- 24 9月, 1999 8 次提交
-
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
This is because (-1) << 32 is -1 (Only intel arc. has been checked) Oleg Sharoiko
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
- 23 9月, 1999 2 次提交
-
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
- 22 9月, 1999 7 次提交
-
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
libpq++. Patrick Welche
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
- 21 9月, 1999 9 次提交
-
-
由 Marc G. Fournier 提交于
last batch, I think...
-
由 Marc G. Fournier 提交于
fixing it more..
-
由 Marc G. Fournier 提交于
bring it all into -current again
-
由 Marc G. Fournier 提交于
try and fix things...
-
由 Marc G. Fournier 提交于
bring in missing files ... this isn't very clean, but :(
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
- 20 9月, 1999 3 次提交
-
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Tom Lane 提交于
INSERT ... DEFAULT VALUES statement does indeed have a null targetlist, at least during parse and rewrite stages.
-
- 19 9月, 1999 3 次提交
-
-
由 Tom Lane 提交于
treat a NULL condition result as FALSE. Clean up some bogus comments here and there, too.
-
由 Tom Lane 提交于
error message wording, due to most cases of no-such-relation now being detected in central heap_open code rather than on an ad-hoc basis.
-
由 Tom Lane 提交于
additional argument specifying the kind of lock to acquire/release (or 'NoLock' to do no lock processing). Ensure that all relations are locked with some appropriate lock level before being examined --- this ensures that relevant shared-inval messages have been processed and should prevent problems caused by concurrent VACUUM. Fix several bugs having to do with mismatched increment/decrement of relation ref count and mismatched heap_open/close (which amounts to the same thing). A bogus ref count on a relation doesn't matter much *unless* a SI Inval message happens to arrive at the wrong time, which is probably why we got away with this sloppiness for so long. Repair missing grab of AccessExclusiveLock in DROP TABLE, ALTER/RENAME TABLE, etc, as noted by Hiroshi. Recommend 'make clean all' after pulling this update; I modified the Relation struct layout slightly. Will post further discussion to pghackers list shortly.
-
- 18 9月, 1999 2 次提交
-
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Michael Meskes 提交于
-
- 17 9月, 1999 3 次提交
-
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
由 Michael Meskes 提交于
-
由 Bruce Momjian 提交于
-
- 16 9月, 1999 3 次提交
-
-
由 Tatsuo Ishii 提交于
See attached mail for more details. ------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Vadim Mikheev" <vadim@krs.ru> To: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> References: <000201befa94$42fe04c0$2801007e@cadzone.tpf.co.jp> Subject: Re: elog(ERROR) in vacuum Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 10:27:10 +0900 Organization: OJSC Rostelecom (Krasnoyarsk) Message-ID: <37D85E6E.5AFA126D@krs.ru> Hiroshi Inoue wrote: > > Hello Vadim, > > I have a question about vacuum. > > VACUUM has a phase like commit which calls TransactionIdCommit(). > But if elog(ERROR) occured after that,the status of transaction is > changed from XID_COMMIT to XID_ABORT. > > Seems to me this causes inconsistency. > Shoudn't AbortTransaction() be changed not to call TransacionIdAbort() > in case of vacuum. You're right! As usual -:) Vadim
-
由 Peter Mount 提交于
-
由 Peter Mount 提交于
into it.
-