedure for making a base backup is relatively simple:
>> + The easiest way to perform a base backup is to use the
>> + tool. It can create
>> + a base backup either as regular files or as a
Bruce Momjian writes:
> OK, based on this feedback, I have updated the pgindent README to use
> these Perl indent instructions:
> find . -name \*.pl -o -name \*.pm | xargs perltidy \
> --backup-and-modify-in-place --opening-brace-on-new-line \
> --vertical-tightness=2 --ve
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 01:50:48PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 05:57:41PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > What about something like this in the root of the tree:
> > find . -name \*.pl -o -name \*.pm | xargs perltidy -b -bl -nsfs -naws
> > -l=100 -ole=unix
> >
> > There ar
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Janes writes:
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> MAX_RESOWNER_LOCKS - How did you arrive at number 10 for it. Is there any
>>> specific reason for 10.
>
>> I instrumented the code to record the maximum number of lock
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> This patch splits htup.h in two pieces -- the first one (tupbasics.h;
> not wedded to the name) does not include many other headers and is just
> enough to have other parts of the code create tuples and pass them
> around, to be used by most other headers. The other one (
Hi,
This patch splits htup.h in two pieces -- the first one (tupbasics.h;
not wedded to the name) does not include many other headers and is just
enough to have other parts of the code create tuples and pass them
around, to be used by most other headers. The other one (which keeps
the name htup.h
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 12:48:24PM +0200, Florian Pflug wrote:
> > Yeah, but that alone is IMO a rather big blocker for claiming that
> > this is the only way to do it :( And I think the fact that that
> > wikipedia page doesn't list any other ones, is a sign that there might
> > not be a lot of ot
On 10 June 2012 19:47, Joshua Berkus wrote:
> So currently we have a major limitation in binary replication, where it is
> not possible to "remaster" your system (that is, designate the most caught-up
> standby as the new master) based on streaming replication only. This is a
> major limitati
I wrote:
> Euler Taveira writes:
>> I see the point in not adding another dependencies or reinventing the wheel
>> but I see more drawbacks than benefits in adopting a SSL-based compression.
> In the end, judging this tradeoff is a matter of opinion, but I come to
> the opposite conclusion.
BTW,
On 15 June 2012 21:27, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> The goal for this first patch is to avoid semantics issues so that we
> can get something technically clean in, and have more time to talk
> semantics next times. The main discussion to avoid is deciding if we
> want to fire event triggers for CREA
Jeff Janes writes:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> MAX_RESOWNER_LOCKS - How did you arrive at number 10 for it. Is there any
>> specific reason for 10.
> I instrumented the code to record the maximum number of locks held by
> a resource owner, and report the max when it
Euler Taveira writes:
> I see the point in not adding another dependencies or reinventing the wheel
> but I see more drawbacks than benefits in adopting a SSL-based compression.
In the end, judging this tradeoff is a matter of opinion, but I come to
the opposite conclusion. Transport-level compr
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Maybe I missed something, but as far as I saw your argument was not that
>> the performance wasn't bad but that the rest of the sort code would
>> dominate the runtime anyway. I grant that entirely, but that doesn't
>> mea
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Yes, that means the list has over-flowed. Once it is over-flowed, it
>> is now invalid for the reminder of the life of the resource owner.
> Don't we need any logic to clear the reference of locallock in owner->locks
> array.
I don't think
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Marko Kreen wrote:
> The row-processor API is now in 9.2, but it solves only the
> "different-row-storage" problem, but not the "one-row-at-a-time"
> problem, as libpq is still in control until all rows are received.
>
> This means libpq cannet still be used to imp
On 15 June 2012 21:06, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas writes:
>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
(And from a performance standpoint, I'm not entirely convinced it's not
a bug, anyway. Worst-case behavior could b
Le vendredi 15 juin 2012 03:27:11, Amit Kapila a écrit :
> > I guess my first question is: why do we need this? There are lots of
> > things in the TODO list that someone wanted once upon a time, but
> > they're not all actually important. Do you have reason to believe
> > that this one is? It's
Magnus Hagander writes:
> -The procedure for making a base backup is relatively simple:
> +The easiest way to perform a base backup is to use the
> + tool. It can create
> +a base backup either as regular files or as a tar archive. If more
> +flexibility than can provide is
>
Robert Haas wrote:
> So maybe instead of trying to cobble together a set of catalog
> contents that we can use for decoding any tuple whatsoever, we
> should instead divide the world into well-behaved types and
> poorly-behaved types. Well-behaved types are those that can be
> interpreted without
On 15-06-2012 11:10, k...@rice.edu wrote:
> I agree and think that the SSL-based compression is an excellent default
> compression scheme. The plugable compression approach allows for the
> choice of the most appropriate compression implementation based on the
> application needs. It really address
On 15-06-2012 11:39, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> As long as a free implementation exists, it can be ported to
> Java/.Net. Sure, it takes more work, but it *can be done*.
