From cbcd3f9a927af05e2c4f0c74a5507641790f9522 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Bruce Momjian Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:20:46 +0000 Subject: New TODO list URL wiki location listed; contents truncated. --- doc/src/FAQ/TODO.html | 1868 +------------------------------------------------ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1865 deletions(-) (limited to 'doc/src') diff --git a/doc/src/FAQ/TODO.html b/doc/src/FAQ/TODO.html index bc9ea5e3bf..a269186897 100644 --- a/doc/src/FAQ/TODO.html +++ b/doc/src/FAQ/TODO.html @@ -2,1875 +2,13 @@ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
-Current maintainer: Bruce Momjian (bruce@momjian.us)
-Last updated: Tue Aug 19 15:19:46 EDT 2008
+
The TODO list is now maintained at:
-The most recent version of this document can be viewed at
-http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.TODO.html.
-
A hyphen, "-", marks changes that will appear in the upcoming 8.4 release.
-A percent sign, "%", marks items that are easier to implement.
-
This list contains all known PostgreSQL bugs and feature requests. If
-you would like to work on an item, please read the Developer's FAQ
-first. There is also a developer's wiki at
-http://developer.postgresql.org.
-
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-06/msg00096.php -
-Currently all schemas are owned by the super-user because they are copied - from the template1 database. However, since all objects are inherited - from the template database, it is not clear that setting schemas to the db - owner is correct. -
-This would allow administrators to see more detailed information from - specific sections of the backend, e.g. checkpoints, autovacuum, etc. - Another idea is to allow separate configuration files for each module, - or allow arbitrary SET commands to be passed to them. -
-This would allow creation of partitioned tables without requiring - creation of triggers or rules for INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE, and constraints - for rapid partition selection. Options could include range and hash - partition selection. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg00375.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg00151.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00028.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00248.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00387.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00413.php -
-Currently ALTER USER and ALTER DATABASE support per-user and - per-database defaults. Consider adding per-user-and-database - defaults so things like search_path can be defaulted for a - specific user connecting to a specific database. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-11/msg00911.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-05/msg00010.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00924.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-12/msg00069.php -
-This is already implemented in - libpq/fe-secure.c::verify_peer_name_matches_certificate() but the code - is commented out. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-07/msg01454.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg01875.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-05/msg00000.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-08/msg00345.php -
-Host name lookup could occur when the postmaster reads the - pg_hba.conf file, or when the backend starts. Another - solution would be to reverse lookup the connection IP and - check that hostname against the host names in pg_hba.conf. - We could also then check that the host name maps to the IP - address. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-06/msg00569.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg00550.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00009.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg01745.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-06/msg00000.php -
-Currently all objects in the default database tablespace must - have default tablespace specifications. This is because new - databases are created by copying directories. If you mix default - tablespace tables and tablespace-specified tables in the same - directory, creating a new database from such a mixed directory - would create a new database with tables that had incorrect - explicit tablespaces. To fix this would require modifying - pg_class in the newly copied database, which we don't currently - do. -
-This item is difficult because a tablespace can contain objects - from multiple databases. There is a server-side function that - returns the databases which use a specific tablespace, so this - requires a tool that will call that function and connect to each - database to find the objects in each database for that tablespace. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-12/msg00106.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-docs/2007-04/msg00028.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg00169.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg00050.php -
-This is useful for checking PITR recovery. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00497.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00800.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00487.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg01331.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-02/msg00505.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg00715.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-03/msg00519.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-05/msg00072.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-09/msg01681.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2003-06/msg01206.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-08/msg00289.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-07/msg00543.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-08/msg00038.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-05/msg00344.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-05/msg00076.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00604.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00008.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg01214.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-08/msg01067.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-12/msg00273.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-09/msg00981.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-10/msg00231.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00471.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2008-01/msg00189.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg01718.php -
-If the TIMESTAMP value is stored with a time zone name, interval - computations should adjust based on the time zone rules. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-10/msg00705.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-sql/2006-10/msg00059.php -
-Currently subtracting one date from another that crosses a - daylight savings time adjustment can return '1 day 1 hour', but - adding that back to the first date returns a time one hour in - the future. This is caused by the adjustment of '25 hours' to - '1 day 1 hour', and '1 day' is the same time the next day, even - if daylight savings adjustments are involved. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-09/msg01363.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-11/msg00390.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-01/msg00250.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2006-04/msg00248.php -
