Re: [HACKERS] seg fault on dsm_create call

2016-06-28 Thread Max Fomichev
On 28/06/16 19:24, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Max Fomichev wrote: Hello, sorry for my repost from psql-novice, probably it was not a right place for my question. I'm trying to understand how to work with dynamic shared memory, message queues and workers. The pr

[HACKERS] seg fault on dsm_create call

2016-06-28 Thread Max Fomichev
... pqsignal(SIGTERM, mystemSigterm); BackgroundWorkerUnblockSignals(); ... What could be a reason and what am I doing wrong? PS test/modules/test_shm_mq works fine... dynamic_shared_memory_type = posix OSX 10.11.5 PostgreSQL 9.5.3 -- Best regards, Max Fomichev

[HACKERS] seg fault on dsm_create call

2016-06-28 Thread Max Fomichev
_shared_memory_type = posix OSX 10.11.5 PostgreSQL 9.5.3 -- Best regards, Max Fomichev -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] configure can't detect proper pthread flags

2015-04-30 Thread Max Filippov
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 2:31 AM, Max Filippov wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 2:06 AM, Max Filippov wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Max Filippov wrote: >>>> Ok, one more attempt: maybe instead of

Re: [HACKERS] configure can't detect proper pthread flags

2015-04-07 Thread Max Filippov
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 2:06 AM, Max Filippov wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Max Filippov wrote: >> Ok, one more attempt: maybe instead of checking that stderr is empty >> we could check that stderr has changed in the presence of the option >> that we test?

Re: [HACKERS] configure can't detect proper pthread flags

2015-03-20 Thread Max Filippov
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Max Filippov wrote: > Ok, one more attempt: maybe instead of checking that stderr is empty > we could check that stderr has changed in the presence of the option > that we test? The patch: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1426860321-13586-1-git-s

[HACKERS] [PATCH] Compare linker/compiler output with their default output

2015-03-20 Thread Max Filippov
default. Signed-off-by: Max Filippov --- config/acx_pthread.m4 | 18 +- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/config/acx_pthread.m4 b/config/acx_pthread.m4 index 581164b..028fdb1 100644 --- a/config/acx_pthread.m4 +++ b/config/acx_pthread.m4 @@ -79,6 +79,22

Re: [HACKERS] configure can't detect proper pthread flags

2015-03-20 Thread Max Filippov
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:01 AM, Max Filippov wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> We don't want every link step producing a useless warning. >>> Ideally, "make -s" would pr

Re: [HACKERS] configure can't detect proper pthread flags

2015-03-20 Thread Max Filippov
harder to notice actually-useful warnings. Then maybe stderr tests should grep output for a specific option, the one we're currently testing, not just any noise? -- Thanks. -- Max -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscriptio

Re: [HACKERS] configure can't detect proper pthread flags

2015-03-20 Thread Max Filippov
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Andrew Gierth wrote: >>>>>> "Max" == Max Filippov writes: > > Max> Sorry, I must be not clear enough: why checking compiler/linker > Max> output instead of checking their exit code or presence of produced > M

Re: [HACKERS] configure can't detect proper pthread flags

2015-03-19 Thread Max Filippov
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 5:09 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 04:51:55AM +0300, Max Filippov wrote: >> xtensa-linux-gcc -o conftest -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes >> -Wpointer-arith -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels >> -Wmissing-format-attribute -

Re: [HACKERS] configure can't detect proper pthread flags

2015-03-19 Thread Max Filippov
Hi Tom, On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 3:50 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Max Filippov writes: >> when PostgreSQL is cross-compiled in the Buildroot with uClibc toolchain >> it may not correctly detect compiler/linker flags for threading. [1] >> The reason is that config/acx_pthread.m4:

[HACKERS] configure can't detect proper pthread flags

2015-03-19 Thread Max Filippov
nameinfo() instead. git log doesn't tell much why it is done that way. Does anybody know? Can that test be rewritten as if eval $ac_link 2>&1 1>&5 && eval $ac_compile 2>&1 1>&5 ; then ? [1] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.uclibc.buildroot/110204

