Horton
Menu

Thread

  1. Questions about 9.0 release note

    Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> — 2010-03-30T05:37:37Z

    Hi, I have some questions about 9.0 release note.
I'd like to work for some of them if required. Comments welcome.

* Allow per-tablespace sequential and random page cost variables
  (seq_page_cost/(random_page_cost)) via ALTER TABLESPACE ... SET/RESET
                  ^                ^
Are those parentheses around random_page_cost intentional?
They seems to mean just "(seq_page_cost and random_page_cost)".

* EXCLUDE constraints has no tags to be linked.
The item in release note is pointing the following page,
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/sql-createtable.html#SQL-CREATETABLE-DESCRIPTION
but the actual description about EXCLUDE constraints are in the subentry
of "Parameters" section. Can we add a tag to <varlistentry> for EXCLUDE?

* "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.
Should we have for it? Unique Constraints have a section for them:
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/ddl-constraints.html#AEN2431

Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center

  2. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> — 2010-03-30T13:23:38Z

    On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 1:37 AM, Takahiro Itagaki
<itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> Hi, I have some questions about 9.0 release note.
> I'd like to work for some of them if required. Comments welcome.
>
> * Allow per-tablespace sequential and random page cost variables
>  (seq_page_cost/(random_page_cost)) via ALTER TABLESPACE ... SET/RESET
>                  ^                ^
> Are those parentheses around random_page_cost intentional?
> They seems to mean just "(seq_page_cost and random_page_cost)".
>
> * EXCLUDE constraints has no tags to be linked.
> The item in release note is pointing the following page,
> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/sql-createtable.html#SQL-CREATETABLE-DESCRIPTION
> but the actual description about EXCLUDE constraints are in the subentry
> of "Parameters" section. Can we add a tag to <varlistentry> for EXCLUDE?
>
> * "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.
> Should we have for it? Unique Constraints have a section for them:
> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/ddl-constraints.html#AEN2431

I think I agree with all of these suggestions.  Also maybe it should
say CREATE TABLE ... CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE rather than CREATE TABLE
CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE.

...Robert

  3. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> — 2010-03-30T13:51:21Z

    Also, where are we on using full names rather than first names only?  I
don't see the point in omitting the last names.  Are we trying to
obscure to outsiders who is really working on our code?

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

  4. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> — 2010-03-31T06:56:28Z

    "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> > * (seq_page_cost/(random_page_cost))
> > * EXCLUDE constraints has no tags to be linked.
> > * "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.

> CREATE TABLE ... CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE rather than CREATE TABLE
> CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE.

Here is a patch to fix the documentation.

For exclusion constraints, I added a tag "SQL-CREATETABLE-exclude"
to <varlistentry> of EXCLUDE in CREATE TABLE documentation. Also,
"Exclusion constraints" section is added to the constraints doc.
But the section is very short and just links to the CREATE TABLE doc.
We could move some contents from CREATE TABLE to the constraints doc.

Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center

  5. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Thom Brown <thombrown@gmail.com> — 2010-03-31T07:06:19Z

    On 31 March 2010 07:56, Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>
> "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > * (seq_page_cost/(random_page_cost))
>> > * EXCLUDE constraints has no tags to be linked.
>> > * "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.
>
>> CREATE TABLE ... CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE rather than CREATE TABLE
>> CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE.
>
> Here is a patch to fix the documentation.
>
> For exclusion constraints, I added a tag "SQL-CREATETABLE-exclude"
> to <varlistentry> of EXCLUDE in CREATE TABLE documentation. Also,
> "Exclusion constraints" section is added to the constraints doc.
> But the section is very short and just links to the CREATE TABLE doc.
> We could move some contents from CREATE TABLE to the constraints doc.
>
> Regards,
> ---
> Takahiro Itagaki
> NTT Open Source Software Center
>

Just one typo: "that that".

Regards

Thom

  6. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> — 2010-03-31T16:50:42Z

    On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 2:56 AM, Takahiro Itagaki
<itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>
> "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > * (seq_page_cost/(random_page_cost))
>> > * EXCLUDE constraints has no tags to be linked.
>> > * "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.
>
>> CREATE TABLE ... CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE rather than CREATE TABLE
>> CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE.
>
> Here is a patch to fix the documentation.
>
> For exclusion constraints, I added a tag "SQL-CREATETABLE-exclude"
> to <varlistentry> of EXCLUDE in CREATE TABLE documentation. Also,
> "Exclusion constraints" section is added to the constraints doc.
> But the section is very short and just links to the CREATE TABLE doc.
> We could move some contents from CREATE TABLE to the constraints doc.

This says:

Exclusion constraints ensure that that if any two rows are compared on
the specified column(s) or expression(s) using the specified
operator(s), not all of these comparisons will return
<literal>TRUE</>.

