On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> On Thursday 30 January 2003 12:07, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Perhaps the next thing to do is to strace (ktrace, trace, truss,
> > whatever system-call tracing utility you got) the postmaster and
> > child processes. If we could determine what system call i
On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Good question. I see the thread at:
>
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&threadm=Pine.LNX.4.30.0202262002040.685-10%40peter.localdomain&rnum=2&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dcreate%2Boperator%2Bgroup:comp.databases.postgresql.*%26hl%3Den%26selm%
On Fri, 26 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > I guess to get at my point, I can ask this question, "Will schema support
> > invalidate existing PostgreSQL database designs."
> >
> > I would like the answer to be no. I would
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > Mainly because when we introduce schemas, all SQL transactions will have
> > to be performed in the context of *some* schema. I think "DEFAULT" was the
> > name you mentioned for whe
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > [ revised proposal for CREATE OPERATOR CLASS syntax ]
>
> I don't like the idea of writing a bunch of consecutive commas (and
> having to count them correctly) for cases where w
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> Make me right if I mistake.
>
> When we was developing operator @@, I saw that postgres don't use index in
> select if operation has not commutator. But operator with different types in
> argument can't be commutator with itself. So I maked operator ~~
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'd like to propose a new command, CREATE OPERATOR CLASS.
>
> Seems like a good idea.
>
> > operator spec is either an operator or an operator followed by the keywor
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> Here's the syntax I'd like to propose:
>
> CREATE OPERATOR CLASS [DEFAULT] FOR TYPE USING method> WITH AND
Hmmm.. Teach me to read the docs. :-) There's no way to set opckeytype. So
hwo about:
CREATE OPERATOR CLA
I'd like to propose a new command, CREATE OPERATOR CLASS. Its purpose is
to create a named operator class, so that you can create new types of
index ops. Also, its inclusion would remove the section of the
documentation where we tell people how to manually manipulate the system
tables.
Since sche
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > So I am a "naive" programmer because I mention intent above?
>
> No.
Sorry, that's the way it came across. As you've said that was not your
intent, please disregard my response;
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > If possible, it's nice to not have commands whose error codes you ignore.
> > That way if you see an error, you know you need to do something about it.
>
> Folks, is this a valid reason for adding OR REPLACE to all CREATE object
> commands?
Sounds go
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > Would it be possible to implement CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW / TRIGGER in
> > PostgreSQL 7.2?
Probably not, it's rather late in the cycle (isn't beta imminent?). Oh,
I'd vote for "OR REPLACE" as there's already an opt_or_replace
non-ter
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> (I've been following the thread, at least casually ;)
>
> > intent-based. The '+' operator means I want these two things added
> > together. I don't care so much what types are involved, I want adding to
> > happen. That's a difference of intent. And
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > Why? Operators are used differently than functions.
>
> I don't think so. Operators are a syntacticaly convenience for functions.
> That's what they always have been and that's what
Your <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> address bounced. Do you have another one?
Thanks,
Bill
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
On Sun, 21 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > The big one for now is how should you log into one schema or another?
> > psql database.schema ?
>
> Each user has a default schema, which is by default the schema with the
> same name as t
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Rod Taylor wrote:
> But what if you want a C function to set a variable which can be
> accessed using an SQL, perl, PLpgSQL or other function type?
> Shouldn't a global variable be global between all types of functions?
No. Doing that requires that all languages have the sam
On Sun, 21 Oct 2001, Serguei Mokhov wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 2:04 PM
>
> > > Quick question: would it be possible then create a 'system' package
> > > and &
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Serguei Mokhov wrote:
> > It means that when you want to use one of the built in functions
> > (date_part, abs, floor, sqrt etc.) you don't have to prefix it with
> > "standard.". You can just say date_part(), abs(), floor(), sqrt(), etc.
> > The only time you need to prefix
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Yes, you're right. Actually, sharing data across PostgreSQL C functions
> is trivial because you can just use global variables in your dlopen
> modules.
Exactly. That's why I never envisioned "C" or "internal" functions using
package global variabl
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> I still think that schemas and packages are different, but I now think
> they are interrelated. And that it shouldn't be too hard to leverage the
> package work into schema support. Still a lot of work, but the package
> work has sho
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah. I am wondering whether we couldn't support Oracle-style packages
> as a thin layer of syntactic sugar on top of schemas. I am concerned
> about the prospect that "foo.bar" might mean either "object bar in
> schema foo" or "object bar in package foo".
