8.0 beta status
AFAIK there are no major patches still outstanding, with the exception
of the Windows-symlinks patch that arrived today from Andreas. Bruce
and I both think that's worth getting in, if no one has any objections,
but otherwise we essentially have 8.0beta1 code.
The documentation, however, desperately needs work still; and Marc would
like to get some of the postgresql.org domains shifted over to the
newly-installed venus server before we go beta. So the plan right now
is for a couple days' push on documentation, wrap beta1 on Sunday,
announce it Monday.
If anyone has time to work on docs over the next two days, please show
up on pgsql-docs and let us know what you want to work on. (And of
course it's still open season for bug-fix patches.)
regards, tom lane
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 07:58:14PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
AFAIK there are no major patches still outstanding, with the
exception of the Windows-symlinks patch that arrived today from
Andreas. Bruce and I both think that's worth getting in, if no one
has any objections, but otherwise we essentially have 8.0beta1 code.The documentation, however, desperately needs work still; and Marc
would like to get some of the postgresql.org domains shifted over to
the newly-installed venus server before we go beta.
Which docs are in the most desparate need of help?
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!
I've fixed dbsize here and will send it off once I get a second to test it
with multiple tablespaces.
I haven't looked at oid2name.
Bruce put together some ideas a few months back on what we want from
oid2name now (somewhere around here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2004-06/msg00263.php). Were
there any other suggestions?
Gavin
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
Show quoted text
AFAIK there are no major patches still outstanding, with the exception
of the Windows-symlinks patch that arrived today from Andreas. Bruce
and I both think that's worth getting in, if no one has any objections,
but otherwise we essentially have 8.0beta1 code.The documentation, however, desperately needs work still; and Marc would
like to get some of the postgresql.org domains shifted over to the
newly-installed venus server before we go beta. So the plan right now
is for a couple days' push on documentation, wrap beta1 on Sunday,
announce it Monday.If anyone has time to work on docs over the next two days, please show
up on pgsql-docs and let us know what you want to work on. (And of
course it's still open season for bug-fix patches.)regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)!DSPAM:4112cc7c190631668695780!
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes:
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 07:58:14PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
The documentation, however, desperately needs work still; and Marc
would like to get some of the postgresql.org domains shifted over to
the newly-installed venus server before we go beta.
Which docs are in the most desparate need of help?
The problem is really that we've done only cursory documentation
additions for the features added in 8.0. For instance, there are
reference pages for SAVEPOINT/ROLLBACK TO/RELEASE but there are still
many places that incorrectly say that we don't have nested transactions;
much less places that give examples involving using nested transactions
to solve real problems. What I was thinking of doing was just trying to
read large sections of the docs and annotate places that are out of date
and need work. If there are any particular areas you are familiar with,
you might want to claim responsibility for those.
regards, tom lane
If anyone has time to work on docs over the next two days, please show
up on pgsql-docs and let us know what you want to work on. (And of
course it's still open season for bug-fix patches.)
Tom, I haven't had a comment on the 'restoring LOB comments' patch, nor
on the two tablespace failures that Gavin and I brought up (Or the
original schema tablespace problem you found when you committed). They
could probably be post-beta perhaps though...
Chris
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
Tom, I haven't had a comment on the 'restoring LOB comments' patch, nor
on the two tablespace failures that Gavin and I brought up (Or the
original schema tablespace problem you found when you committed). They
could probably be post-beta perhaps though...
Yeah, those are all bug fixes and okay for post-beta I think. But which
two tablespace failures are you thinking of exactly? The last couple
weeks have been a bit of a blur for me...
regards, tom lane
Yeah, those are all bug fixes and okay for post-beta I think. But which
two tablespace failures are you thinking of exactly? The last couple
weeks have been a bit of a blur for me...
Sorry about crappy long urls :/
Chris
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
Yeah, those are all bug fixes and okay for post-beta I think. But which
two tablespace failures are you thinking of exactly? The last couple
weeks have been a bit of a blur for me...
Okay, this is a the-error-message-could-be-better gripe. Fair enough,
but it's not top of my priority list ...
I think the problem here is that we don't have a syntax for saying
"my tablespace is the same as my database's default tablespace" or "my
tablespace is the same as my schema's default tablespace", when there is
an intermediate object (schema or table) that isn't using that
tablespace. (Note that "TABLESPACE pg_default" does definitely not mean
either of these.)
This is fixable with some special syntax but is it worth the trouble?
regards, tom lane
Where are we on this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote:
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
Yeah, those are all bug fixes and okay for post-beta I think. But which
two tablespace failures are you thinking of exactly? The last couple
weeks have been a bit of a blur for me...Okay, this is a the-error-message-could-be-better gripe. Fair enough,
but it's not top of my priority list ...I think the problem here is that we don't have a syntax for saying
"my tablespace is the same as my database's default tablespace" or "my
tablespace is the same as my schema's default tablespace", when there is
an intermediate object (schema or table) that isn't using that
tablespace. (Note that "TABLESPACE pg_default" does definitely not mean
either of these.)This is fixable with some special syntax but is it worth the trouble?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073The other tablespace problem is if you drop a tablespace that schema in
another db uses, it's broken still I think.
