Horton

Thread

  1. pgaccess update for 6.5.2?

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-13T00:28:51Z

    Do people want pgaccess updated to 0.98 for the 6.5.2 release?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

  2. Re: pgaccess update for 6.5.2?

    Constantin Teodorescu <teo@flex.ro> — 1999-09-13T06:16:40Z

    Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> Do people want pgaccess updated to 0.98 for the 6.5.2 release?

It would be just fine.
I'm waiting for a german translation this week and everything seems to
be ok. No bugs have been discovered.
When should be the package prepared to be inserted into 6.5.2 ?

-- 
Constantin Teodorescu
FLEX Consulting Braila, ROMANIA

  3. Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgaccess update for 6.5.2?

    Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> — 1999-09-13T14:05:25Z

    On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Constantin Teodorescu wrote:

> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > Do people want pgaccess updated to 0.98 for the 6.5.2 release?
> 
> It would be just fine.
> I'm waiting for a german translation this week and everything seems to
> be ok. No bugs have been discovered.
> When should be the package prepared to be inserted into 6.5.2 ?

Am going to do a roll-out on Tuesday evenin...

Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org

  4. Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgaccess update for 6.5.2?

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-13T14:36:28Z

    > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > Do people want pgaccess updated to 0.98 for the 6.5.2 release?
> 
> It would be just fine.
> I'm waiting for a german translation this week and everything seems to
> be ok. No bugs have been discovered.
> When should be the package prepared to be inserted into 6.5.2 ?

The real issue was not if it was stable, but whether a non-bugfix
release of pgaccess was proper for a 6.5.2 release.  I haven't heard any
comments on that yet.  Not sure how I feel either.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

  5. Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgaccess update for 6.5.2?

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-13T14:38:02Z

    > On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Constantin Teodorescu wrote:
> 
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > 
> > > Do people want pgaccess updated to 0.98 for the 6.5.2 release?
> > 
> > It would be just fine.
> > I'm waiting for a german translation this week and everything seems to
> > be ok. No bugs have been discovered.
> > When should be the package prepared to be inserted into 6.5.2 ?
> 
> Am going to do a roll-out on Tuesday evenin...

I will take this as a "Yes", you want the new pgaccess.  Adding it now.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

  6. Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgaccess update for 6.5.2?

    Constantin Teodorescu <teo@flex.ro> — 1999-09-13T14:51:16Z

    Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> The real issue was not if it was stable, but whether a non-bugfix
> release of pgaccess was proper for a 6.5.2 release.  I haven't heard any
> comments on that yet.  Not sure how I feel either.

It's rock solid stable.

I am using it for 2 weeks and just minor bugs have been reported (some
color problems on Solaris that have been fixed, some messages missing
from translations).

It will be ready for tomorow to be picked up and included in 6.5.2
distribution.
Just I will need a final confirmation with 10 minutes before someone
downloads the .tar.gz to be sure that it will be the right one.
I'll be (I hope) reachable by e-mail checking my mailbox every 1 minute.

Please, there is available a bug fix list for 6.5.2 ?

Teo

  7. Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgaccess update for 6.5.2?

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-13T15:05:40Z

    > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > The real issue was not if it was stable, but whether a non-bugfix
> > release of pgaccess was proper for a 6.5.2 release.  I haven't heard any
> > comments on that yet.  Not sure how I feel either.
> 
> It's rock solid stable.
> 
> I am using it for 2 weeks and just minor bugs have been reported (some
> color problems on Solaris that have been fixed, some messages missing
> from translations).
> 
> It will be ready for tomorow to be picked up and included in 6.5.2
> distribution.
> Just I will need a final confirmation with 10 minutes before someone
> downloads the .tar.gz to be sure that it will be the right one.
> I'll be (I hope) reachable by e-mail checking my mailbox every 1 minute.
> 
> Please, there is available a bug fix list for 6.5.2 ?

Can I download it now?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

  8. HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> — 1999-09-13T16:38:30Z

    Bruce,

in HISTORY for 6.5.2 I see:

This is to re-use space on index pages freed by vacuum(Tom)

isn't this re-use indices after vacuum hack by Vadim ?
(prevent indices to grow infinitely)

	Regards,

		Oleg

_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83

  9. Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-13T17:11:11Z

    > Bruce,
> 
> in HISTORY for 6.5.2 I see:
> 
> This is to re-use space on index pages freed by vacuum(Tom)
> 
> isn't this re-use indices after vacuum hack by Vadim ?
> (prevent indices to grow infinitely)
> 

Thanks.  I have updated the release.sgml and the HISTORY file.