I think that's backwards - the last clause should say "none of those
comparisons will return <literal>TRUE</>".

Unless I'm confused.

...Robert

  7. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Kevin Grittner <kevin.grittner@wicourts.gov> — 2010-03-31T17:07:17Z

    Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
 
> This says:
> 
> Exclusion constraints ensure that that if any two rows are
> compared on the specified column(s) or expression(s) using the
> specified operator(s), not all of these comparisons will return
> <literal>TRUE</>.
> 
> I think that's backwards - the last clause should say "none of
> those comparisons will return <literal>TRUE</>".
> 
> Unless I'm confused.
 
"not all" seems correct.  For example, you could be checking the
room number for equality and a range of time for overlap -- both
must be TRUE to have a problem; otherwise you could only schedule
one thing in the room for all time and one thing at a given time
across all rooms.
 
-Kevin

  8. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> — 2010-03-31T17:13:47Z

    On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This says:
>>
>> Exclusion constraints ensure that that if any two rows are
>> compared on the specified column(s) or expression(s) using the
>> specified operator(s), not all of these comparisons will return
>> <literal>TRUE</>.
>>
>> I think that's backwards - the last clause should say "none of
>> those comparisons will return <literal>TRUE</>".
>>
>> Unless I'm confused.
>
> "not all" seems correct.  For example, you could be checking the
> room number for equality and a range of time for overlap -- both
> must be TRUE to have a problem; otherwise you could only schedule
> one thing in the room for all time and one thing at a given time
> across all rooms.

Oh, I see.  I thought it was referring to all pairs of rows, but I see
now it's referring to pairs of columns, so it's correct.

...Robert

  9. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Kevin Grittner <kevin.grittner@wicourts.gov> — 2010-03-31T17:17:52Z

    Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
 
> I thought it was referring to all pairs of rows, but I see
> now it's referring to pairs of columns, so it's correct.
 
If it confused you, I suspect it will confuse others.  Offhand,
I can't see how to improve the language, though.
 
-Kevin

  10. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca> — 2010-03-31T18:18:18Z

    * Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> [100331 13:18]:
  
> If it confused you, I suspect it will confuse others.  Offhand,
> I can't see how to improve the language, though.


How about a simple:
    s/these/the colomn or expression/

Leaving:
    ... not all of the column or expression comparisons ...


"These" isn't wrong, but if people are being confused about the objects
"these" refer to, being explicit can at least avoid that confusion.

a.

-- 
Aidan Van Dyk                                             Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca                                       command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/                                   work like a slave.

  11. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2010-04-01T00:19:56Z

    Takahiro Itagaki wrote:
> Hi, I have some questions about 9.0 release note.
> I'd like to work for some of them if required. Comments welcome.
> 
> * Allow per-tablespace sequential and random page cost variables
>   (seq_page_cost/(random_page_cost)) via ALTER TABLESPACE ... SET/RESET

That is a bug, fixed.

> Are those parentheses around random_page_cost intentional?
> They seems to mean just "(seq_page_cost and random_page_cost)".
> 
> * EXCLUDE constraints has no tags to be linked.
> The item in release note is pointing the following page,
> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/sql-createtable.html#SQL-CREATETABLE-DESCRIPTION
> but the actual description about EXCLUDE constraints are in the subentry
> of "Parameters" section. Can we add a tag to <varlistentry> for EXCLUDE?

I was hesitant to add an 'id' link just for the 9.0 docs, but I have now
added a link and linked to it.

> * "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.
> Should we have for it? Unique Constraints have a section for them:
> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/ddl-constraints.html#AEN2431

I am unclear if exclude really belongs there because that section
contains mostly basic features.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  12. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> — 2010-04-01T00:21:39Z

    On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> * "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.
>> Should we have for it? Unique Constraints have a section for them:
>> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/ddl-constraints.html#AEN2431
>
> I am unclear if exclude really belongs there because that section
> contains mostly basic features.

It seems like the charter of that page is to list all of the types of
constraints that we have, in which case exclusion constraints belong
there too.

...Robert

  13. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2010-04-01T00:21:51Z

    Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>  
> > I thought it was referring to all pairs of rows, but I see
> > now it's referring to pairs of columns, so it's correct.
>  
> If it confused you, I suspect it will confuse others.  Offhand,
> I can't see how to improve the language, though.

I have no idea what text this is referring to.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  14. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> — 2010-04-01T00:22:26Z

    On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:21 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I thought it was referring to all pairs of rows, but I see
>> > now it's referring to pairs of columns, so it's correct.
>>
>> If it confused you, I suspect it will confuse others.  Offhand,
>> I can't see how to improve the language, though.
>
> I have no idea what text this is referring to.

Itagaki-san's proposed doc patch, which you seem to have missed.

