Re: [HACKERS] custom guc vars

2005-05-02 Thread Brent Verner
[2005-05-01 18:38] Andrew Dunstan said: | | Is there a readme somewhere on how modules are supposed to use custom | GUC variables? If there is I have missed it. I don't think there is any documentation for this, but here's a simple overview. cheers. Brent === postgresql.conf === c

Re: [HACKERS] [proposal] protocol extension to support loadable stream filters

2005-04-28 Thread Brent Verner
[2005-04-28 10:00] Tom Lane said: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > Would it be sane to recognize a specific PG_PROTOCOL_MAJOR | > to enter the filter-negotiation process? PG_PROTOCOL_MINOR | > would then be used to lookup and call a ptr to the filter

Re: [HACKERS] [proposal] protocol extension to support loadable stream filters

2005-04-27 Thread Brent Verner
[2005-04-26 23:00] Tom Lane said: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | I also wonder what happens when | > | the client and server disagree on the meaning of a filter name. | | > How this is any different than saying "...when the client and | > server disag

Re: [HACKERS] [proposal] protocol extension to support loadable stream filters

2005-04-26 Thread Brent Verner
[2005-04-25 18:34] Tom Lane said: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > I'd like to introduce the concept of (dynamically loaded) stream | > filters that would be used to wrap calls to send/recv by the FE/BE | > protocol. | You certainly don't get to have any

[HACKERS] [proposal] protocol extension to support loadable stream filters

2005-04-25 Thread Brent Verner
Hackers, I'd like to introduce the concept of (dynamically loaded) stream filters that would be used to wrap calls to send/recv by the FE/BE protocol. The initial "StreamFilter" will be a zlib compression filter. Yeah, I know it could just be added along-side (in the same way as) the SSL cod

Re: [HACKERS] Edge case problem with pg_dump

2002-05-25 Thread Brent Verner
[2002-05-25 11:44] Tom Lane said: | > In your responses you also raised the problem of COPY having to know about | > default values for columns if we allow subsets of columns when we load | > data; does that mean that COPY does something more fancy than the | > equivalent of an INSERT? | | No,

Re: [HACKERS] Edge case problem with pg_dump

2002-05-25 Thread Brent Verner
[2002-05-23 10:51] Tom Lane said: | "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > So who was it that wanted to make this change. Perhaps I can help. | | I forget who had volunteered to work on it, but it was several months | ago and nothing's happened ... I'd be the disappearing culprit...

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] helps fe-connect.c handle -EINTR more gracefully

2001-10-25 Thread Brent Verner
On 26 Oct 2001 at 00:05 (-0400), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > I'm not sure this is correct. I've tried to /make/ a SIGALRM cause | > connect to errno==EINTR, but I can't cause this condition. | | It wouldn't surprise me

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] helps fe-connect.c handle -EINTR more gracefully

2001-10-25 Thread Brent Verner
On 25 Oct 2001 at 17:08 (-0400), David Ford wrote: | I'm fresh in the code, but this has solved my issues with PQconnect* | failing when interrupted by signals. Some of it is sloppy and not to my | liking yet, but I'm still digging through to see if anything else needs | touched. Comments app

Re: [HACKERS] FAQ error

2001-10-10 Thread Brent Verner
On 10 Oct 2001 at 17:12 (-0400), Bruce Momjian wrote: | | Our FAQ, item 4.16.2 has: | | $newSerialID = nextval('person_id_seq'); | INSERT INTO person (id, name) VALUES ($newSerialID, 'Blaise Pascal'); | | Is this correct Perl? I don't see a nextval() function in Perl. Can | you ca

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] ALTER RENAME and indexes

2001-10-08 Thread Brent Verner
On 08 Oct 2001 at 14:43 (-0400), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > wooohoo!!! Of course, it would be best if someone else looked this | > code over, because I get the feeling there is an easier way to get | > this done. | | No, that's about ri

