Re: [HACKERS] Bug 1500

This has my vote Lorne In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 03/26/05 at 02:04 PM, Josh Berkus said: >Karel, >> > Yeah. áKarel Zak, who wrote that code, is convinced we should remove it, >> > but I don't think anyone else is ... >> >> áI think I was Peter and Josh Berkus who convinced me that t

Re: [HACKERS] psql: recall previous command?

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/22/05 at 03:26 PM, Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >Is there a way to recall the previous command in psql? Obviously, "up >arrow" or Ctrl-P using readline and the default readline bindings is >close, but it recalls the previous _line_ of input. That is not

Re: [HACKERS] SMP buffer management test question

Thanks Well I tried it out and on OS/2 using 8.0 it has the same problems as on Linux, with two clients running on a dual PIII 750 both CPUs go to 100% and the system is madly switching between the two processes. With a single client, about 35% CPU is used. Should the new buffer manager patch el

[HACKERS] SMP buffer management test question

There was a mention of a "context-swap-storm" test in the posts on the ARC patent. Where might I obtain a copy of this test procedure? Thanks -- --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ---

Re: [HACKERS] Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/19/05 at 02:23 PM, Jaime Casanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 22:35:31 -0500, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> > I think there should be a 100% no data loss fail safe. >> >> Possibly we need to recalibrate our

Re: [HACKERS] Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/18/05 at 09:48 PM, Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >Russell Smith wrote: >>On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 04:10 am, Tom Lane wrote: >> >> >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >>> >>> In fact, I think it is so bad, that I think we need to back-port a fix to

Re: [HACKERS] win32 performance - fsync question

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/17/05 at 10:21 AM, Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >E.Rodichev wrote: >> >> This problem is addressed by file system (fsck, journalling etc.). >> Is it reasonable to handle it directly within application? >> >> >In the words of the Duke of Wellington,

Re: [HACKERS] Extending System Views: proposal for 8.1/8.2

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/22/05 at 05:21 PM, "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 01:36:54PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > Jim, >> >> > Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting renaming anything in any of the >> > existing pg_catalog objects. I'm suggesting creating

[HACKERS] OS/2 port

I submitted the patches and additional files for the OS/2 port on the patches ML. I might as well claim responsibility for that port and put myself down as the maintainer... Lorne Sunley Winnipeg MB Canada -- --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [HACKERS] OS/2 port regression tests

Hi, Never mind about the "permission denied errors" I tracked it down to a bug in the LIBC port's handling of doing an unlink... So it would appear the port mostly works barring the problems with the LIBC implementation. Lorne -- --- [EMA

Re: [HACKERS] Libtool?

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/07/05 at 10:00 PM, "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> Various recent and not so recent problem reports got me thinking again >> that it might be worth switching our shared library build system to >> libtoo

[HACKERS] Is there a psql function equivalent to a session log

One of my testers asked me if there is a function in psql that is equivalent to a session log - something that will write out commands sent to the server and the results written to a file while still displaying the results on screen. I can't find anything like this, but I think I can put it togeth

Re: [HACKERS] sysv_shmem potential problem

I see, The shmem.c implementation I am using returns the OS/2 memory ID which also happens to be the base address of the allocated memory. Bug in shmem.c code then Thanks Lorne In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/31/04 at 03:53 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

[HACKERS] sysv_shmem potential problem

Hi I am using the sysv_shmem.c shared memory allocation api for os/2 and I ran into a problem when OS/2 allocates shared memory over the 2 gigabyte address boundary. The existing sysv_shmem.c tests for the return address of the segment as less than 0 and determines that a negative indicates an er

Re: [HACKERS] RC3 in ... ~12 hours ...

Yay I assume that any changes will be in CVS at that point? I have a bunch of patches and some new files for the OS/2 port that I plan on submitting as a diff to the 8.0 GA when that comes about. Is that the appropriate time? BTW - I did get all the NLS stuff working as well. Lorne In <[EM

[HACKERS] Multiple language support

Are there any plans for modifying the message outputs from the programs to support multiple languages? Most of the messages (at least in things like the database engine and utilities like initdb etc) have messages hard coded in English. This does not affect me very much, but I have at least 6 beta

[HACKERS] order by problems FIXED

Hi all It was a setlocale problem Thanks Lorne -- --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading throu

[HACKERS] more on character fields

Hi all, It would appear that none of the comparision functions work on my OS/2 port for columns defined as char or varchar. With a table "smalvar" of two columns, one varchar and the other name acol nn -- AA AA CC a "select * from smalvar where acol = '' " will retu

Re: [HACKERS] More on Order by

OK I believe that.. But why does order by work on a "name" column but not a "char(10)" column. See my earlier (posted later because of problems) e-mail. Lorne In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/26/04 at 02:16 PM, Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 02:57:08PM -0500,

[HACKERS] Problem with ORDER BY

The previous one of these seems to being blocked because of the big attachments. Short stuff is embedded in this e-mail. Hi all, I have a problem in my os/2 port of postgreSQL v8.0 and I am hoping someone can help me with it. When I create a database and use the commands shown below the selec

[HACKERS] More on Order by

Hi All I have discovered that when I use a table like this create table whois (acol name); and insert a few rows, the order by clause works correctly. I dug into the database init stuff to find that the table pg_class column relname is where the pg_tables column tablename comes from. That colum

Re: [HACKERS] rc2 bundled

Will do... thanks Lorne In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/21/04 at 01:56 AM, "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >check her over .. > >Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services >(http://www.hub.org) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy > >

[HACKERS] Locale question

Hi I have a few people in Europe trying out the rc1 port for OS/2 and they have run into a problem with the locale settings They have a locale set as de_DE_EURO and the initdb program really does not like this because the setlocale(LC_MESSAGES, NULL) call returns a zero length string. When the po

Re: [HACKERS] So is there a 8.0RC1 tomorrow

CONGRATULATIONS BTW - I have the OS/2 port running through to creating the template0 and template1 databases with initdb. I have a glitch with the fork() processing that seems to be in the OS/2 GCC 3.3.5 runtime, but I expect to have that resolved shortly. I am going to apply the patches fro

Re: [HACKERS] So is there a 8.0RC1 tomorrow

Out of all of the messages on this thread, I am still not sure... Is there an RC1 coming out RSN? Lorne -- --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ---(end of broadcast)---

Re: [HACKERS] New member says hello

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 11/27/04 at 01:05 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >>at 09:50 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >>> If you're hoping to get this into 8.0, it had better arrive soon and be a >>> very small patch ... >> It may have to be for

Re: [HACKERS] New member says hello

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 11/26/04 at 09:50 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> How do I go about getting OS/2 specific changes for source code and >> makefiles merged with the regular release code? >Send a proposed patch to pgsql-patches for discussion. >If

[HACKERS] New member says hello

Hi All, I am doing a port of postgreSQL v8 to OS/2. I have successfully built a port (using the beta 4 code), and am starting testing. I will be updating my port with the beta 5 code in the next couple of days. How do I go about getting OS/2 specific changes for source code and makefiles merge