On 19 Oct 2001, Gunnar [iso-8859-1] Rønning wrote:
> * Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> |
> | Yeah. I am wondering whether we couldn't support Oracle-style packages
> | as a thin layer of syntactic sugar on top of schemas. I am concerned
> | about the prospect that "foo.bar" might mean eit
On 19 Oct 2001, Gunnar [iso-8859-1] Rønning wrote:
> * Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> |
> | Packages aren't schemas. What they bring to the table is they facilitate
> | making stored procedures (functions). You can have twelve different
> | developers w
On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The other choice is to just give the function's name. The first place
> > Postgres will look is in the package context used for parsing. If it's not
> > there (and that con
On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > I also wonder how the fixed, single-level namespace search path you
> > describe interacts with the SQL rules for schema search. (I don't
> > actually know what those rules are
On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > So what are packages? In Oracle, they are a feature which helps developers
> > make stored procedures and functions.
>
> I think you have restricted yourself too much to functions and proce
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > Honestly, I do not understand why "global variables" have been such a sore
> > point for you.
>
> My point is that the proposed "package support" introduces two features
>
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > Could you please give me an example of how to do this, say for plperl or
> > plpython? Just showing how two functions made with CREATE FUNCTION can use
> > global variables will be fine. T
On Sun, 14 Oct 2001, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > For the most part, I think packages and schemas are orthogonal. I'm taking
> > > a cue from Oracle here. Oracle c
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > Yes, I want a namespace below schemas.
> >
> > The difference between packages and schemas is that schemas encapsulate
> > everything. As Tom pointed out, that includes types (and I'd
are on their way to the patches list. Given the mail delay we've been
seeing, they'll take a while to get there. Oh, it turns out there _is_ a
size limit for patches, so it'll need to get approved.
There are still a few warts in the code.
1) One wart is that I needed to make an identifier for th
On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > session-specific package variables,
>
> I think this is assuming a little too much about how a PL might operate.
> Some PLs already support this in their own language-specific way, with or
> wi
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bill Studenmund writes:
>
> > I disagree. Views and tables are the purview of schemas, which as I
> > mentioned to Tom, strike me as being different from packages.
>
> Well, obviously schemas are a namespacing mechanism for
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Lee Kindness wrote:
> And the patch below corrects a pet peeve I have with ecpg, all errors
> and warnings are output with a line number one less than reality...
I think this patch is wrong. Wouldn't it be better to make the line number
in yylineno be correct? Also, there ar
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Hmmm. I don't know why date_part isn't working, but I now only use the
> EXTRACT syntax for maximum SQL compatibility. ie. Do this instead:
>
> v_seed := EXTRACT (EPOCH FROM CURRENT_TIMESTAMP);
Unfortunatly that gives the same error. I thin
On Sun, 14 Oct 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I have been pondering a little about something I called "package",
> completely independent of anything previously implemented. What I would
> like to get out of a package is the same thing I get out of package
> systems on operating systems, namely
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > For the most part, I think packages and schemas are orthogonal. I'm taking
> > a cue from Oracle here. Oracle considers packages to be a schema-specific
> > object.
>
>
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > For the most part, I think packages and schemas are orthogonal. I'm taking
> > a cue from Oracle here. Oracle considers packages to be a schema-specific
> > object.
>
>
On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, Jean-Michel POURE wrote:
> >What do folks think?
> >Take care,
> >Bill
>
> Hello Bill,
>
> The community have been waiting for packages for a long time. I don't
> believe you did it!!!
>
> IMHO most applications do not fully benefit from the power of PostgreSQL
> because tran
On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > For functions and aggregates, things are a little more complicated. First
> > off, there is a package called "standard" which contains all types,
> > aggregates, opera
Zembu has decided to release the result of a recent Postgres developement
project to the Postgres project. This project (for which I was the lead
developer) adds Oracle-like package support to Postgres. I'm in the
process of making a version of the patch which is relative to the current
cvs tree.
I have a function in PL/pgSQL which needs the current time in seconds
expressed as an int4. In 7.1 I was able to get this (I thought) with
date_part(''epoch'', timestamp ''now'') . That doesn't seem to work for me
in last week's -current.