Re: [HACKERS] ALTER RENAME and indexes

2001-10-07 Thread Brent Verner
On 07 Oct 2001 at 04:03 (-0700), Stephan Szabo wrote: | | On Sat, 6 Oct 2001, Brent Verner wrote: | | > On 06 Oct 2001 at 20:13 (-0400), Rod Taylor wrote: | > | Of course, in 7.1 foreign key constraints become rather confused when | > | you rename columns on them. | > 1) modify

Re: [HACKERS] ALTER RENAME and indexes

2001-10-06 Thread Brent Verner
On 06 Oct 2001 at 20:13 (-0400), Rod Taylor wrote: | Of course, in 7.1 foreign key constraints become rather confused when | you rename columns on them. | | create table parent (id serial); | create table child (id int4 references parent(id) on update cascade); | alter table parent rename column

[HACKERS] [patch] ALTER RENAME and indexes

2001-10-06 Thread Brent Verner
The attached patch works for my case... regression=# create table test (id serial, col1 varchar(64)); NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit sequence 'test_id_seq' for SERIAL column 'test.id' NOTICE: CREATE TABLE/UNIQUE will create implicit index 'test_id_key' for table 'test' CREATE regres

Re: [HACKERS] ALTER RENAME and indexes

2001-10-06 Thread Brent Verner
On 05 Oct 2001 at 10:18 (-0400), Brent Verner wrote: | On 05 Oct 2001 at 09:46 (-0400), Tom Lane wrote: | | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | | > 'ALTER TABLE tbl RENAME col1 TO col2' does not update any indices that | | > reference the old column name. | | | | I

Re: [HACKERS] ALTER RENAME and indexes

2001-10-05 Thread Brent Verner
On 05 Oct 2001 at 09:46 (-0400), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > 'ALTER TABLE tbl RENAME col1 TO col2' does not update any indices that | > reference the old column name. | | It doesn't need to; the indexes link to column numbers, not

[HACKERS] typo in src/interfaces/ecpg/preproc/preproc.y

2001-10-04 Thread Brent Verner
Hi, In trying to solve a bug in 'ALTER TABLE tbl RENAME col1 TO col2',I noticed (what must be) a typo in src/interfaces/ecpg/preproc/preproc.y patch attached, tho it might be easier if you just look for this line in the file: opt_column: COLUMN { $$ = make_str

[HACKERS] Re: Re: WAL and commit_delay

2001-02-17 Thread Brent Verner
On 17 Feb 2001 at 15:53 (-0800), Nathan Myers wrote: | On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 06:30:12PM -0500, Brent Verner wrote: | > On 17 Feb 2001 at 17:56 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | > | > [snipped] | > | > | Is anyone out there running a 2.4 Linux kernel? Would you try pgbench | > | wi

[HACKERS] Re: WAL and commit_delay

2001-02-17 Thread Brent Verner
On 17 Feb 2001 at 17:56 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: [snipped] | Is anyone out there running a 2.4 Linux kernel? Would you try pgbench | with current sources, commit_delay=0, -B at least 1024, no -F, and see | how the results change when pg_fsync is made to call fdatasync instead | of fsync? (It's

[HACKERS] Re: preproc.y error

2001-02-08 Thread Brent Verner
On 07 Feb 2001 at 20:15 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > Now I get: | > byacc -d preproc.y | > byacc: f - maximum table size exceeded | > gmake[4]: *** [preproc.c] Error 2 | | Better install bison if you want to work with CVS sources ... | the lack of bi

[HACKERS] Re: 7.1beta4 RPMs.

2001-02-07 Thread Brent Verner
On 29 Jan 2001 at 02:50 (-0500), Lamar Owen wrote: | Lamar Owen wrote: | > ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/dev/test-rpms is the place. | | One note: for whatever reason the date on the uploaded RPM's has the | wrong year -- but the timestamp on my local copy has the correct date. | In any case,

Re: [HACKERS] function optimization ???