>
Good point. IMHO, if there isn't a solution that cover all PostgreSQL (it
seems it is not), we should pick the most appropriate
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> (And from a performance standpoint, I'm not entirely convinced it's not
>>> a bug, anyway. Worst-case behavior could be pretty bad.)
>
>> Instead of simply asserting t
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> I don't plan to throw in loads of conflict resolution smarts. The aim is to
> get
> to the place where all the infrastructure is there so that a MM solution can
> be built by basically plugging in a conflict resolution mechanism. Maybe
> pro
The row-processor API is now in 9.2, but it solves only the
"different-row-storage" problem, but not the "one-row-at-a-time"
problem, as libpq is still in control until all rows are received.
This means libpq cannet still be used to implement iterative
result processing that almost all high-level
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I developed the attached patch to avoid taking a heavyweight lock on
> the metapage of a hash index. Instead, an exclusive buffer content
> lock is viewed as sufficient permission to modify the metapage, and a
> shared buffer content lock is u
> So it sounds unsurprising to me.
OK, I'll just submit a note for the docs for max_locks_per_transaction,
then.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.po
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (And from a performance standpoint, I'm not entirely convinced it's not
>> a bug, anyway. Worst-case behavior could be pretty bad.)
> Instead of simply asserting that, could you respond to the specific
> points raised in
On 6/10/12 11:47 AM, Joshua Berkus wrote:
> So currently we have a major limitation in binary replication, where it is
> not possible to "remaster" your system (that is, designate the most caught-up
> standby as the new master) based on streaming replication only. This is a
> major limitation b
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 15.06.2012 06:19, Nikolas Everett wrote:
>> I'd like to be able to save the current snapshot and then at a later date
>> roll the entire database back to that snapshot, essentially erasing
>> everything that happened since the snapshot.
> To revert the database to
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> In the course of debugging why a particular server required increasing
> max_locks_per_transation, I found a peculiar behavior. If you do an
> UPDATE which doesn't match any CE constraint on the parent table in an
> inheritance chain, you get
All,
In the course of debugging why a particular server required increasing
max_locks_per_transation, I found a peculiar behavior. If you do an
UPDATE which doesn't match any CE constraint on the parent table in an
inheritance chain, you get a RowExclusiveLock on every partition and
every index o
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan writes:
>> On 14 June 2012 19:28, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I thought that doubling repeatedly would be overly aggressive in terms
>>> of memory usage.
>
>> I fail to understand how this sortsupport buffer fundamentally differs
>>
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> On 14 June 2012 19:28, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I thought that doubling repeatedly would be overly aggressive in terms
>> of memory usage.
> I fail to understand how this sortsupport buffer fundamentally differs
> from a generic dynamic array abstraction built to contain c
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:59 PM, Vlad Arkhipov wrote:
>> Does it make sense to have a comment on function's arguments?
> This would be somewhat tricky, because our COMMENT support assumes
> that the object upon which we're commenting has an ObjectAddress, and
> individual
On 15.06.2012 18:28, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
On 15.06.2012 17:58, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
You could write a dummy SSL implementation that only does compression,
not
enc
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:28:48PM +0800, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> wrote:
> > On 15.06.2012 17:58, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 15.06.2012 17:39, Magnus Haga
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> wrote:
>> Umm, then you use a real SSL libray, not the dummy one?
> But (in this scenario, and so far nobody has proven it to be wrong)
> there exists no real SSL library that does support compression.
I do not thi
> On 06/13/2012 03:25 PM, Honza Horak wrote:
> A draft patch is attached. It renames unix_socket_directory to
> unix_socket_directories and allows to use directory:port to be able
> to
> create more sockets in one directory with different port number in
> the
> socket name.