Here's the PLpgSQL:
v_seed := date_part(''epoch''
On Mon, 1 Oct 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Marc,
> >
> > it worked, but now I'm again getting:
> >
> > cvs server: failed to create lock directory for
>/projects/cvsroot/pgsql/contrib/pgcrypto/expected'
>(/projects/cvsroot/pgsql/contrib/pgcrypto/expected/#cvs.lock): Permission denied
> > cvs
On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Looking at source on the web, I found:
>
> > kernel/signal.c:1042
>
> > * Note the silly behaviour of SIGCHLD: SIG_IGN means that the
> > * signal isn't actually ign
On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > All ECHILD is doing is saying there was no child. Since we aren't really
> > waiting for the child, I don't see how that's a problem.
>
> You're missing th
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > I have written a postgres C function that
> > > uses a popen linux system call. Orginally when I first tried it I kept
> > > getting an ECHILD. I read a little bit more on the pclose function
> > > and the wait system c
On 26 Jul 2001, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
> > "Tom" == Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Would that be the 'debug_print_query = true' in posgresql.conf?
>
> It IS true, but still nothing in the syslog...
I'm not sure. But I expect the logging would go out the postmaster's logs,
not nec
On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> Bill Studenmund wrote:
> >
> > "How does postgres know that the new table a is sufficiently like the old
> > table that it should be used?"
> >
> > By making the reattachment automatic, you are saying that
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> > This step I disagree with. Well, I disagree with the automated aspect
of
> > the update. How does postgres know that the new table a is sufficiently
> > like the old table that it should be used? A way the DBA could say, "yeah,
> > restablish that," w
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> Oops I made a mistake.
> Reference name is needed not an object name,
> i.e
> object relid
> object oid
> relerence relid
> reference oid
> reference name
>
> create table a (...);
> create view view_a as select .. from
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Studenmund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think it's actually O(N^M) where there are N system objects and a chain
> > of M dependencies (A depends on B which depends on C => M = 3).
>
> It's probably not *th
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > The alternative to pg_depend is to do a brute force scan of all the
> > system catalogs looking for dependent objects. In that case, you'd
> > know what you are looking at, but if we extract the dependencies as
> > a separate
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Seems like a bad idea; it'll slow down deletes quite a lot, no? Do you
> really want to (for example) parse every SQL function in the system to
> see if it refers to a table being dropped? Why would we want to do that
> work over again for every such delet
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >
> > Alex Pilosov writes:
> >
> > > drop object [RESTRICT | CASCADE]
> > >
> > > to make use of dependency info.
> >
> > That was me. The point, however, was, given object id 145928, how the
> > heck to you know what tabl
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Alex Pilosov writes:
>
> > > I'm not so convinced on that idea. Assume you're dropping object foo.
> > > You look at pg_depend and see that objects 145928, 264792, and 1893723
> > > depend on it. Great, what do you do now?
> > I believe someone el
Sorry for the delay.
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathan Myers) writes:
>
> > Also, as hints, would it be Bad(tm) if an attempt to clear one failed?
>
> Clearing hint bits is also an exclusive-lock-only operation. Notice
> I specified that *setting* them is the onl
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Joe Brenner wrote:
> The reason I'm asking is that the place that I work is
> actually contemplating reverting from Oracle's expensive
> bugs to MySQL's (supposedly) cheap ones. They'd consider
> postgresql, but they figure that with MySQL they can at
> least point to sites t
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I am always confused when to bump the minor and when the major. I also
> was not sure how significant the change would be for apps. We added
> const, and I changed the return type of one function from short to int.
> Seems like ConnectionBad was also
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > checking for libreadline ... no
> > checking for libedit ... no
> > *
> > * NOTICE: I couldn't find libreadline nor libedit. You will
> > * not have history support in psql.
> > *
>
> This may be usef
A friend of mine (Matthew Green) mentioned that 7.1RC2 had NetBSD/powerpc
down as unttested, and asked me to test it. So here are the results:
On my NetBSD/macppc system running NetBSD 1.5, gmake check reported that 2
of 62 tests failed. I've attached regression.diff to this message.
The two tha
61 matches
Mail list logo