Re: [HACKERS] silent_mode and LINUX_OOM_ADJ

2011-06-28 Thread Reinhard Max
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 at 10:40, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: It seems to me you could just stop setting silent_mode. If you want to capture any early errors at startup into a log file, like silent_mode does to postmaster.log, you can redirect stdout and stderr in the startup script. pg_ctl start -l

Re: [HACKERS] silent_mode and LINUX_OOM_ADJ

2011-06-27 Thread Reinhard Max
Hi Heikki, On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 at 12:10, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Max, you're the maintainer of the PostgreSQL SuSE RPMs, right? my first name is Reinhard, but aside from that, you are right. ;) Can you comment on the above? I enabled it many years ago when (IIRC) it was need

[HACKERS] Passing an array or record to a stored procedure in PostgreSQL

2011-05-17 Thread Max Bourinov
://dba.stackexchange.com/ gave me no answer... Thank you in advance! Max -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-07 Thread Max Bowsher
On 08/09/10 00:37, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Robert Haas writes: >>> Well, as Max says downthread, cvs -r REL8_4_STABLE -d >>> INTERMEDIATE_DATE apparently shows the file as being there, which is a >>> fairly goo

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-07 Thread Max Bowsher
On 08/09/10 00:47, Tom Lane wrote: > Max Bowsher writes: >> And, I've just tracked down that this bug was apparently fixed in CVS >> 1.11.18, released November 2004. > > Hrm, what bug exactly? As far as I've gathered from the discussion, > this is a fundament

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-07 Thread Max Bowsher
s to fit around the actual revisions involved. Hmm. Now I'm speculating vaguely about how the cycle breaker could be convinced to break branch update commits into as many pieces as possible, instead of as few. Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-07 Thread Max Bowsher
On 07/09/10 23:20, Max Bowsher wrote: > On 07/09/10 23:15, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> BTW, why is this commit shown as being a predecessor of refs/tags/REL8_4_4 >>> and not refs/tags/REL8_4_3? That's nothing to do

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-07 Thread Max Bowsher
t file is there or not. $ cvs co -r REL8_4_STABLE -D "2010-04-01" pgsql ... $ ls -la pgsql/src/bin/pg_dump/po/it.po -rw-r--r-- 1 maxb maxb 67871 2010-02-19 00:40 pgsql/src/bin/pg_dump/po/it.po It's there. Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-07 Thread Max Bowsher
done over >>> the years have been properly handled. I need to look at Max's latest >>> conversion and I'll look at yours as well. >> >> Magnus - >> >> I just looked at your latest conversion (based on what Max did) and it >> looks a lot better.

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-07 Thread Max Bowsher
LE'. Cherrypick from master 2010-02-28 21:31:57 UTC Tom Lane 'Fix up memory management problems in contrib/xml2.': contrib/xml2/expected/xml2.out contrib/xml2/sql/xml2.sql src/bin/pg_dump/po/it.po Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-07 Thread Max Bowsher
On 07/09/10 16:47, Tom Lane wrote: > Max Bowsher writes: >> Personally, the idea of trying to use git-filter-branch to make what >> cvs2git currently gives you more sensible scares me silly. > > I'm not excited about it either --- but if Magnus wants to ex

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-07 Thread Max Bowsher
s soon as I can figure out how to cleanly fit that into cvs2git's structure, I want it to change the word "create" to "update" in most of those commits. Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-05 Thread Max Bowsher
On 05/09/10 03:55, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Max Bowsher wrote: >>> Can you post the repo you ended up with somewhere? >> >> Well, it's a Bazaar repository at the moment :-) >> >> But, I'll re-run it targetting git, and

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-04 Thread Max Bowsher
On 04/09/10 12:24, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 3:22 AM, Max Bowsher wrote: >> and the result is that things are looking pretty clean :-) > > Hey, that's great. But I wonder why Magnus got a different result. This is the first time I've posted these inca

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-04 Thread Max Bowsher
On 03/09/10 03:34, Max Bowsher wrote: >>>> Robert Haas wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Michael Haggerty >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> What weirdness, exactly, are you discussing now? I've lost track of >>>>>&g