...Robert

  15. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2010-04-01T00:23:21Z

    Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >> * "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.
> >> Should we have for it? Unique Constraints have a section for them:
> >> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/ddl-constraints.html#AEN2431
> >
> > I am unclear if exclude really belongs there because that section
> > contains mostly basic features.
> 
> It seems like the charter of that page is to list all of the types of
> constraints that we have, in which case exclusion constraints belong
> there too.

OK, but I am incapable of writing such a section.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  16. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> — 2010-04-01T00:30:52Z

    On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> >> * "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.
>> >> Should we have for it? Unique Constraints have a section for them:
>> >> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/ddl-constraints.html#AEN2431
>> >
>> > I am unclear if exclude really belongs there because that section
>> > contains mostly basic features.
>>
>> It seems like the charter of that page is to list all of the types of
>> constraints that we have, in which case exclusion constraints belong
>> there too.
>
> OK, but I am incapable of writing such a section.

Perhaps you could use the one from the patch Itagaki-san already wrote.

...Robert

  17. Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2010-04-01T00:34:06Z

    Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> 
> Also, where are we on using full names rather than first names only?  I
> don't see the point in omitting the last names.  Are we trying to
> obscure to outsiders who is really working on our code?

You are the third person to ask for this and I was holding up that
change while Josh Berkus worked on rewording the release notes.  I just
pinged him and he said he will deal with the merge conflicts so I went
ahead and added missing last names.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  18. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2010-04-01T01:18:35Z

    Takahiro Itagaki wrote:
> 
> "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > * (seq_page_cost/(random_page_cost))
> > > * EXCLUDE constraints has no tags to be linked.
> > > * "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.
> 
> > CREATE TABLE ... CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE rather than CREATE TABLE
> > CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE.
> 
> Here is a patch to fix the documentation.
> 
> For exclusion constraints, I added a tag "SQL-CREATETABLE-exclude"
> to <varlistentry> of EXCLUDE in CREATE TABLE documentation. Also,
> "Exclusion constraints" section is added to the constraints doc.
> But the section is very short and just links to the CREATE TABLE doc.
> We could move some contents from CREATE TABLE to the constraints doc.

I applied a clarified version of your submitted patch, attached.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  19. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2010-04-01T01:19:21Z

    Takahiro Itagaki wrote:
> 
> "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > * (seq_page_cost/(random_page_cost))
> > > * EXCLUDE constraints has no tags to be linked.
> > > * "EXCLUDE constraints" is not indexed from the Index page.
> 
> > CREATE TABLE ... CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE rather than CREATE TABLE
> > CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE.
> 
> Here is a patch to fix the documentation.
> 
> For exclusion constraints, I added a tag "SQL-CREATETABLE-exclude"
> to <varlistentry> of EXCLUDE in CREATE TABLE documentation. Also,
> "Exclusion constraints" section is added to the constraints doc.
> But the section is very short and just links to the CREATE TABLE doc.
> We could move some contents from CREATE TABLE to the constraints doc.

[ Apologies, proper patch now attached.]

I applied a clarified version of your submitted patch.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  20. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2010-04-01T14:04:47Z

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> +     Exclusion constraints ensure that if any two rows are compared on
> +     the specified columns or expressions using the specified operators,
> +     at least one of these operator comparisons will be false. The syntax is:

Isn't that phrasing outright incorrect?  Consider nulls.

			regards, tom lane

  21. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2010-04-05T02:10:48Z

    Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > +     Exclusion constraints ensure that if any two rows are compared on
> > +     the specified columns or expressions using the specified operators,
> > +     at least one of these operator comparisons will be false. The syntax is:
> 
> Isn't that phrasing outright incorrect?  Consider nulls.

Well, doesn't a comparison returning null really behave as false? 
Should I reword it as "not true" or "false or null"?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  22. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2010-04-05T14:35:19Z

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>>> +     Exclusion constraints ensure that if any two rows are compared on
>>> +     the specified columns or expressions using the specified operators,
>>> +     at least one of these operator comparisons will be false. The syntax is:
>> 
>> Isn't that phrasing outright incorrect?  Consider nulls.

> Well, doesn't a comparison returning null really behave as false? 
> Should I reword it as "not true" or "false or null"?

Either one.

			regards, tom lane

  23. Re: [SPAM]Re: Questions about 9.0 release note

    Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> — 2010-04-06T02:16:26Z

    Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> >>> +     Exclusion constraints ensure that if any two rows are compared on
> >>> +     the specified columns or expressions using the specified operators,
> >>> +     at least one of these operator comparisons will be false. The syntax is:
> >> 
> >> Isn't that phrasing outright incorrect?  Consider nulls.
> 
> > Well, doesn't a comparison returning null really behave as false? 
> > Should I reword it as "not true" or "false or null"?
> 
> Either one.

I used "false or null".

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com