I should have posted the list of changes.  Here it is.  Gee, it is quite
a lot.  Thomas, any way to get the dates from the release.sgml into the
HISTORY file and the html output?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------



Detailed Change List

       subselect+CASE fixes(Tom)
       Add SHLIB_LINK setting for solaris_i386 and solaris_sparc ports(Daren
       Sefcik)
       Fixes for CASE in WHERE join clauses(Tom)
       Fix BTScan abort(Tom)
       Repair the check for redundant UNIQUE and PRIMARY KEY indices(Tom)
       Improve it so that it checks for multi-column constraints(Tom)
       Fix for Win32 making problem with MB enabled(Hiroki Kataoka)
       Allow BSD yacc and bison to compile pl code(Bruce)
       Fix SET NAMES
       int8 fixes(Thomas)
       Fix vacuum's memory consumption(Tom)
       Reduce the total memory consumption of vacuum(Tom)
       Fix for timestamp(datetime)
       Rule deparsing bugfixes(Tom)
       Fix quoting problems in mkMakefile.tcldefs.sh.in and
       mkMakefile.tkdefs.sh.in(Tom)
       Update frontend libpq to remove limits on query lengths,
       error/notice message lengths, and number of fields per tuple(Tom)
       This is to re-use space on index pages freed by vacuum(Vadim)
       document -x for pg_dump(Bruce)
       Fix for unary operators in rule deparser(Tom)
       Comment out FileUnlink of excess segments during mdtruncate()(Tom)
       Irix linking fix from Yu Cao <yucao@falcon.kla-tencor.com>
       Repair logic error in LIKE: should not return LIKE_ABORT
       when reach end of pattern before end of text(Tom)
       Repair incorrect cleanup of heap memory allocation during transaction
       abort(Tom)

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

  10. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> — 1999-09-13T17:42:16Z

    Bruce Momjian wrote:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Detailed Change List
> 
[snip]

Hey, Bruce -- did the patches for Alpha get in??  If not, I'll need to
mung Ryan K's/Uncle G's patchset against 6.5.1 to work with 6.5.2.

Your friendly RPM packager...

Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio

  11. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-13T17:47:19Z

    > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > Detailed Change List
> > 
> [snip]
> 
> Hey, Bruce -- did the patches for Alpha get in??  If not, I'll need to
> mung Ryan K's/Uncle G's patchset against 6.5.1 to work with 6.5.2.
> 
> Your friendly RPM packager...

The bad news is that those patches are too large/significant for a minor
release.  They could affect other platforms adversely, so we can't apply
them until 6.6.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

  12. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> — 1999-09-13T17:50:33Z

    Bruce Momjian wrote:
 
> The bad news is that those patches are too large/significant for a minor
> release.  They could affect other platforms adversely, so we can't apply
> them until 6.6.

Ok, mung time, then.  That means RedHat will be releasing 6.5.1 with
RedHat 6.1, unless those patches can be munged relatively easily. Alpha
is a big platform for RedHat.

Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio

  13. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> — 1999-09-13T17:55:09Z

    > Bruce Momjian wrote:
>  
> > The bad news is that those patches are too large/significant for a minor
> > release.  They could affect other platforms adversely, so we can't apply
> > them until 6.6.
> 
> Ok, mung time, then.  That means RedHat will be releasing 6.5.1 with
> RedHat 6.1, unless those patches can be munged relatively easily. Alpha
> is a big platform for RedHat.
> 

It would be very valid to apply Uncle George's patches to a 6.5.2
alpha-only release.  If we had an alpha-only release, we would apply
them too.

Our problem is that minor releases don't get the same cross-platform
testing as major releases.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

  14. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> — 1999-09-13T18:00:07Z

    On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > Ok, mung time, then.  That means RedHat will be releasing 6.5.1 with
> > RedHat 6.1, unless those patches can be munged relatively easily. Alpha
> > is a big platform for RedHat.
> > 
> 
> It would be very valid to apply Uncle George's patches to a 6.5.2
> alpha-only release.  If we had an alpha-only release, we would apply
> them too.