-The SQL standard states that the units after the string - specify the units of the string, e.g. INTERVAL '2' MINUTE - should return '00:02:00'. The current behavior has the units - restrict the interval value to the specified unit or unit - range, INTERVAL '70' SECOND returns '00:00:10'. -
-For syntax that isn't uniquely ISO or PG syntax, like '1' or - '1:30', treat as ISO if there is a range specification clause, - and as PG if there no clause is present, e.g. interpret '1:30' - MINUTE TO SECOND as '1 minute 30 seconds', and interpret - '1:30' as '1 hour, 30 minutes'. -
-This makes common cases like SELECT INTERVAL '1' MONTH - SQL-standard results. The SQL standard supports a limited - number of unit combinations and doesn't support unit names in - the string. The PostgreSQL syntax is more flexible in the - range of units supported, e.g. PostgreSQL supports '1 year 1 - hour', while the SQL standard does not. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-05/msg00114.php -
-contrib/lo offers this functionality. -
-This requires the TOAST column to be stored EXTERNAL. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-09/msg00781.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2005-08/msg01432.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg01181.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-11/msg00081.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00511.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-10/msg00966.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg01146.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2008-02/msg00190.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-03/msg00062.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg00915.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-12/msg00948.php -
-Some special format flag would be required to request such - accumulation. Such functionality could also be added to EXTRACT. - Prevent accumulation that crosses the month/day boundary because of - the uneven number of days in a month. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-10/msg00665.php -
-Currently SQL-language functions can only refer to dollar parameters, - e.g. $1 -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg01403.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00568.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-08/msg00060.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg00060.php -
-Some geometric types do not have the full suite of geometric operators, - e.g. box @> point -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-08/msg00012.php -
-Index functions are safe, so VACUUM and ANALYZE are safe too. - Triggers, CHECK and DEFAULT expressions, and rules are still vulnerable. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00268.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2008-01/msg00031.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg01180.php -
-The standards specify array_agg() and UNNEST. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-08/msg00464.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-11/msg00044.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-12/msg00145.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-10/msg00000.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-10/msg00895.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg01017.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-10/msg01375.php -
-SELECT * FROM pg_get_keywords() works but SELECT * FROM - pg_show_all_settings() does not. -
-Currently locale can only be set during initdb. No global tables have - locale-aware columns. However, the database template used during - database creation might have locale-aware indexes. The indexes would - need to be reindexed to match the new locale. -
-Right now only one encoding is allowed per database. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-03/msg00932.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-08/msg00039.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-08/msg00309.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-09/msg00110.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-09/msg00020.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-12/msg01121.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-01/msg00767.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-03/msg00233.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-09/msg00662.php - http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo:Collate - http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo:ICU -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-07/msg00272.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-10/msg00001.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-11/msg00173.php -
-Currently client_encoding is set in postgresql.conf, which - defaults to the server encoding. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-08/msg01696.php -
-Currently we preallocate memory based on worst-case usage. -
-We can only auto-create rules for simple views. For more complex - cases users will still have to write rules manually. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-03/msg00586.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-08/msg00255.php -
-Another issue is whether underlying table changes should be reflected - in the view, e.g. should SELECT * show additional columns if they - are added after the view is created. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-09/msg00577.php -
-Right now materialized views require the user to create triggers on the - main table to keep the summary table current. SQL syntax should be able - to manager the triggers and summary table automatically. A more - sophisticated implementation would automatically retrieve from the - summary table when the main table is referenced, if possible. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-05/msg00691.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-07/msg01410.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-08/msg00300.php -
-Currently only the owner can TRUNCATE a table because triggers are not - called, and the table is locked in exclusive mode. -
-Currently queries prepared via the libpq API are planned on first - execute using the supplied parameters --- allow SQL PREPARE to do the - same. Also, allow control over replanning prepared queries either - manually or automatically when statistics for execute parameters - differ dramatically from those used during planning. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-11/msg00092.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00047.php -
-MERGE is typically used to merge two tables. REPLACE or UPSERT - command does UPDATE, or on failure, INSERT. This is similar to UPDATE, - then for unmatched rows, INSERT. Whether concurrent access allows - modifications which could cause row loss is implementation independent. - To implement this cleanly requires that the table have a unique index - so duplicate checking can be easily performed. It is possible to do it - without a unique index if we require the user to LOCK the table before - the MERGE. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-11/msg00501.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-11/msg00536.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg01157.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg01475.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg01890.php -