Chris
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Show quoted text
Where are we on this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote:
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
Yeah, those are all bug fixes and okay for post-beta I think. But which
two tablespace failures are you thinking of exactly? The last couple
weeks have been a bit of a blur for me...Okay, this is a the-error-message-could-be-better gripe. Fair enough,
but it's not top of my priority list ...I think the problem here is that we don't have a syntax for saying
"my tablespace is the same as my database's default tablespace" or "my
tablespace is the same as my schema's default tablespace", when there is
an intermediate object (schema or table) that isn't using that
tablespace. (Note that "TABLESPACE pg_default" does definitely not mean
either of these.)This is fixable with some special syntax but is it worth the trouble?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Where are we on this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote:
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
Yeah, those are all bug fixes and okay for post-beta I think. But which
two tablespace failures are you thinking of exactly? The last couple
weeks have been a bit of a blur for me...Okay, this is a the-error-message-could-be-better gripe. Fair enough,
but it's not top of my priority list ...
I submitted a patch for the above with the subject:
[PATCHES] CREATE DATABASE with tablespace fix
Gavin
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Yeah, those are all bug fixes and okay for post-beta I think. But which
two tablespace failures are you thinking of exactly? The last couple
weeks have been a bit of a blur for me...
I am confused. You had:
template1=# create tablespace blah location '/home/swm/tbl/tspc1/';
CREATE TABLESPACE
template1=# create table foo (i int) tablespace blah;
CREATE TABLE
template1=# create database foo tablespace blah;
ERROR: could not initialize database directory
DETAIL: Directory "/home/swm/tbl/data/pg_tblspc/17227/17230" already
exists.
but with CVS head I see:
$ psql -a test </tmp/x
create tablespace blah location '/bjm/tmp';
CREATE TABLESPACE
create table foo (i int) tablespace blah;
CREATE TABLE
create database foo tablespace blah;
CREATE DATABASE
However, I don't see any CVS commit that fixed this? What am I missing?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073Tom Lane wrote:
I think the problem here is that we don't have a syntax for saying
"my tablespace is the same as my database's default tablespace" or "my
tablespace is the same as my schema's default tablespace", when there is
an intermediate object (schema or table) that isn't using that
tablespace. (Note that "TABLESPACE pg_default" does definitely not mean
either of these.)This is fixable with some special syntax but is it worth the trouble?
Seems we have to come up with some solution or dump/reload will not put
things back in the same place for certain unusual configurations.
Added to open items:
* fix ambiguity for objects using default tablespaces
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
However, I don't see any CVS commit that fixed this? What am I missing?
The failure case is where the template database has a conflicting
table. You didn't show us where you created that table, but it
evidently was not in template1.
regards, tom lane
On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Yeah, those are all bug fixes and okay for post-beta I think. But which
two tablespace failures are you thinking of exactly? The last couple
weeks have been a bit of a blur for me...I am confused. You had:
template1=# create tablespace blah location '/home/swm/tbl/tspc1/';
CREATE TABLESPACE
template1=# create table foo (i int) tablespace blah;
CREATE TABLE
template1=# create database foo tablespace blah;
ERROR: could not initialize database directory
DETAIL: Directory "/home/swm/tbl/data/pg_tblspc/17227/17230" already
exists.but with CVS head I see:
$ psql -a test </tmp/x
create tablespace blah location '/bjm/tmp';
CREATE TABLESPACE
create table foo (i int) tablespace blah;
CREATE TABLE
create database foo tablespace blah;
CREATE DATABASE
You need to create a condition where by the new database would have to
merge a table into its default database. If you did the above in the
template1 database, you would get the same effect.
I sent a (partial) fix for this, which included some documentation
improvements. However, I posed a question. *digs*
[PATCHES] CREATE DATABASE with tablespace fix
was the subject.
Gavin
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
However, I don't see any CVS commit that fixed this? What am I missing?
The failure case is where the template database has a conflicting
table. You didn't show us where you created that table, but it
evidently was not in template1.
OK, reproduced by using template1:
create tablespace blah location '/bjm/tmp';
CREATE TABLESPACE
create table foo (i int) tablespace blah;
CREATE TABLE
create database foo tablespace blah;
ERROR: could not initialize database directory
DETAIL: Directory "/u/pgsql/data/pg_tblspc/17229/17232" already exists.
Gavin has posted a patch for this so I will put it in the patch queue.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073