Oh, I understand.  Somehow or another I thought 6.5.2 had those patches
integrated.  My error.

> Our problem is that minor releases don't get the same cross-platform
> testing as major releases.

I understand -- I am patch-munging as I write this, after booting into RedHat 6
on my notebook.  If Ryan K is still around, he may find it easier going, as he
did the backpatch to 6.5.1.  There are a couple of failed hunks, and some
reverses.  We'll see how it goes.

Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio

  15. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Ryan Kirkpatrick <rkirkpat@rkirkpat.net> — 1999-09-14T21:44:30Z

    On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Lamar Owen wrote:

> > Our problem is that minor releases don't get the same cross-platform
> > testing as major releases.
> 
> I understand -- I am patch-munging as I write this, after booting into RedHat 6
> on my notebook.  If Ryan K is still around, he may find it easier going, as he
> did the backpatch to 6.5.1.  There are a couple of failed hunks, and some
> reverses.  We'll see how it goes.

	Yea, I am still around, though a bit busy with school at the
moment. I should be able to get 6.5.2beta downloaded and the alpha patches
updated for it by Monday if you want me to try. Or, if you get an updated
alpha patch before then, email it to me, and I will try it out. TTYL.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain."                    |
|                                            --- Philippians 1:21 (KJV)   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   Ryan Kirkpatrick  |  Boulder, Colorado  |  http://www.rkirkpat.net/   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  16. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> — 1999-09-14T22:11:58Z

    On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Ryan Kirkpatrick wrote:
> 	Yea, I am still around, though a bit busy with school at the
> moment. I should be able to get 6.5.2beta downloaded and the alpha patches
> updated for it by Monday if you want me to try. Or, if you get an updated
> alpha patch before then, email it to me, and I will try it out. TTYL.

You know that code far better than I; if you have time, applying those patches
to the final 6.5.2 would be a nice thing.  I'm applying my time to getting RPM
upgrading working -- many thanks to Oliver Elphick for the Debian upgrade
scripts, some of which are very useful even in an RPM context.

Those 6.5.1 patches made alot of people very happy -- the guys at RedHat in
particular.  Bravo to Uncle George for them originally, and bravo to you for
the backpatch and packaging to 6.5.1!  Those patches, incidentally, will ship
with RedHat 6.1, if nothing happens between now and release time.

TIA!

Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio

  17. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Ryan Kirkpatrick <rkirkpat@nag.cs.colorado.edu> — 1999-09-15T23:49:16Z

    On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Lamar Owen wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Ryan Kirkpatrick wrote:
> > 	Yea, I am still around, though a bit busy with school at the
> > moment. I should be able to get 6.5.2beta downloaded and the alpha patches
> > updated for it by Monday if you want me to try. Or, if you get an updated
> > alpha patch before then, email it to me, and I will try it out. TTYL.
> 
> You know that code far better than I; if you have time, applying those patches
> to the final 6.5.2 would be a nice thing.  I'm applying my time to getting RPM
> upgrading working -- many thanks to Oliver Elphick for the Debian upgrade
> scripts, some of which are very useful even in an RPM context.

	Ok, I will do so this weekend, providing there are not too many
things broken. I will let you know on Monday what the status is. :)
Though, is the 6.5.2beta tar ball on the ftp site the one I want to work
with, or do I want to go from something from CVS? And if so, what is the
relevant tag?

> Those 6.5.1 patches made alot of people very happy -- the guys at RedHat in
> particular.  Bravo to Uncle George for them originally, and bravo to you for
> the backpatch and packaging to 6.5.1!  Those patches, incidentally, will ship
> with RedHat 6.1, if nothing happens between now and release time.

	Good to hear, and you are welcome! Hopefully by 6.6 the patches
will not be needed and Linux/Alpha will finally be a fully supported pgsql
platform!

	PS. Now that I made people at RedHat happy, can I get some of
thier stock? :) **Just kidding**

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain."                    |
|                                            --- Philippians 1:21 (KJV)   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   Ryan Kirkpatrick  |  Boulder, Colorado  |  http://www.rkirkpat.net/   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  18. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> — 1999-09-16T19:37:37Z

    Ryan Kirkpatrick wrote:
>         Ok, I will do so this weekend, providing there are not too many
> things broken. I will let you know on Monday what the status is. :)

The current tarball is 6.5.2RC (for Release Candidate).  AFAIK, this
will become the release of 6.5.2, unless there are problems.