-When this is done, backslash-quote should be prohibited in non-E'' - strings because of possible confusion over how such strings treat - backslashes. Basically, '' is always safe for a literal single - quote, while \' might or might not be based on the backslash - handling rules. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg01375.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00642.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-03/msg00139.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg01334.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-01/msg00105.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-03/msg00327.php -
-This would be useful for SERIAL nextval() calls and CHECK constraints. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-04/msg00203.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-06/msg00380.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-07/msg00232.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2006-09/msg00803.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-10/msg00693.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-06/msg00124.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg00937.php -
-Ideally the information would be pulled from the SGML file - automatically. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg00944.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00597.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-04/msg00149.php -
-Right now pg_attribute.attnotnull records the NOT NULL status - of the column, but does not record the contraint name -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-10/msg00169.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-07/msg01306.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg00865.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-04/msg00315.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-03/msg00237.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-05/msg00507.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg00016.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-07/msg00006.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00008.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-09/msg00092.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-10/msg00007.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00008.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-02/msg00168.php -
-Currently non-global system tables must be in the default database - tablespace. Global system tables can never be moved. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00782.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg00500.php -
-This might require some background daemon to maintain clustering - during periods of low usage. It might also require tables to be only - partially filled for easier reorganization. Another idea would - be to create a merged heap/index data file so an index lookup would - automatically access the heap data too. A third idea would be to - store heap rows in hashed groups, perhaps using a user-supplied - hash function. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2004-08/msg00349.php -
-To do this, determine the ideal cluster index for each system - table and set the cluster setting during initdb. -
-This requires the use of a savepoint before each COPY line is - processed, with ROLLBACK on COPY failure. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00572.php -
-On crash recovery, the table involved in the COPY would - be removed or have its heap and index files truncated. One - issue is that no other backend should be able to add to - the table at the same time, which is something that is - currently allowed. This currently is done if the table is - created inside the same transaction block as the COPY because - no other backends can see the table. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-02/msg00140.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg01080.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00811.php -
-Currently this is always treated as a zero-length string, - which generates an error when loading into an integer column - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-07/msg00905.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00954.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg01169.php -
-The proposed syntax is: -
GRANT SELECT ON ALL TABLES IN public TO phpuser; - GRANT SELECT ON NEW TABLES IN public TO phpuser; -
-Currently LISTEN/NOTIFY information is stored in pg_listener. - Storing such information in memory would improve performance. -
-This would allow an informational message to be added to the notify - message, perhaps indicating the row modified or other custom - information. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2008-01/msg00057.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg01106.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-09/msg00174.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-09/msg00174.php -
-This would allow UPDATE tab SET col = col + 1 to work if col has - a unique index. Currently, uniqueness checks are done while the - command is being executed, rather than at the end of the statement - or transaction. - http://people.planetpostgresql.org/greg/index.php?/archives/2006/06/10.html - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-09/msg01458.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2005-10/msg00458.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg00744.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2002-03/msg00591.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg01615.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg01587.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-07/msg00458.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-05/msg00302.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-06/msg00031.php -
-Because a row is not scalar, do not allow assignment - from NULL-valued scalars. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-10/msg00070.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-04/msg00527.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-07/msg00436.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg01009.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00696.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-02/msg00288.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-05/msg00289.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-01/msg00125.php -
-pg_ctl can not read the pid file because it isn't located in the - config directory but in the PGDATA directory. The solution is to - allow pg_ctl to read and understand postgresql.conf to find the - data_directory value. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-12/msg00166.php -
-This would allow non-psql clients to pull the same information out - of the database as psql. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-01/msg00191.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-11/msg00014.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-11/msg00014.php -
-Consider using auto-expanded mode for backslash commands like \df+. -