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-02 Thread Max Bowsher
On 02/09/10 16:44, Michael Haggerty wrote: > Max Bowsher wrote: >> On 02/09/10 14:40, Michael Haggerty wrote: >>> Robert Haas wrote: >>>> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Michael Haggerty >>>> wrote: >>>>> What weirdness, exactly, are you

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-09-02 Thread Max Bowsher
rib/git-move-refs.py is > supposed to fix problems like this. Have you run this script against > your git repository? (Caveat: I am not very familiar with the script, > which was contributed by a user. Please check the results carefully and > let us know how it works for you.) Moving refs can't possibly splice out branch creation commits. Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-25 Thread Max Bowsher
On 25/08/10 16:43, Tom Lane wrote: > Max Bowsher writes: >> On 25/08/10 04:21, Tom Lane wrote: >>> What seemed more likely to be artifacts were these: >>> >>> remotes/origin/unlabeled-1.44.2 >>> remotes/origin/unlabeled-1.51.2 >>> remote

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-25 Thread Max Bowsher
On 25/08/10 12:36, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 25/08/10 14:03, Max Bowsher wrote: >> On 25/08/10 09:18, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 07:11, Tom Lane wrote: >>>> Robert Haas writes: >>>>> There are also a number of commits tha

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-25 Thread Max Bowsher
that. 2) Retroactively modify history to say that those generated files NEVER existed in the repository. 3) Retroactively modify history to say that those generated files are actually included in all those release tags. Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-25 Thread Max Bowsher
On 25/08/10 01:15, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Max Bowsher wrote: >> My guess at this point is that there may be a (very old?) version of cvs >> which, when adding a file to a branch, actually misrecorded the file as >> having existed on the branch f

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-25 Thread Max Bowsher
lem with >> the concept, but I notice cases where the converted commit has a >> timestamp some minutes later than what the cvs2cl output claims. >> I suspect this is what the converter was using as a cutoff time. >> Would it be possible to make sure that the converted commi

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
On 20/08/10 19:30, Tom Lane wrote: > Max Bowsher writes: >> My guess at this point is that there may be a (very old?) version of cvs >> which, when adding a file to a branch, actually misrecorded the file as >> having existed on the branch from the moment it was first add

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
of the various >> release tags should have caught extra files, so maybe I'm >> misunderstanding. > > I haven't been able to complete that test on the repo converted by the > new version yet, because the repo Max prepared for us had the keyword > problem. The other pr

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
On 20/08/10 18:43, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 19:41, Max Bowsher wrote: >> On 20/08/10 18:30, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 19:28, Tom Lane wrote: >>>> Max Bowsher writes: >>>>> The history that cvs2svn is a

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
On 20/08/10 19:07, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 19:56, Max Bowsher wrote: >> On 20/08/10 18:43, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 19:41, Max Bowsher wrote: >>>> On 20/08/10 18:30, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>>>> O

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
On 20/08/10 18:30, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 19:28, Tom Lane wrote: >> Max Bowsher writes: >>> The history that cvs2svn is aiming to represent here is this: >> >>> 1) At the time of creation of the REL8_4_STABLE branch, plperl_opmask.pl >

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
ng a CVS checkout of the REL8_4_STABLE branch, at various points in time, which is why this changeset is introduced. I should also say that the autogenerated commit message is rather poor - it should say 'update' not 'create' in this case. I'm actually looking at fixing that. Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
On 20/08/10 18:28, Tom Lane wrote: > Max Bowsher writes: >> The history that cvs2svn is aiming to represent here is this: > >> 1) At the time of creation of the REL8_4_STABLE branch, plperl_opmask.pl >> did *not* exist. > >> 2) Later, it was added to trunk. >

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
On 20/08/10 21:08, Tom Lane wrote: > Max Bowsher writes: >>> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 20:52, Tom Lane wrote: >>>> If I understand Max's statements correctly, there is an observable >>>> problem in the actual git history, not just the commit log entries: &g

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
On 20/08/10 12:02, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 09:49, Max Bowsher wrote: >> On 19/08/10 10:35, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 07:00, Michael Haggerty >>> wrote: >>>> Magnus Hagander wrote: >>>>> Is

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
t;>> impossible and we need to look at another tool? >> >> The good news: (I just reminded myself/realized that) Max Bowsher has >> already implemented pretty much exactly what you want in the cvs2svn >> trunk version, including noting in the commit messages any cherry-p

Re: [HACKERS] git: uh-oh

2010-08-20 Thread Max Bowsher
On 20/08/10 12:55, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 13:50, Max Bowsher wrote: >> I have run cvs2git on the pgsql module of your CVS locally (is that the >> right thing to convert?) if you'd like to compare notes on specific >> parts of the conversion. &g

[HACKERS] [Fwd: Re: PostgreSQL Translation - PL/pgSQL current]

2009-02-19 Thread Max
pment and that is not a good idea to translate "the current". (one new message was already added). Can you please advice? Many thanks, Max --- Begin Message --- Hi, I don't have anything to do with the translations of PostgreSQL so cannot help with this. I'd suggest e

[HACKERS] PostgreSQL Translation - PL/pgSQL current

2009-02-19 Thread Max
Max wrote: Hi, I would like to help with the translation from english to romanian. I could not contact the people in charge for the Romanian translations. I already completed the plpgsql-ro.po but I don't know how or where to submit it. Latter I found out that the module is under still

Re: [Pgsqlrpms-hackers] [HACKERS] Safer auto-initdb for RPM init

2006-09-11 Thread Reinhard Max
On Sat, 9 Sep 2006 at 15:57, Lamar Owen wrote: > [...] or annoying the small number of people who NFS mount their > datadirs? This problem is not limited to NFS. It can happen with any FS just by reversing (for whatever reason) the order of mounting the FS and starting the PostgreSQL server.

Re: [Pgsqlrpms-hackers] [HACKERS] Safer auto-initdb for RPM init

2006-08-25 Thread Reinhard Max
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 at 10:20, Tom Lane wrote: > If this were a bulletproof solution then I'd consider it anyway, but > AFAICS it's got the very same vulnerabilities as the flag-file > method, ie, if you RPM install or upgrade while your mountable data > directory is offline, you can still get s

Re: [HACKERS] The problem of an inline definition by construction in

2006-07-05 Thread Robert Max Kramer
cd interfaces\libpq nmake /f win32.mak Microsoft (R) Program Maintenance-Dienstprogramm: Version 6.00.9782.0 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp 1988-1998. Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Building the Win32 static library... cl.exe @C:\DOKUME~1\Max\LOKALE~1\Temp\nma02636. wchar.c ..\..\backend\ut

Re: [HACKERS] problem with PQsendQuery/PQgetResult and COPY FROM statement

2006-05-24 Thread max . poletto
ars that I should check whether the first PGresult object has a status code of PGRES_COPY_IN, and ignore subsequent PGresults even if they are not NULL. I don't object to this interface, but it is not what I would conclude after RTFM. max ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

[HACKERS] problem with PQsendQuery/PQgetResult and COPY FROM statement

2006-05-21 Thread max . poletto
ust memory and crash. The postgres version is 8.1.3. I can reproduce the problem in about 50 lines of C. I include below (1) the code, (2) a psql dump of the table in question, (3) the code's output. I'd appreciate any insight or suggestions you may have.

Re: [HACKERS] semaphore usage "port based"?

2006-05-09 Thread Max Khon
Hi! On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 11:56:13PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote: > >>This is why it's disabled by default, and the jail documentation > >>specifically advises of this possibility. Excerpt below. > > > >Ah, I see, glad to see it's accurately documented. > > As it has been for the last five ye

[HACKERS] probably needless linking against readline and ncurses

2005-04-11 Thread Reinhard Max
Hi, it appears all of PostgreSQL's binaries are linked against libreadline and libncurses, but the only one that really needs them seems to be psql. Is there a reason behind this other than that it might be easier to have only one set of linker switches that can be used for everything? cu

Re: [HACKERS] Is CVS HEAD open for 8.1 commits?

2005-01-18 Thread Reinhard Max
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 at 11:53, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > ... if someone knows how to safely remove a branch that has had no > commits made to it, please let me know, a little bit of googling brought me to this: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-cvs/2003-11/msg00166.html --- snip --- > How

Re: [HACKERS] SUSE port (was [ANNOUNCE] PostgreSQL 8.0.0 Release

2005-01-13 Thread Reinhard Max
Tom, On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 at 03:53, Tom Lane wrote: > > ...or is it because his postings to ANNOUNCE that the port to SUSE > > have gone unnoticed by those that compile the supported platforms > > list? > > If he insists on posting such routine stuff to pgsql-announce, he > should not be too s

Re: [HACKERS] SUSE port (was [ANNOUNCE] PostgreSQL 8.0.0 Release Candidate 5)

2005-01-13 Thread Reinhard Max
Simon, On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 at 08:23, Simon Riggs wrote: > Not sure what is going on here: why is SUSE not listed on the supported > platforms list? (still) > > ...is it because Reinhard seems resistant why do you think so? > (after private conversation) to the idea of submitting a formal port

Re: [HACKERS] segfault caused by heimdal (was: SUSE port)

2005-01-12 Thread Reinhard Max
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 at 14:59, Tom Lane wrote: > That looks like a reasonable fix, but isn't it needed in > backend/libpq/auth.c as well? Yes, indeed: auth.c: In function `pg_krb5_init': auth.c:202: warning: implicit declaration of function `com_err' cu Reinhard ---

Re: [HACKERS] segfault caused by heimdal (was: SUSE port)

2005-01-12 Thread Reinhard Max
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 at 20:28, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > This is because the proper prototype is: > extern char const *error_message (long); > > And C automaticly generates a prototype with in int instead. > > On 32 bit platforms this ussualy isn't a problem since both int and > long are ussualy both

Re: [HACKERS] segfault caused by heimdal (was: SUSE port)

2005-01-12 Thread Reinhard Max
Sorry for following up to myself once more... On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 at 19:36, Reinhard Max wrote: > The problem is, that the heimdal implementation of kerberos5 used on > sles8 needs an extra include statement for com_err.h in > src/interfaces/libpq/fe-auth.c to get the prot

[HACKERS] segfault caused by heimdal (was: SUSE port)

2005-01-12 Thread Reinhard Max
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 at 18:20, Reinhard Max wrote: > I am still not sure whether the kerberos library, glibc, or > PostgreSQL is to blame, or if it's a combination of bugs in these > components that triggers the segfault. The problem is, that the heimdal implementation of ker

Re: [HACKERS] SUSE port (was [ANNOUNCE] PostgreSQL 8.0.0 Release

2005-01-12 Thread Reinhard Max
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 at 17:29, Reinhard Max wrote: > The only failure I have to report is sles8-x86_64, where I am > getting segfaults from psql during the regression tests. The segfault in a call to snprintf somewhere in libpq's kerberos5 code. So when I leave out --with-krb5 it c

Re: [HACKERS] SUSE port (was [ANNOUNCE] PostgreSQL 8.0.0 Release

2005-01-12 Thread Reinhard Max
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 at 16:29, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > In the meantime I have received confirmation from Reinhard Max that > his test methods match our requirements, so the list will be > completed with the other platforms he reported in due time. Today I've updated the RPMs on

[HACKERS] calling plpgsql from c

2003-11-18 Thread Max Jacob
call SPI_finish by myself before calling the plpgsql function since i would loose tons of stuff (or am i missing something?). Now, is there a way to work around this? If not: wouldn't it be meaningful to change this behavior? thank you max. ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] Erroneous PPC spinlock code

2003-11-09 Thread Reinhard Max
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 at 13:28, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The SuSE PPC guru said that the PPC spinlock code we currently use > > may behave erroneously on multiprocessor systems. > > What's his evidence for that claim? Let's ask himself. > The code we have

[HACKERS] calling functions through a "pointer"

2003-10-03 Thread Max Jacob
the statement string on the fly), but this is much less performing than direct sql written in plpgsq... Thanks, Max. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html

[HACKERS] SetQuerySnapshot in 7.4

2003-09-14 Thread Max Jacob
ly suggest it, and i really apologize on not having (yet) the time to really dive into postgresql sources to contribute myself on this point instead of asking like this. Thanks to everybody (especially to all developpers since this is really the only point i don't like in

Re: [HACKERS] [ANNOUNCE] PostgreSQL v7.3b5 Packaged for Testing ...