2001-01-24 Thread Brent Verner
On 24 Jan 2001 at 12:14 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > calling it as: | > SELECT p.*, p.book_info.title FROM pricing p WHERE vista_ans='POD'; | > background and observation: | > the pricing table is fairly large,

[HACKERS] function optimization ???

2001-01-24 Thread Brent Verner
Hi, I've the following function: CREATE FUNCTION book_info(pricing) RETURNS catalog_general AS ' select * from catalog_general where star_isbn = $1.vista_isbn ' LANGUAGE 'sql'; calling it as: SELECT p.*, p.book_info.title FROM pricing p WHERE vista_ans='POD'; background

[HACKERS] Re: oid failures on Alpha solved

2000-12-30 Thread Brent Verner
On 30 Dec 2000 at 14:24 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | > Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | >> formatting '-1040' with '%u' | >> snprintf = 18446744073709550576 | >> sprintf = 4294966256 | | >> oidout() is where the offending cal

Re: [HACKERS] oid failures on Alpha solved

2000-12-30 Thread Brent Verner
On 30 Dec 2000 at 12:57 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > formatting '-1040' with '%u' | > snprintf = 18446744073709550576 | > sprintf = 4294966256 | | > oidout() is where the offending call originates, FWIW. | >

[HACKERS] oid failures on Alpha solved

2000-12-30 Thread Brent Verner
Hi, It turns out the problem causing the oid failures is with our snprintf. specifically we are formatting "%u" incorrectly: using a enhanced-for-testing version of our snprintf I get. formatting '-1040' with '%lu' snprintf = 18446744073709550576 sprintf = 18446744073709550576 formatti

[HACKERS] Re: Alpha tas() patch

2000-12-28 Thread Brent Verner
On 28 Dec 2000 at 23:08 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | > after fresh CVS update: geometry, float8, and oid are still failing, | | You're running this on DEC's cc, right? Geometry and float8 are a | matter of fixing the expected output, I think. I'm surprised that the | OID test is failing for you -

[HACKERS] Re: Alpha tas() patch

2000-12-28 Thread Brent Verner
On 28 Dec 2000 at 17:40 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Okay ... I guess the LOCK_LONG macros are our best shot. Here is a | proposed new Alpha section for s_lock.h. Would you try it and let me | know how it works for you? | | Note that this will NOT fix the CreateCheckPoint shutdown error; don't |

[HACKERS] Re: Alpha tas() patch

2000-12-28 Thread Brent Verner
On 28 Dec 2000 at 12:41 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > I see this with the version of TAS() that you recently suggested, but not | > with either of the versions I'd hacked up. | | Hm. Your second version might incorrectly appear to

[HACKERS] Re: Alpha tas() patch

2000-12-28 Thread Brent Verner
On 28 Dec 2000 at 10:48 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > another loop-free version of TAS that /seems/ to work as desired. | | Since it doesn't check to see if the stq_c succeeded, it can't possibly | be right... right, I just realized t

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Alpha tas() patch

2000-12-28 Thread Brent Verner
On 28 Dec 2000 at 17:03 (+0200), Adriaan Joubert wrote: | Hi, | | I missed the beginning of this thread. Are you doing this for Tru64 or | for Linux? For Tru64 there are macros in /usr/include/alpha/builtins.h | which do the job. gcc + Tru64, since gcc-2.95.2 doesn't implement the builtins

[HACKERS] Re: Alpha tas() patch

2000-12-28 Thread Brent Verner
On 27 Dec 2000 at 21:37 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > This is a revised patch that I sent earlier to allow building | > pg-7.1 with gcc as well as DEC's cc. I've had good results with this | > applied. Could some other Alpha

Re: [PATCHES] Re: [HACKERS] Re: Tuple-valued datums on Alpha (was Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha)

2000-12-27 Thread Brent Verner
On 27 Dec 2000 at 21:45 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | Hm. I thought I'd fixed that. Are you up to date on | > | src/backend/utils/adt/oid.c ? Current CVS has rev 1.42. | | > yup. got that version -- 1.42 2000/12/22 21:36:09 tgl |