-Currently SET <tab> causes a database lookup to check all - supported session variables. This query causes problems - because setting the transaction isolation level must be the - first statement of a transaction. -
-Another option is to add \# which lists line numbers, and - allows command execution. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00255.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00227.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg00424.php -
-Ideally it will not generate an error for invalid permissions -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-09/msg00438.php -
-Currently, "wrapped" format chops values into fixed - widths. Perhaps the word wrapping could use the same - algorithm documented in the W3C specification. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-05/msg00404.php - http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/tables.htmlauto-table-layout -
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-05/msg00417.php -
-The difficulty with this is getting multiple dump processes to - produce a single dump output file. It also would require - several sessions to share the same snapshot. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00205.php -
-This might require a pg_restore flag to indicate how many - simultaneous operations should be performed. Only pg_dump's - -Fc format has the necessary dependency information. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00963.php -
-This requires a pg_dump -Fc file because that format contains - the required dependency information. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-05/msg01274.php -
-Using psql to restore a pg_dump dump is also affected. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00205.php -
-Document differences between ecpg and the SQL standard and - information about the Informix-compatibility module. -
-PQfnumber() should never have been doing lowercasing, but - historically it has so we need a way to prevent it -
-Currently all statement results are transferred to the libpq - client before libpq makes the results available to the - application. This feature would allow the application to make - use of the first result rows while the rest are transferred, or - held on the server waiting for them to be requested by libpq. - One complexity is that a statement like SELECT 1/col could error - out mid-way through the result set. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg00184.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg01803.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-interfaces/2007-11/msg00015.php -
-Right now all deferred trigger information is stored in backend - memory. This could exhaust memory for very large trigger queues. - This item involves dumping large queues into files, or doing some - kind of join to process all the triggers, or some bulk operation. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-05/msg00876.php -
-This is currently possible by starting a multi-statement transaction, - modifying the system tables, performing the desired SQL, restoring the - system tables, and committing the transaction. ALTER TABLE ... - TRIGGER requires a table lock so it is not ideal for this usage. -
-If the dump is known to be valid, allow foreign keys to be added - without revalidating the data. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-07/msg00107.php -
-System tables are modified in many places in the backend without going - through the executor and therefore not causing triggers to fire. To - complete this item, the functions that modify system tables will have - to fire triggers. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00564.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-02/msg01466.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00451.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-05/msg00620.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-06/msg00635.php -
-Uniqueness (index) checks are done when updating a column even if the - column is not modified by the UPDATE. -
-Such indexes could be more compact if there are only a few distinct values. - Such indexes can also be compressed. Keeping such indexes updated can be - costly. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-07/msg00512.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg01107.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg00265.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg01214.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-05/msg00013.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-07/msg00741.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2006-10/msg00222.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg01131.php -
-Also consider having a larger statistics target for indexed columns - and expression indexes. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-05/msg01228.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-06/msg00542.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg01066.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00188.php -
-This is useful if the heap is clustered by the indexed values. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00341.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg01264.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg00465.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-03/msg00163.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-08/msg00014.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-08/msg00487.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg01589.php -
-This is difficult because you must upgrade to an exclusive table lock - to replace the existing index file. CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY does not - have this complication. This would allow index compaction without - downtime. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2007-08/msg00289.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2008-01/msg01010.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg01657.php -
-The main difficulty with this item is the problem of - creating an index that can span multiple tables. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-04/msg00026.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2008-02/msg01420.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2008-03/msg00077.php -
-Currently only one hash bucket can be stored on a page. Ideally - several hash buckets could be stored on a single page and greater - granularity used for the hash algorithm. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-06/msg00168.php -
-This would be beneficial when there are few distinct values. This is - already used by GROUP BY. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00558.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg01101.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00045.php -
-Ideally this requires a separate test program that can be run - at initdb time or optionally later. Consider O_SYNC when - O_DIRECT exists. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg00541.php -
-We could use a fixed row count and a +/- count to follow MVCC - visibility rules, or a single cached value could be used and - invalidated if anyone modifies the table. Another idea is to - get a count directly from a unique index, but for this to be - faster than a sequential scan it must avoid access to the heap - to obtain tuple visibility information. -