Thanks much!

>         Good to hear, and you are welcome! Hopefully by 6.6 the patches
> will not be needed and Linux/Alpha will finally be a fully supported pgsql
> platform!

Yes!  Now if I just HAD one.... ;-)

>         PS. Now that I made people at RedHat happy, can I get some of
> thier stock? :) **Just kidding**

ROTFL....  I _wish_...

Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11

  19. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Theo Kramer <theo@flame.co.za> — 1999-09-17T06:53:52Z

    Lamar Owen wrote:
> 
> Ryan Kirkpatrick wrote:
> >         Ok, I will do so this weekend, providing there are not too many
> > things broken. I will let you know on Monday what the status is. :)
> 
> The current tarball is 6.5.2RC (for Release Candidate).  AFAIK, this
> will become the release of 6.5.2, unless there are problems.
> 
> Thanks much!
> 
> >         Good to hear, and you are welcome! Hopefully by 6.6 the patches
> > will not be needed and Linux/Alpha will finally be a fully supported pgsql
> > platform!
> 
> Yes!  Now if I just HAD one.... ;-)

Dont know if it's been raised before, but the postgres utilities are installed
into /usr/bin from the rpm. Problem with this is the naming of some of the 
utilities eg.createuser, destroyuser. These could be confused with the 
'standard' user utilities such as useradd, userdel etc. How about pre-pending 
a 'pg' to all postgres utilities so that these become pgcreateuser, 
pgdestroyuser etc.?

--------
Regards
Theo

  20. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Ryan Kirkpatrick <rkirkpat@nag.cs.colorado.edu> — 1999-09-18T14:58:48Z

    On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Lamar Owen wrote:

> Ryan Kirkpatrick wrote:
> >         Ok, I will do so this weekend, providing there are not too many
> > things broken. I will let you know on Monday what the status is. :)
> 
> The current tarball is 6.5.2RC (for Release Candidate).  AFAIK, this
> will become the release of 6.5.2, unless there are problems.

	Ok, I grabbed 6.5.2, and after only minor trouble, have an
alpha-patched version. The biggest changes to the patch was that a few
of the "safe" changes made by the 6.5.1 alpha patches have made thier way
into the source tree (i.e. CPU defintions in the configure and makefiles).
Only one instance where changes in actual source code broke and patch, and
that instance was trival.
	I am running regression tests on the 6.5.2 alpha patched binaries
now. Once they pass, I will post the patch to the list.

> >         Good to hear, and you are welcome! Hopefully by 6.6 the patches
> > will not be needed and Linux/Alpha will finally be a fully supported pgsql
> > platform!
> 
> Yes!  Now if I just HAD one.... ;-)

	They are nice machines... And there is a nice range of price/perf
on them, everything from low end inexpensive machine to top of the end
bank-busting machines. :) If you are really interested in playing around
with an Alpha, I would recommend something like an AS200 at the low end,
or a PC164LX at the mid end. Don't waste your time on a UDB though, they
are more trouble then they are worth (overheat and die after a few years
:( ).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain."                    |
|                                            --- Philippians 1:21 (KJV)   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   Ryan Kirkpatrick  |  Boulder, Colorado  |  http://www.rkirkpat.net/   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  21. Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

    Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> — 1999-09-18T20:27:08Z

    On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Theo Kramer wrote:
> Dont know if it's been raised before, but the postgres utilities are installed
> into /usr/bin from the rpm. Problem with this is the naming of some of the 
> utilities eg.createuser, destroyuser. These could be confused with the 
> 'standard' user utilities such as useradd, userdel etc. How about pre-pending 
> a 'pg' to all postgres utilities so that these become pgcreateuser, 
> pgdestroyuser etc.?

This is an interesting idea.

What is also interesting is that if you have a traditional postgresql
installation (/usr/local/pgsql), you can get even wierder results if /usr/bin
contains one createuser and /usr/local/pgsql/bin contains another.  Depending
upon your PATH, you could get unwanted results in a hurry.

So, it IS an interesting thought -- while it would initially create a good deal
of confusion, what is the consensus of the hackers on this issue??  Prepending
"pg_" to all postgresql commands seems to me to be a good idea (after all, we
already hav pg_dump, pg_dumpall, pg_upgrade, etc.).

Thoughts??

Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio