Обсуждение: TODO updates
The following TODO items seem to be taken care of in current sources,
but aren't marked done in TODO:
PARSER
* INSERT INTO ... SELECT with AS columns matching result columns problem
* UNION with LIMIT fails
* CREATE TABLE x AS SELECT 1 UNION SELECT 2 fails
* CREATE TABLE test(col char(2) DEFAULT user) fails in length restriction
* mismatched types in CREATE TABLE ... DEFAULT causes problems [default]
* SELECT COUNT('asdf') FROM pg_class WHERE oid=12 crashes
URGENT
* Eliminate limits on query length
(Not quite done, but close enough to put a dash on it...)
TYPES
* Allow compression of large fields or a compressed field type
Jan just created a compressed text type, so this is partly done.
We speculated a little about adding a lower-level mechanism that would
compress whole tuples, so maybe this item should be replaced by one
mentioning that idea (it wouldn't belong in the TYPES section though).
MISC
* Allow subqueries in target list
* Overhaul mdmgr/smgr to fix double unlinking and double opens, cleanup
Is this one done, or do we still have issues there? I think it's a lot
better than it used to be, anyway...
SOURCE CODE
* Make configure --enable-debug add -g on compile line
regards, tom lane
> The following TODO items seem to be taken care of in current sources,
> but aren't marked done in TODO:
Thanks. I have trouble figuring out which fixes I hear about go with
which items. I also forget they are on there.
>
> PARSER
>
> * INSERT INTO ... SELECT with AS columns matching result columns problem
> * UNION with LIMIT fails
> * CREATE TABLE x AS SELECT 1 UNION SELECT 2 fails
> * CREATE TABLE test(col char(2) DEFAULT user) fails in length restriction
> * mismatched types in CREATE TABLE ... DEFAULT causes problems [default]
> * SELECT COUNT('asdf') FROM pg_class WHERE oid=12 crashes
Thanks. Done.
>
> URGENT
>
> * Eliminate limits on query length
>
> (Not quite done, but close enough to put a dash on it...)
Marked.
>
> TYPES
>
> * Allow compression of large fields or a compressed field type
>
> Jan just created a compressed text type, so this is partly done.
> We speculated a little about adding a lower-level mechanism that would
> compress whole tuples, so maybe this item should be replaced by one
> mentioning that idea (it wouldn't belong in the TYPES section though).
Marked. Let someone ask for tuple compression.
>
> MISC
>
> * Allow subqueries in target list
Marked.
>
> * Overhaul mdmgr/smgr to fix double unlinking and double opens, cleanup
>
> Is this one done, or do we still have issues there? I think it's a lot
> better than it used to be, anyway...
Marked.
>
> SOURCE CODE
>
> * Make configure --enable-debug add -g on compile line
Marked.
Thanks. Updated.
-- 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,
Pennsylvania19026
one of the things I remember seeing discussed, and wonder about current
status on:
removal of the whole pg_vlock requirement on vacuum?
last I recall, MVCC eliminated that requirement, and also made it easier
to do a vacuum on 'live tables'?
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > The following TODO items seem to be taken care of in current sources,
> > but aren't marked done in TODO:
>
> Thanks. I have trouble figuring out which fixes I hear about go with
> which items. I also forget they are on there.
>
>
> >
> > PARSER
> >
> > * INSERT INTO ... SELECT with AS columns matching result columns problem
> > * UNION with LIMIT fails
> > * CREATE TABLE x AS SELECT 1 UNION SELECT 2 fails
> > * CREATE TABLE test(col char(2) DEFAULT user) fails in length restriction
> > * mismatched types in CREATE TABLE ... DEFAULT causes problems [default]
> > * SELECT COUNT('asdf') FROM pg_class WHERE oid=12 crashes
>
> Thanks. Done.
>
> >
> > URGENT
> >
> > * Eliminate limits on query length
> >
> > (Not quite done, but close enough to put a dash on it...)
>
> Marked.
>
> >
> > TYPES
> >
> > * Allow compression of large fields or a compressed field type
> >
> > Jan just created a compressed text type, so this is partly done.
> > We speculated a little about adding a lower-level mechanism that would
> > compress whole tuples, so maybe this item should be replaced by one
> > mentioning that idea (it wouldn't belong in the TYPES section though).
>
> Marked. Let someone ask for tuple compression.
>
> >
> > MISC
> >
> > * Allow subqueries in target list
>
> Marked.
>
> >
> > * Overhaul mdmgr/smgr to fix double unlinking and double opens, cleanup
> >
> > Is this one done, or do we still have issues there? I think it's a lot
> > better than it used to be, anyway...
>
> Marked.
>
> >
> > SOURCE CODE
> >
> > * Make configure --enable-debug add -g on compile line
>
> Marked.
>
> Thanks. Updated.
>
> --
> 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
>
> ************
>
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> one of the things I remember seeing discussed, and wonder about current
> status on:
> removal of the whole pg_vlock requirement on vacuum?
I have that on my to-do list; as far as I know it's a trivial code
change, but I just haven't gotten to it. Maybe I'll try it tonight.
regards, tom lane
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > one of the things I remember seeing discussed, and wonder about current
> > status on:
> > removal of the whole pg_vlock requirement on vacuum?
>
> I have that on my to-do list; as far as I know it's a trivial code
> change, but I just haven't gotten to it. Maybe I'll try it tonight.
is this something that could safely be back-patched into v6.5.x's tree?
have at least one project that could really use the ability to vacuum a
database without the tables being locked :)
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
>>>> removal of the whole pg_vlock requirement on vacuum?
>>
>> I have that on my to-do list; as far as I know it's a trivial code
>> change, but I just haven't gotten to it. Maybe I'll try it tonight.
> is this something that could safely be back-patched into v6.5.x's tree?
Well, mumble. We could probably back-patch the ability to run more than
one vacuum at a time, since that'd be local to vacuum.c. But I think
that'd encourage people to run vacuum in parallel with *other* database
activities, something we know is not very safe in 6.5! That whole
set of changes I made to enforce more careful locking was mainly
motivated by Oleg's examples of crashes when system table changes were
made in parallel with vacuuming of the system tables.
In short, I think it'd be a risky thing to do. I'm not even 100%
confident that it will work reliably in current sources; I'll check
it out before I commit it, but I won't be really comfortable until
we've had a beta-test cycle on it...
regards, tom lane