-Perhaps by using the optimizer's cardinality estimates or random - sampling. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-11/msg00943.php -
-Currently indexes do not have enough tuple visibility information - to allow data to be pulled from the index without also accessing - the heap. One way to allow this is to set a bit on index tuples - to indicate if a tuple is currently visible to all transactions - when the first valid heap lookup happens. This bit would have to - be cleared when a heap tuple is expired. -
-Another idea is to maintain a bitmap of heap pages where all rows - are visible to all backends, and allow index lookups to reference - that bitmap to avoid heap lookups, perhaps the same bitmap we might - add someday to determine which heap pages need vacuuming. Frequently - accessed bitmaps would have to be stored in shared memory. One 8k - page of bitmaps could track 512MB of heap pages. -
-A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are visible - and if so set a per-table flag which can be checked by index scans. - Any change to the table would have to clear the flag. To detect - changes during the heap scan a counter could be set at the start and - checked at the end --- if it is the same, the table has not been - modified --- any table change would increment the counter. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-10/msg00166.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-01/msg00049.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg00823.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-10/msg01419.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-11/msg00797.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg00752.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00562.php -
-For large table adjustments during VACUUM FULL, it is faster to cluster - or reindex rather than update the index. Also, index updates can bloat - the index. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg00024.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2007-05/msg00296.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-08/msg00307.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-02/msg01125.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-03/msg00011.php -
-Instead of sequentially scanning the entire table, have the background - writer or some other process record pages that have expired rows, then - VACUUM can look at just those pages rather than the entire table. In - the event of a system crash, the bitmap would probably be invalidated. - One complexity is that index entries still have to be vacuumed, and - doing this without an index scan (by using the heap values to find the - index entry) might be slow and unreliable, especially for user-defined - index functions. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg01188.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg00121.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-03/msg00508.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-04/msg00347.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00156.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00546.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg00416.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-03/msg00358.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-05/msg00143.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00876.php -
-The problem is that autovacuum cannot vacuum them to set frozen xids; - only the session that created them can do that. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-06/msg01645.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg01440.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00724.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00899.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-11/msg00893.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-11/msg00905.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-11/msg01011.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00001.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg00435.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-05/msg00773.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg00073.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2008-01/msg00138.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00873.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2008-01/msg00365.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00873.php -
-This would prevent the overhead associated with process creation. Most - operating systems have trivial process creation time compared to - database startup overhead, but a few operating systems (Win32, - Solaris) might benefit from threading. Also explore the idea of - a single session using multiple threads to execute a statement faster. -
-Currently, to protect against partial disk page writes, we write - full page images to WAL before they are modified so we can correct any - partial page writes during recovery. These pages can also be - eliminated from point-in-time archive files. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2002-06/msg00655.php -
-If CRC check fails during recovery, remember the page in case - a later CRC for that page properly matches. -
-This allows most full page writes to happen in the background - writer. It might cause problems for applying WAL on recovery - into a partially-written page, but later the full page will be - replaced from WAL. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-03/msg01589.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-06/msg00025.php -
-Currently fsync of WAL requires the disk platter to perform a full - rotation to fsync again. One idea is to write the WAL to different - offsets that might reduce the rotational delay. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2002-11/msg00483.php -
-Allow tables to bypass WAL writes and just fsync() dirty pages on - commit. This should be implemented using ALTER TABLE, e.g. ALTER - TABLE PERSISTENCE [ DROP | TRUNCATE | DEFAULT ]. Tables using - non-default logging should not use referential integrity with - default-logging tables. A table without dirty buffers during a - crash could perhaps avoid the drop/truncate. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-12/msg01016.php -
-To do this, only a single writer can modify the table, and writes - must happen only on new pages so the new pages can be removed during - crash recovery. Readers can continue accessing the table. Such - tables probably cannot have indexes. One complexity is the handling - of indexes on TOAST tables. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-12/msg01016.php -
-This should be done utilizing the same infrastructure used for - prefetching in general to avoid introducing complex error-prone code - in WAL replay. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-12/msg00683.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00497.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg01279.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00556.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-10/msg01325.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-07/msg01075.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-04/msg00556.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-10/msg01468.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00035.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-11/msg00771.php -
