Re: [HACKERS] Thanks for the TAP framework

2017-03-20 Thread Yuriy Zhuravlev
Hello. For me Testgres https://github.com/postgrespro/testgres much better because I have the allergy for Perl. Unfortunately, it's not inside Postgres... 2017-03-20 10:21 GMT+03:00 Craig Ringer : > Hi > > It just occurred to me that much of what I've been doing recently > would've been exceedin

[HACKERS] Thanks for the TAP framework

2017-03-20 Thread Craig Ringer
Hi It just occurred to me that much of what I've been doing recently would've been exceedingly difficult to write and even harder to debug without the TAP framework. I would've spent a LOT of time writing test scripts and wondering whether the bug was in my scripts or my Pg code. I still spend a

Re: [HACKERS] thanks for FOSDEM/PGDay 2016 Developer Meeting

2016-01-28 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Amit Langote wrote: > On Friday, 29 January 2016, Oleg Bartunov wrote: >> I read >> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/FOSDEM/PGDay_2016_Developer_Meeting and >> would like to say thanks for such nice review of meeting. > > > +many +1. Thanks for taking the time to

Re: [HACKERS] thanks for FOSDEM/PGDay 2016 Developer Meeting

2016-01-28 Thread Amit Langote
On Friday, 29 January 2016, Oleg Bartunov wrote: > I read > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/FOSDEM/PGDay_2016_Developer_Meeting and > would like to say thanks for such nice review of meeting. > +many Thanks, Amit

[HACKERS] thanks for FOSDEM/PGDay 2016 Developer Meeting

2016-01-28 Thread Oleg Bartunov
I read https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/FOSDEM/PGDay_2016_Developer_Meeting and would like to say thanks for such nice review of meeting. Oleg

[HACKERS] Thanks for git

2010-10-05 Thread Simon Riggs
Big thanks to everyone that was involved in the git conversion. The commit instructions were flawless and the multiple workdirs option works well for our setup. git reset helped me out of a minor issue where I'd set the case of the email address incorrectly. So git has already saved me once. Th

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-05-02 Thread Hannu Krosing
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I can even think of a situation, as unlikely as it can be, where this > > could happen ... run out of inodes on the file system ... last inode used > > by the table, no inode to stick the symlink onto ... > > If you run out of inodes, you are going to have much bigger

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-05-02 Thread Bruce Momjian
> > Yes, I like that idea, but the problem is that it is hard to update just > > one table in the file. > > why not have just one ever-growing file that is only appended to and > that has > lines of form > > OID, type (DB/TABLE/INDEX/...), name, time > > so when you need tha actual info you g

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-05-02 Thread Michael Samuel
On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 08:17:28PM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Sort of, if that flat file is in the form of: > 123456;"tablename " > 33;"another_table " Or better yet, since the flat file is unlikely to be large, you could just do this dance: 1) open file

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-30 Thread Bruce Momjian
> It might be worth making a simple utility (could be based on Bryan > White's pg_check) to grovel through the raw pg_class bits and extract > relfilenode info the hard way. You'd only need it in certain disaster > scenarios, but when you did need it you'd need it bad. > > So far we have not see

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-30 Thread Tom Lane
Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Oh, you did a direct postgres backend connect. Yes, that will work >> fine. Good idea if the postmaster is down. I originally thought you >> meant reading the pg_class file raw. Of course, that would be really >> hard because there is no way to kn

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-30 Thread Vince Vielhaber
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I think parsing the file contents is too hard. The database would have > > > to be running and I would use psql. > > > > I don't know, I recovered someone's database using a "raw" connection ... > > wasn't that difficult once I figured out the form

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010429 23:12] wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > big problem is that there is no good way to make the symlinks reliable > > because in a crash, the symlink could point to a table creation that got > > rolled back or the renaming of a table that g

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > big problem is that there is no good way to make the symlinks reliable > because in a crash, the symlink could point to a table creation that got > rolled back or the renaming of a table that got rolled back. Yes. Have you already forgotten the very lo

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
Here is what I suggested for oid2name to do with file names: --- Just seems like a major pain; not worth the work. If you do a ls and pipe it, here is what you would need to do: - find out where $PWD is - in that databas

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Casey Lyon
If this isn't incorporated into a utility, it would certainly be prime for inclusion for the yet-to-be-written chapter 11 of the PG Admin Manual "Database Recovery." Thanks for your responses, -Casey The Hermit Hacker wrote: > On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Yes, I like

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
> > I think parsing the file contents is too hard. The database would have > > to be running and I would use psql. > > I don't know, I recovered someone's database using a "raw" connection ... > wasn't that difficult once I figured out the format *shrug* > > the following gets the oid,relname's

