postgres-xc-developers Mailing List for Postgres-XC

Thanks.  I've already tested similar patch but it is not sufficient.

Somehow, response from GTM is received twice in a GTM-Proxy.   Because GTM-Proxy clears up all the response in each round of backend scan, I'm worrying this has be caused by bad response handling in GTM, which does not happen when backgrounds are connected directly to the GTM.

I'm asking Pavan a review on this.

Regards;
---
Koichi Suzuki

On 2013/08/02, at 12:39, Nikhil Sontakke <ni...@st...> wrote:

> Hi, 
> 
> I saw missing breaks for the MSG_BARRIER handling in both GTM and GTM_Proxy. I wonder if barrier works in the first place without these breaks? PFA, patch to fix this. AFAICS, the 1.1 branch also has similar issues.
> 
> Regards,
> Nikhils
> -- 
> StormDB - http://www.stormdb.com
> The Database Cloud <pgxc_head_barrier_missing_breaks.patch>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get your SQL database under version control now!
> Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent 
> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under 
> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 10:09 PM, 鈴木 幸市 <ko...@in...> wrote:

> This depends on how serious the demand/usecase is and how works on it.
>  Yes, you can work on it and you must have demanding usecase.
>
> I mean when 1.1GA is out, it's safer to concentrate on the master.   This
> is a better place to work for Solaris.
>
As 1.1 stable branch and master are already separated, what is the point of
not committing what Matt has sent before it is forgotten? It is perfectly
possible to continue the development work on master while improving the 1.1
beta state. IMO, I think that we should look at what Matt could send.
-- 
Michael

This depends on how serious the demand/usecase is and how works on it.  Yes, you can work on it and you must have demanding usecase.

I mean when 1.1GA is out, it's safer to concentrate on the master.   This is a better place to work for Solaris.

Regards;
---
Koichi Suzuki

On 2013/08/03, at 0:43, Matt Warner <MW...@XI...> wrote:

> Good morning.
>  
> I just wanted to check in and see whether there’s still an interest in the patches I submitted that allow XC to compile and run under Solaris with the Sun compiler.
>  
> Regards,
>  
> Matt
>  
> From: Koichi Suzuki [mailto:koi...@gm...] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 9:27 AM
> To: Matt Warner
> Cc: Postgres-XC Developers
> Subject: Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Minor Fixes
>  
> Thank you Matt.
> 
> Please wait a bit until branch for 1.1 is built.
> 
> Regards;
> 
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
>  
> 
> 2013/6/28 Matt Warner <MW...@xi...>
> I’d be happy to continue testing on Solaris.
>  
> From: Koichi Suzuki [mailto:koi...@gm...] 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 11:19 PM
> To: Matt Warner; Postgres-XC Developers
> 
> Subject: Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Minor Fixes
>  
> Hi,
> 
> I reviewed this thread again.  It may be better to include Matt's patch to the master after we build REL1_1_STABLE so that he can continue his Solaris-related work on the master.   As Ashutosh suggested, it will be less confusing not to include this in REL1_1_STABLE.
> 
> Because I'm about to build REL1_1_STABLE for beta work, please let me know if anybody need Matt's patch in 1.1.
> 
> Matt, could you let me know your idea and if you can continue to test XC on Solaris and declare that XC supports Solaris?
> 
> Best Regards;
> 
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
>  
> 
> 2013/6/25 Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...>
> I meant that removing "return" statement which returns another function return value will be a good refactoring.   Of course, simple return may not be removed.
>  
> 
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
>  
> 
> 2013/6/25 Koichi Suzuki <koi...@gm...>
> Year.   The code is not harmfull at all.    Removing "return" from void functions could be a good refactoring.   Although Solaris is not supported officieally yet, I think it's a good idea to have it in master.   I do hope Matt continues to test XC so that we can tell XC runs on Solaris.
> 
> Any more inputs?
> 
> Regardsds;
> 
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
>  
> 
> 2013/6/25 Matt Warner <MW...@xi...>
> I'll double check but I thought I'd only removed return from functions declaring void as their return type. 
>  
> ?
>  
> Matt
> 
> On Jun 23, 2013, at 6:22 PM, "鈴木 幸市" <ko...@in...> wrote:
> 
> The patch looks reasonable.   One comment: removing "return" for non-void function will cause Linux gcc warning.  For this case, we need #ifdef SOLARIS directive.
>  
> You sent two similar patch for proxy_main.c in separate e-mails.   The later one seems to resolve my comment above.   Although the core team cannot declare that XC runs on Solaris so far, I think the patch is reasonable to be included.
>  
> Any other comments?
> ---
> Koichi Suzuki
>  
>  
>  
> On 2013/06/22, at 1:26, Matt Warner <MW...@XI...> wrote:
>  
> 
> Regarding the other changes, they are specific to Solaris. For example, in src/backend/pgxc/pool/pgxcnode.c, Solaris requires we include sys/filio.h. I’ll be searching to see if I can find a macro already defined for Solaris that I can leverage to #ifdef those Solaris-specific items.
>  
> Matt
>  
> From: Matt Warner 
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 9:21 AM
> To: 'Koichi Suzuki'
> Cc: 'pos...@li...'
> Subject: RE: [Postgres-xc-developers] Minor Fixes
>  
> First patch.
>  
> From: Matt Warner 
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 8:50 AM
> To: 'Koichi Suzuki'
> Cc: pos...@li...
> Subject: RE: [Postgres-xc-developers] Minor Fixes
>  
> Yes, I’m running XC on Solaris x64.
>  
> From: Koichi Suzuki [mailto:koi...@gm...] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 6:34 PM
> To: Matt Warner
> Cc: pos...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Minor Fixes
>  
> Thanks a lot for the patch.   As Michael mentioned, you can send a patch to developers mailing list.
>  
> BTW, core team tested current XC on 64bit Intel CentOS and others tested it against RedHat.    Did you test XC on Solaris?
>  
> Regards;
> 
> ----------
> Koichi Suzuki
>  
> 
> 2013/6/21 Matt Warner <MW...@xi...>
> Just a quick question about contributing fixes. I’ve had to make some minor changes to get XC compiled on Solaris x64.
> What format would you like to see for the changes? Most are very minor, such as removing return statements inside void functions (which the Solaris compiler flags as incorrect since you can’t return from a void function).
> Matt
>  
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
> 
> Build for Windows Store.
> 
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> 
>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
> 
> Build for Windows Store.
> 
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get your SQL database under version control now!
> Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent 
> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under 
> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk_______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers

PFA revised patch.

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Masataka Saito <pg...@gm...> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Masataka Saito <pg...@gm...> wrote:
> >>
> >> The patch will work fine.
> >>
> >> But this is my basal question:
> >> setTransactionIsolation(Connection.TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE) after XC
> >> block doesn't raise an exception, I know.
> >> Is it right shelving unsupported isolation level without an error?
> >
> >
> > It is due to already checked in code
> >
> > void
> > assign_XactIsoLevel(const char *newval, void *extra)
> > {
> >     XactIsoLevel = *((int *) extra);
> > #ifdef PGXC
> >     /*
> >      * PGXCTODO - PGXC does not support 9.1 serializable transactions yet
> >      */
> >     if (XactIsoLevel == XACT_SERIALIZABLE)
> >         XactIsoLevel = XACT_REPEATABLE_READ;
> > #endif
> > }
> >
> > I think we already have a source forge ticket to deal with this XC
> > limitation.
>
> Thanks.
> I know it caused by XC limitation.
>
> I thought that unsupported level should be denied by
> check_XactIsoLevel rather than modified at assign_XactIsoLevel.
> I shouldn't grumble reviewed commit. I'm sorry to be bothering you with
> this.
>
> Reading check_XactIsoLevel, I found XC doesn't support SERIALIZABLE
> but supports other levels.
> I think you could replace SERIALIZABLE to other transaction level
> (e.g. REPEATABLE READ) instead of skipping.
> It is more natural by the gist of the test case.
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> > PFA patch to make sure that JDBC regression skips tests for
> serializable
> >> > transactions.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Abbas
> >> > Architect
> >> >
> >> > Ph: 92.334.5100153
> >> > Skype ID: gabbasb
> >> > www.enterprisedb.com
> >> >
> >> > Follow us on Twitter
> >> > @EnterpriseDB
> >> >
> >> > Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > Get your SQL database under version control now!
> >> > Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
> >> > caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
> >> > version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
> >> >
> >> >
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> >> > Pos...@li...
> >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > --
> > Abbas
> > Architect
> >
> > Ph: 92.334.5100153
> > Skype ID: gabbasb
> > www.enterprisedb.com
> >
> > Follow us on Twitter
> > @EnterpriseDB
> >
> > Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
>



-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

Please use this patch for review, attached the wrong patch file with the
previous mail.

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>wrote:

> Attached please find a revised patch according to your suggestion.
> I am holding the rest of the patches till you review this one, because we
> need similar changes for integer, date, time and time-stamp tests.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Masataka Saito <pg...@gm...> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I feel feckless for sorting assertins.
>>
>> I propose appending a serial column to test tables and SELECT rows
>> ORDERED BY it.
>> I think this idea makes costless and it doesn't against to the gist of
>> the test.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > PFA patch to fix wrongly written boolean tests, patch comments explain
>> the
>> > errors and the fix.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Abbas
>> > Architect
>> >
>> > Ph: 92.334.5100153
>> > Skype ID: gabbasb
>> > www.enterprisedb.com
>> >
>> > Follow us on Twitter
>> > @EnterpriseDB
>> >
>> > Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
>> >
>> >
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Get your SQL database under version control now!
>> > Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
>> > caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
>> > version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
>> >
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> > Pos...@li...
>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> *Abbas*
>  Architect
>
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>  Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
> *
> Follow us on Twitter*
> @EnterpriseDB
>
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>



-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

Attached please find a revised patch according to your suggestion.
I am holding the rest of the patches till you review this one, because we
need similar changes for integer, date, time and time-stamp tests.

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Masataka Saito <pg...@gm...> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I feel feckless for sorting assertins.
>
> I propose appending a serial column to test tables and SELECT rows
> ORDERED BY it.
> I think this idea makes costless and it doesn't against to the gist of the
> test.
>
> Regards.
>
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > PFA patch to fix wrongly written boolean tests, patch comments explain
> the
> > errors and the fix.
> >
> > --
> > Abbas
> > Architect
> >
> > Ph: 92.334.5100153
> > Skype ID: gabbasb
> > www.enterprisedb.com
> >
> > Follow us on Twitter
> > @EnterpriseDB
> >
> > Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Get your SQL database under version control now!
> > Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
> > caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
> > version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
> >
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> > _______________________________________________
> > Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> > Pos...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> >
>



-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Masataka Saito <pg...@gm...> wrote:
>>
>> The patch will work fine.
>>
>> But this is my basal question:
>> setTransactionIsolation(Connection.TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE) after XC
>> block doesn't raise an exception, I know.
>> Is it right shelving unsupported isolation level without an error?
>
>
> It is due to already checked in code
>
> void
> assign_XactIsoLevel(const char *newval, void *extra)
> {
>     XactIsoLevel = *((int *) extra);
> #ifdef PGXC
>     /*
>      * PGXCTODO - PGXC does not support 9.1 serializable transactions yet
>      */
>     if (XactIsoLevel == XACT_SERIALIZABLE)
>         XactIsoLevel = XACT_REPEATABLE_READ;
> #endif
> }
>
> I think we already have a source forge ticket to deal with this XC
> limitation.

Thanks.
I know it caused by XC limitation.

I thought that unsupported level should be denied by
check_XactIsoLevel rather than modified at assign_XactIsoLevel.
I shouldn't grumble reviewed commit. I'm sorry to be bothering you with this.

Reading check_XactIsoLevel, I found XC doesn't support SERIALIZABLE
but supports other levels.
I think you could replace SERIALIZABLE to other transaction level
(e.g. REPEATABLE READ) instead of skipping.
It is more natural by the gist of the test case.

>
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > PFA patch to make sure that JDBC regression skips tests for serializable
>> > transactions.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Abbas
>> > Architect
>> >
>> > Ph: 92.334.5100153
>> > Skype ID: gabbasb
>> > www.enterprisedb.com
>> >
>> > Follow us on Twitter
>> > @EnterpriseDB
>> >
>> > Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Get your SQL database under version control now!
>> > Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
>> > caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
>> > version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
>> >
>> > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> > Pos...@li...
>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Abbas
> Architect
>
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
> Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.com
>
> Follow us on Twitter
> @EnterpriseDB
>
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Masataka Saito <pg...@gm...> wrote:

> The patch will work fine.
>
> But this is my basal question:
> setTransactionIsolation(Connection.TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE) after XC
> block doesn't raise an exception, I know.
> Is it right shelving unsupported isolation level without an error?
>

It is due to already checked in code

void
assign_XactIsoLevel(const char *newval, void *extra)
{
    XactIsoLevel = *((int *) extra);
#ifdef PGXC
    /*
     * PGXCTODO - PGXC does not support 9.1 serializable transactions yet
     */
    if (XactIsoLevel == XACT_SERIALIZABLE)
        XactIsoLevel = XACT_REPEATABLE_READ;
#endif
}

I think we already have a source forge ticket to deal with this XC
limitation.



>
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > PFA patch to make sure that JDBC regression skips tests for serializable
> > transactions.
> >
> > --
> > Abbas
> > Architect
> >
> > Ph: 92.334.5100153
> > Skype ID: gabbasb
> > www.enterprisedb.com
> >
> > Follow us on Twitter
> > @EnterpriseDB
> >
> > Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Get your SQL database under version control now!
> > Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
> > caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
> > version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
> >
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> > _______________________________________________
> > Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> > Pos...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
> >
>



-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

The patch will work fine.

But this is my basal question:
setTransactionIsolation(Connection.TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE) after XC
block doesn't raise an exception, I know.
Is it right shelving unsupported isolation level without an error?

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:
> Hi,
> PFA patch to make sure that JDBC regression skips tests for serializable
> transactions.
>
> --
> Abbas
> Architect
>
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
> Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.com
>
> Follow us on Twitter
> @EnterpriseDB
>
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get your SQL database under version control now!
> Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Masataka Saito <pg...@gm...> wrote:
>>
>> HI,
>>
>> It's OK If you know the property could be changed by
>> build.local.properties file and you daringly changed build.xml directly.
>
>
> I had opted to change build.xml instead of adding another file in the
> repository, but we can do it the way you are suggesting. I remember testing
> it and it was working fine. Should I send an updated patch that adds a file
> build.local.properties containing binarytransfer=false?

I just wanted to know whether you recognize options or not.
It is needless to fix.

>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>> PFA patch to make sure that JDBC regression does not use binary transfer
>>> of fields since XC does not support it.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Abbas
>>> Architect
>>>
>>> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>>> Skype ID: gabbasb
>>> www.enterprisedb.com
>>>
>>> Follow us on Twitter
>>> @EnterpriseDB
>>>
>>> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Get your SQL database under version control now!
>>> Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
>>> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
>>> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
>>>
>>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>>> Pos...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Abbas
> Architect
>
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
> Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.com
>
> Follow us on Twitter
> @EnterpriseDB
>
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more

Hi,

I feel feckless for sorting assertins.

I propose appending a serial column to test tables and SELECT rows
ORDERED BY it.
I think this idea makes costless and it doesn't against to the gist of the test.

Regards.

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...> wrote:
> Hi,
> PFA patch to fix wrongly written boolean tests, patch comments explain the
> errors and the fix.
>
> --
> Abbas
> Architect
>
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
> Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.com
>
> Follow us on Twitter
> @EnterpriseDB
>
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers and more
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get your SQL database under version control now!
> Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Masataka Saito <pg...@gm...> wrote:

> HI,
>
> It's OK If you know the property could be changed by
> build.local.properties file and you daringly changed build.xml directly.
>

I had opted to change build.xml instead of adding another file in the
repository, but we can do it the way you are suggesting. I remember testing
it and it was working fine. Should I send an updated patch that adds a file
build.local.properties containing binarytransfer=false?


>
>
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> PFA patch to make sure that JDBC regression does not use binary transfer
>> of fields since XC does not support it.
>>
>> --
>> *Abbas*
>>  Architect
>>
>> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>>  Skype ID: gabbasb
>> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
>> *
>> Follow us on Twitter*
>> @EnterpriseDB
>>
>> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Get your SQL database under version control now!
>> Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
>> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
>> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
>>
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>>
>>
>


-- 
-- 
*Abbas*
 Architect

Ph: 92.334.5100153
 Skype ID: gabbasb
www.enterprisedb.co
<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
*
Follow us on Twitter*
@EnterpriseDB

Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars,
whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and
more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>

Hi,
I missed it. This patch is needed.


On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>wrote:

> Hi
> PFA patch to fix a spelling mistake.
>
> --
> *Abbas*
>  Architect
>
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>  Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
> *
> Follow us on Twitter*
> @EnterpriseDB
>
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get your SQL database under version control now!
> Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>

HI,

It's OK If you know the property could be changed by build.local.properties
file and you daringly changed build.xml directly.


On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Abbas Butt <abb...@en...>wrote:

> Hi,
> PFA patch to make sure that JDBC regression does not use binary transfer
> of fields since XC does not support it.
>
> --
> *Abbas*
>  Architect
>
> Ph: 92.334.5100153
>  Skype ID: gabbasb
> www.enterprisedb.co <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>m<http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
> *
> Follow us on Twitter*
> @EnterpriseDB
>
> Visit EnterpriseDB for tutorials, webinars, whitepapers<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>and more<http://www.enterprisedb.com/resources-community>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get your SQL database under version control now!
> Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Postgres-xc-developers mailing list
> Pos...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-developers
>
>