2002-11-15 Thread Reinhard Max
Hi Marc, On Fri, 8 Nov 2002 at 09:59, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > At this point, we are looking for confirmation that all the > platforms are building and running the regression tests correctly, v7.3b5 builds and passes the testsuite under SuSE Linux on the following platforms: i386, ia64

Re: [HACKERS] RI oddness

2001-04-24 Thread Max Khon
hi, there! On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Jan Wieck wrote: > I just got trapped by one of my own features in the > referential integrity area. > > The problem is, that the trigger run on the FK row at UPDATE > allways checks and locks the referenced PK, even if the FK >

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] MySQL -> Postgres dump converter

2001-01-28 Thread Max Rudensky
On 27 Jan 2001 11:25:56 +0100 Adrian Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>> "Max" == Max Rudensky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Max> Guys, Thomas said he won't look into GPL'ed code for ideas. > Max> Well, I re-r

[HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] MySQL -> Postgres dump converter

2001-01-26 Thread Max Rudensky
code to your without limitations. I even would prefer to change license to BSD or similar but I didn't find in GPL ideas about that. Max Rudensky. On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:06:12 -0500 (EST) Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Can someone look at both versions and merg

[HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] MySQL -> Postgres dump converter

2001-01-23 Thread Max Rudensky
one promises to be exactly so. Sending you my MySQL db dump which I used to play with it. Max Rudensky. test.init test.mysql test.sql92

Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY

2001-01-23 Thread Max Khon
hi, there! On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > This problem with foreign keys has been reported to me, and I have confirmed > > the bug exists in current sources. The DELETE should succeed: > > > > --- > > >

[HACKERS] locking bug?

2000-12-16 Thread Max Khon
hi, there! test=> create table foo(id int primary key); NOTICE: CREATE TABLE/PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index 'foo_pkey' for table 'foo' CREATE test=> insert into foo values(1); INSERT 88959 1 test=> create table bar(id int references foo); NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit trigge

[HACKERS] left join bug? (fwd)

2000-12-13 Thread Max Khon
hi, there! test=# create table a(id int primary key); NOTICE: CREATE TABLE/PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index 'a_pkey' for table 'a' CREATE test=# create table b(id int references a); NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit trigger(s) for FOREIGN KEY check(s) CREATE test=# insert into a v

[HACKERS] left join bug?

2000-12-13 Thread Max Khon
hi, there! test=# create table a(id int primary key); NOTICE: CREATE TABLE/PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index 'a_pkey' for table 'a' CREATE test=# create table b(id int references a); NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit trigger(s) for FOREIGN KEY check(s) CREATE test=# insert into a v

Re: [HACKERS] Enum type emulation: problem with opaque type in PL/pgSQL functions

2000-11-24 Thread Max Fonin
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000 11:13:28 -0500 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Max Fonin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I guess the problem is that PL/pgSQL doesn't handle opaque type correctly. > > No it doesn't, which is not surprising considering that opaq

[HACKERS] Enum type emulation: problem with opaque type in PL/pgSQL functions

2000-11-23 Thread Max Fonin
text'/'int2' they work fine. I guess the problem is that PL/pgSQL doesn't handle opaque type correctly. Any ideas ? I don't care how but I need to emulate ENUM type, just to convert MySQL dumps to PostgreSQL. E.g. ENUM values stored in MySQL dump should be restorable in Postgres without any conversion. I running PostgreSQL 7.0.3 on Linux RedHat 6.2, kernel 2.2.15, Intel Celeron CPU; Postgres was upgraded from 7.0.2 without changing anything in system catalog. Thanks, Max Rudensky.