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
> It certainly works quickly for smaller tables, however the 21.7 million > record table I ran this on takes a touch longer as shown here: > > database=# explain select count(*) from table; > NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: > > Aggregate (cost=478056.20..478056.20 rows=1 width=0) >-> Seq Scan on tabl

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Serguei Mokhov
- Original Message - From: Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: The Hermit Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Casey Lyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2001 11:17 PM Subject: Re: [HACKE

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread The Hermit Hacker
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Yes, I like that idea, but the problem is that it is hard to update just > > > one table in the file. You sort of have to update the entire file each > > > time a table changes. That is why I liked symlinks because they are > > > per-table, but yo

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Casey Lyon
Bruce Momjian wrote: > The problem here is that now we don't have commit status in the index > rows, so they have to check the heap for every row. One idea is to > update the index status on an index scan, and if we can do that, we can > easily use the index. However, the table scan is pretty

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Casey Lyon
I could even see a utility that does a dump of this info into a flat file, entirely overwriting the file every time. This would be quick to reference and usable in a meltdown scenario. Could easily be incorporated into vacuum and other db maintenance cron scripts. -Casey Bruce Momjian wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
> > Yes, I like that idea, but the problem is that it is hard to update just > > one table in the file. You sort of have to update the entire file each > > time a table changes. That is why I liked symlinks because they are > > per-table, but you are right that the symlink creation could fail >

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread B. Palmer
2 points: - I thought that a big part of the reason we got rid of filenames was so we would use arbitrary table / db names that were not restricted by the file system / OS. Using links would then return this restriction. - What is the format for the table? Could we write a tool that can read t

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
> * Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010429 20:14] wrote: > > > Yes, I like that idea, but the problem is that it is hard to update just > > one table in the file. You sort of have to update the entire file each > > time a table changes. That is why I liked symlinks because they are > > per-t

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread The Hermit Hacker
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I can even think of a situation, as unlikely as it can be, where this > > could happen ... run out of inodes on the file system ... last inode used > > by the table, no inode to stick the symlink onto ... > > > If you run out of inodes, you are going

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010429 20:14] wrote: > Yes, I like that idea, but the problem is that it is hard to update just > one table in the file. You sort of have to update the entire file each > time a table changes. That is why I liked symlinks because they are > per-table, but yo

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
> I can even think of a situation, as unlikely as it can be, where this > could happen ... run out of inodes on the file system ... last inode used > by the table, no inode to stick the symlink onto ... If you run out of inodes, you are going to have much bigger problems than symlinks. Sort fil

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread The Hermit Hacker
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I don't know the answers to these questions, which is why I'm asking them > > ... if this is something safe to do, and doesn't break us again, then > > sounds like a good idea to me too ... > > I was suggesting the symlinks purely for admin convenienc

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > doesn't this defeat the reasons for going to numerics? is there a reason > > > why its such a difficult thing to do a SELECT oid on pg_database and > > > pg_class to get this information? that's what I've been doing when I need > > > to

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread The Hermit Hacker
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > doesn't this defeat the reasons for going to numerics? is there a reason > > why its such a difficult thing to do a SELECT oid on pg_database and > > pg_class to get this information? that's what I've been doing when I need > > to know *shrug* >

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
> > > > doesn't this defeat the reasons for going to numerics? is there a reason > > why its such a difficult thing to do a SELECT oid on pg_database and > > pg_class to get this information? that's what I've been doing when I need > > to know *shrug* > > Yes, but you can't do that if you can'

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
> > doesn't this defeat the reasons for going to numerics? is there a reason > why its such a difficult thing to do a SELECT oid on pg_database and > pg_class to get this information? that's what I've been doing when I need > to know *shrug* Yes, but you can't do that if you can't start the da

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread The Hermit Hacker
doesn't this defeat the reasons for going to numerics? is there a reason why its such a difficult thing to do a SELECT oid on pg_database and pg_class to get this information? that's what I've been doing when I need to know *shrug* On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > First off I jus

Re: [HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Bruce Momjian
> First off I just wanted to give a big 'thank you' to all the > developers and contributors who have made PostgreSQL what it is > today. I haven't come across a single thing since my first > experience with it a few years ago that hasn't been corrected, > sped up, or otherwise postively enhanced!

[HACKERS] Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

2001-04-29 Thread Casey Lyon
First off I just wanted to give a big 'thank you' to all the developers and contributors who have made PostgreSQL what it is today. I haven't come across a single thing since my first experience with it a few years ago that hasn't been corrected, sped up, or otherwise postively enhanced! In work

[HACKERS] Thanks!

2000-12-14 Thread Philip Hofstetter
Hi all, I am adressing this email to this mailinglist due to the lack of some address to post euphoric feedback to. Let me tell you my story: This february I began working on a web-application using PHP and a SQL-Database. My problem was to evaluate the right one: Interbase was at the state of