Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Updated documentation for new sequence binding

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,PostgreSQL-documentation <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Updated documentation for new sequence binding
Date: 2005-10-05 19:52:44
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-docspgsql-hackers
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 10:54:10PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > pgman wrote:
> > > I have marged Tom's description of the new sequence binding with text I
> > > was working on.  I modified it to follow the existing "we used to do X,
> > > now we do Y" pattern in the surrounding entries:
> > > 
> > >
> > 
> > Sorry, this is a better URL:
> > 
> >
> Out of curiosity, how is this file maintained as development is done?
> The reason I'm asking is because it would be nice to have links to more
> information, especially for the 'one-liner' items in 1.3.1 for example,
> and it seems like that would be easier to do along-the-way rather than
> waiting for the end. Even a link to a mailing list discussion would be
> better than nothing...

I go through the CVS commits and make the release notes just before
beta.  During it incrementally is much more work.

> That said, what's
>  Improve the optimizer, including auto-resizing of hash joins (Tom)
> mean?

We would sometimes fail in a query where the allocated memory was larger
than our hash could hold.  This fixed that.

> On full_page_writes, are we certain that all battery-backed disk caches
> ensure that partial-page writes can't happen?

Well, I would think so, but I have no documentation to state that.  The
battery-backed memory is supposed to allow for power failure and keep
writes in the cache until they hit the disk.

> Maybe pg_column_siz should just be included in the item for all the
> other size functions brought into the backend? If not, ISTM they should
> at least be one after the other in the list...

Not really.  It is different in that is does not aggregate values, but
just the storage of a column.

> Finally, weren't more changes made it contrib than what's listed?
> Nothing's said about pg_autovacuum for example.

Moved to the main server.  That is mentioned.

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Philip RodriguesDate: 2005-10-05 20:47:18
Subject: Online comments system
Previous:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2005-10-05 19:45:28
Subject: Re: XML and PostGreSql

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jonah H. HarrisDate: 2005-10-05 19:54:42
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] A Better External Sort?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-10-05 19:51:17
Subject: Re: [ [BUGS] Race condition in dropdb;createdb]

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group