-This might replace GEQO, http://sixdemonbag.org/Djinni. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg00096.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-05/msg00450.php -
-Implementing this requires the background writer to have access to system - catalogs and the transaction status log. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg00781.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg00781.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg01007.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-06/msg00340.php -
-http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo:Todo
-Async I/O allows multiple I/O requests to be sent to the disk with - results coming back asynchronously. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-10/msg00820.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2007-09/msg00255.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00027.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-01/msg00170.php -
-This would remove the requirement for SYSV SHM but would introduce - portability issues. Anonymous mmap (or mmap to /dev/zero) is required - to prevent I/O overhead. -
-Doing I/O to large tables would consume a lot of address space or - require frequent mapping/unmapping. Extending the file also causes - mapping problems that might require mapping only individual pages, - leading to thousands of mappings. Another problem is that there is no - way to prevent I/O to disk from the dirty shared buffers so changes - could hit disk before WAL is written. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-08/msg00030.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2007-08/msg00024.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-07/msg00948.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00361.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg00213.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-08/msg00082.php -
-Though backend priorities make priority inversion during lock - waits possible, research shows that this is not a huge problem. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-02/msg00493.php -
-This would allow a single query to make use of multiple I/O channels - simultaneously. One idea is to create a background reader that can - pre-fetch sequential and index scan pages needed by other backends. - This could be expanded to allow concurrent reads from multiple devices - in a partitioned table. -
-This would allow several CPUs to be used for a single query, such as - for sorting or query execution. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2008-02/msg00157.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-09/msg00343.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2007-11/msg00585.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2008-01/msg00023.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2007-12/msg00090.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00624.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-12/msg00109.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg01119.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-07/msg00439.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-09/msg00206.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00361.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-09/msg00895.php -
-This would assist multiple backends in working together. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00400.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-05/msg00847.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-07/msg00199.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-11/msg00245.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg00132.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-09/msg02238.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-10/msg00048.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-05/msg00040.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg01213.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-docs/2006-12/msg00152.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-05/msg00046.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-05/msg00111.php -
-Also change 32-bit floats (float4) to be passed by value at the same - time. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-07/msg00003.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-07/msg00056.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-08/msg00067.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-08/msg01510.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-docs/2007-12/msg00059.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-10/msg00154.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-10/msg00851.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00656.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00673.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00939.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-02/msg00097.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg01211.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-04/msg00001.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-04/msg00164.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-08/msg01377.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-06/msg00027.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-08/msg00961.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00455.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00485.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-02/msg00038.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00808.php -
-This could allow SQL written for other databases to run without - modification. -
-A package would be a schema with session-local variables, - public/private functions, and initialization functions. It - is also possible to implement these capabilities - in any schema and not use a separate "packages" - syntax at all. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-08/msg00384.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-04/msg00818.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-10/msg01527.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg00849.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-07/msg00415.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00893.php -
-This eliminates the process protection we get from the current setup. - Thread creation is usually the same overhead as process creation on - modern systems, so it seems unwise to use a pure threaded model. -
-Optimizer hints are used to work around problems in the optimizer. We - would rather have the problems reported and fixed. -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-08/msg00506.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-10/msg00517.php - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-10/msg00663.php -
-Because we support postfix operators, it isn't possible to make AS - optional and continue to use bison. - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2003-04/msg00436.php -
-http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-sql/2006-08/msg00164.php -
-While PostgreSQL clients runs fine in limited-resource environments, the - server requires multiple processes and a stable pool of resources to - run reliabily and efficiently. Stripping down the PostgreSQL server - to run in the same process address space as the client application - would add too much complexity and failure cases.
-