Patch applied. Thanks.
I modified the doc wording a bit --- patch attached.
---
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> You can find it here.
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2004-02/msg00072.php
>
> I know Neil was
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
---
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> You can find i
You can find it here.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2004-02/msg00072.php
I know Neil was reviewing it and had a minor doc style quibble, as well
as the question he raised on -hackers about psql tab completion.
cheers
andrew
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Based o
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Based on Larry's idea, I had in mind to provide a third escape in the
> log_line_info string (in addition to the %U and %D that I had previously
> done) of %S for sessionid, which would look something like this:
> 402251fc.713f
>
> I will start redoing this feature when
Chester Kustarz wrote:
On Thu, 5 Feb 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Wow, like the idea too --- pid plus time_t start time of backend.
Actully, it would be good to have star time first so you can sort
everything in order of start time.
Why not just add a printf like pattern so the user can ou
On Thu, 5 Feb 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Wow, like the idea too --- pid plus time_t start time of backend.
> Actully, it would be good to have star time first so you can sort
> everything in order of start time.
Why not just add a printf like pattern so the user can output
whatever they like?
%
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Larry's idea about combining PID and backend start time didn't sound too
unreasonable to me.
Wow, like the idea too --- pid plus time_t start time of backend.
Actully, it would be good to have star time first so you can sort
everything in order of st
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Right. And if we have sessionids we would want them logged there, I
> > think. And that would rule out anything based on xid or backend pid.
>
> Uh, what's wrong with backend pid? Since we fork before we start doing
> anything wit
Tom Lane said:
> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Right. And if we have sessionids we would want them logged there, I
>> think. And that would rule out anything based on xid or backend pid.
>
> Uh, what's wrong with backend pid? Since we fork before we start doing
> anything with a co
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Right. And if we have sessionids we would want them logged there, I
> think. And that would rule out anything based on xid or backend pid.
Uh, what's wrong with backend pid? Since we fork before we start doing
anything with a connection, it should su
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Bruce and others have suggested that PID is not sufficiently unique.
The nice things about using xid for session id is that is is unique for
a long time, rather than pid.
Hmm. Now that I think
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Bruce and others have suggested that PID is not sufficiently unique.
> The nice things about using xid for session id is that is is unique for
> a long time, rather than pid.
Hmm. Now that I think about it, InitPostgres() alwa
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Tom Lane said:
> > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I'm not sure I understand. I didn't suggest that a sequence should be
> >> used for txn ids. For the purpose I had in mind we would call
> >> nextval() once per connection,
> >
> > Oh, okay, I misunderstood.
Tom Lane said:
> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'm not sure I understand. I didn't suggest that a sequence should be
>> used for txn ids. For the purpose I had in mind we would call
>> nextval() once per connection,
>
> Oh, okay, I misunderstood. But why not just use the PID?
>
B
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not sure I understand. I didn't suggest that a sequence should be
> used for txn ids. For the purpose I had in mind we would call nextval()
> once per connection,
Oh, okay, I misunderstood. But why not just use the PID?
r
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Also, Andrew, on your other patch for log_session_info line, Magnus had
the idea of giving each session an id based on the first transaction of
the session.
I did think about using a cluster-wide se
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Also, Andrew, on your other patch for log_session_info line, Magnus had
>> the idea of giving each session an id based on the first transaction of
>> the session.
> I did think about using a cluster-wide sequence, if we can make
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Also, Andrew, on your other patch for log_session_info line, Magnus had
the idea of giving each session an id based on the first transaction of
the session. That seems like a useful addition to that variable, though
I am not sure what value to give a session before it execu
Also, Andrew, on your other patch for log_session_info line, Magnus had
the idea of giving each session an id based on the first transaction of
the session. That seems like a useful addition to that variable, though
I am not sure what value to give a session before it executes its first
query.
-
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
[redirecting to hackers]
If you like. I originally just made it happen if log_connections was
set, but Neil wanted a separate setting for it. What is the consensus
about a name?
log_disconnect?
Not bad. Maybe for symmetry "log_disconnectio
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> [redirecting to hackers]
>
> If you like. I originally just made it happen if log_connections was
> set, but Neil wanted a separate setting for it. What is the consensus
> about a name?
log_disconnect?
--
Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.u
[redirecting to hackers]
If you like. I originally just made it happen if log_connections was
set, but Neil wanted a separate setting for it. What is the consensus
about a name?
cheers
andrew
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
This patch brings up to date what I did last year (
22 matches
Mail list logo