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Tuple-valued datums on Alpha (was Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha)

2000-12-27 Thread Brent Verner
On 26 Dec 2000 at 23:41 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | Please apply it locally and let me know what you find. | | > what I'm seeing now is much the same. | | Drat. More to do, then. after hours in the gdb-hole, I see this... mayb

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Tuple-valued datums on Alpha (was Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha)

2000-12-27 Thread Brent Verner
On 26 Dec 2000 at 23:41 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | Please apply it locally and let me know what you find. | | > what I'm seeing now is much the same. | | Drat. More to do, then. | | > i've been in circles trying to figure

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Tuple-valued datums on Alpha (was Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha)

2000-12-26 Thread Brent Verner
On 26 Dec 2000 at 23:41 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | Please apply it locally and let me know what you find. | | > what I'm seeing now is much the same. sorry, I sent the previous email w/o the details of the different

[HACKERS] Re: Tuple-valued datums on Alpha (was Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha)

2000-12-26 Thread Brent Verner
On 26 Dec 2000 at 14:41 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | I wrote: | > ... What I'm thinking about doing is setting typmod of | > an entire-tuple function argument to sizeof(Pointer), rather than | > the default -1, to indicate that a pointer representation is being | > used. Comments, hackers? | | Her

[HACKERS] Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha

2000-12-25 Thread Brent Verner
On 24 Dec 2000 at 01:19 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > (gdb) p *resSlot | > Error accessing memory address 0x40141830: Invalid argument. | | Oooh. resSlot has been truncated to 32 bits --- judging by the other | nearby pointer values, it almo

Re: [HACKERS] Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha

2000-12-24 Thread Brent Verner
On 24 Dec 2000 at 00:47 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | | > I'll send the patch that allows me to | > cleanly build with gcc. right now, s_lock.h does the wrong thing | > when compiling on Alpha/OSF with gcc. | | Roger, we want to build with either. The attached patch _seems_ to do the right thing.

[HACKERS] Re: Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha

2000-12-23 Thread Brent Verner
On 24 Dec 2000 at 01:00 (-0500), Tom Lane wrote: | Brent Verner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > here's a post-mortem. | | > #0 0x1200ce58c in ExecEvalFieldSelect (fselect=0x1401615c0, | > econtext=0x14016a030, isNull=0x14016ab31 "", isDone=0x0) at execQual.c

[HACKERS] Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha

2000-12-23 Thread Brent Verner
here's a post-mortem. #0 0x1200ce58c in ExecEvalFieldSelect (fselect=0x1401615c0, econtext=0x14016a030, isNull=0x14016ab31 "", isDone=0x0) at execQual.c:1096 #1 0x1200ceafc in ExecEvalExpr (expression=0x1401615f0, econtext=0x0, isNull=0x14016ab31 "", isDone=0x0) at execQual.c:1234 #2

[HACKERS] Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha

2000-12-22 Thread Brent Verner
On 22 Dec 2000 at 21:58 (-0500), Brent Verner wrote: | On 22 Dec 2000 at 20:27 (-0500), Brent Verner wrote: | | observation: | | commenting out the queries with 'FROM person* p' causes the misc | regression test to pass. that's not what I meant to say. the misc test still FA

[HACKERS] Re: 7.1 on DEC/Alpha

2000-12-22 Thread Brent Verner
On 22 Dec 2000 at 20:27 (-0500), Brent Verner wrote: observation: commenting out the queries with 'FROM person* p' causes the misc regression test to pass. SELECT p.name, p.hobbies.name FROM person* p; Brent | Hi, | I saw the thread from a few days ago about Linux/Alp

[HACKERS] 7.1 on DEC/Alpha

2000-12-22 Thread Brent Verner
h the same, esp the FAILURE of misc regression test. If there is anything else I can do to help get this working, please let me know. Brent Verner