I realized the patch ha
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> On 15.06.2012 17:58, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15.06.2012 17:39, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Florian Pflug wrot
On 15.06.2012 17:58, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
On 15.06.2012 17:39, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Florian Pflugwrote:
The way I see it, if we use SSL-based compression then non-libpq clients
there's at
On 15.06.2012 17:54, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
New SQL functons pg_backup_in_progress() and pg_backup_start_time()
Darold Gilles, rev
On 15 June 2012 16:09, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 15 June 2012 15:54, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Magnus Hagander
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15,
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 15 June 2012 15:54, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Magnus Hagander
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> New SQL fun
On 15 June 2012 15:54, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
New SQL functons pg_backup_in_progress() and pg_backup_start_time()
>>
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> On 15.06.2012 17:39, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
>>>
>>> The way I see it, if we use SSL-based compression then non-libpq clients
>>>
>>> there's at least a chance of those clients
On 15.06.2012 17:39, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
The way I see it, if we use SSL-based compression then non-libpq clients
there's at least a chance of those clients being able to use it easily
(if their SSL implementation supports it). If we go w
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> New SQL functons pg_backup_in_progress() and pg_backup_start_time()
>>>
>>> Darold Gilles, reviewed by Gabriele Bartolini and o
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I've had cause, a few times this development cycle, to want to measure
>>> the amount of spinning on each lwlock in the system.
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
> On Jun15, 2012, at 12:09 , Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
>>> On Jun15, 2012, at 07:50 , Magnus Hagander wrote:
Second, we also have things like the JDBC driver and the .Net driver
t
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 07:18:34AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:48 AM, Florian Pflug wrote:
> > On Jun15, 2012, at 12:09 , Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
> >>> On Jun15, 2012, at 07:50 , Magnus Hagander wrote:
> S
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I've had cause, a few times this development cycle, to want to measure
>> the amount of spinning on each lwlock in the system. To that end,
>> I've found the attached patch useful. Note
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> However, as Ants points out, we could make it work better for the
> special case where we're not actually doing any aggregation, because
> in that case we can emit the row for each group when the group is
> created, rather than waiting until en
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:48 AM, Florian Pflug wrote:
> On Jun15, 2012, at 12:09 , Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
>>> On Jun15, 2012, at 07:50 , Magnus Hagander wrote:
Second, we also have things like the JDBC driver and the .Net driver
t
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> New SQL functons pg_backup_in_progress() and pg_backup_start_time()
>>
>> Darold Gilles, reviewed by Gabriele Bartolini and others, rebased by
>> Marco Nenciarini. Stylistic cleanup a
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 6:55 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
A user complained on pgsql-performance that SELECT col FROM table
GROUP BY col LIMIT 2; performs a full table scan. ISTM that it's safe
to return tuples from hash-aggregate as they are found when no
aggregate functions are i
On 06/13/2012 03:25 PM, Honza Horak wrote:
Going through the thread, I'd like to sum it up choosing approach with
less potential issues and would like to find a consensus if possible.
It seems unix_socket_directory could be turned into list and probably
renamed to unix_socket_directories, since
Hi,
I would like to ask a question before looking into the patch.
At 21:56 12/03/30 -0400, Jay Levitt wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Ants Aasma writes:
A user complained on pgsql-performance that SELECT col FROM table
GROUP BY col LIMIT 2; performs a full table scan. ISTM that it's safe
to return tup
On Jun15, 2012, at 12:09 , Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
>> On Jun15, 2012, at 07:50 , Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Second, we also have things like the JDBC driver and the .Net driver
>>> that don't use libpq. the JDBC driver uses the native java ssl
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
> On Jun15, 2012, at 07:50 , Magnus Hagander wrote:
So I've got very little patience with the idea of "let's put in some
hooks and then great things will happen". It would be far better all
around if we supported exactly one, we
On Jun15, 2012, at 07:50 , Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> So I've got very little patience with the idea of "let's put in some
>>> hooks and then great things will happen". It would be far better all
>>> around if we supported exactly one, well-chosen, method. But really
>>> I still don't see a reaso
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
> wrote:
>> Please let's apply that documentation patch to 9.2 too.
>
> Agreed.
Here's a patch that does the first two things. Does not attempt a
tl;tr section yet. Also adds a subheader for
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 23:10 +0200, Miroslav Šimulčík wrote:
> I have working patch for postgresql version 9.0.4, but it needs
> refactoring before i can submit it, because some parts don't
> meet formatting requirements yet. And yes, changes are large, so it
> will be better to discuss design firs
83 matches
Mail list logo
