Pavan Deolasee wrote:
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The
policy of this project is that we only put nontrivial bug fixes into
back branches, and I don't think this item qualifies ...
Got it. I will submit a patch for HEAD.
Thanks,
As I
Pavan Deolasee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please see the attached patch. One change I made is to hold the SHARE lock
on the page while ANALYZE is reading tuples from it. I thought it would
be a right thing to do instead of repeatedly acquiring/releasing the lock.
I've applied a
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:02 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've applied a modified/extended form of this patch for 8.3.2.
Thanks. I had another concern about VACUUM not reporting DEAD line
pointers (please see up thread). Any comments on that ?
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
Pavan Deolasee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks. I had another concern about VACUUM not reporting DEAD line
pointers (please see up thread). Any comments on that ?
If you want to work on that, go ahead, but I wanted it separate because
I didn't think it merited back-patching. It's strictly
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pavan Deolasee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks. I had another concern about VACUUM not reporting DEAD line
pointers (please see up thread). Any comments on that ?
If you want to work on that, go ahead
Ok. I would do
Pavan Deolasee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't think it merited back-patching. It's strictly cosmetic in
terms of being about what VACUUM VERBOSE prints, no?
Umm.. Whatever we decide on the fix, I think we should backpatch
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The
policy of this project is that we only put nontrivial bug fixes into
back branches, and I don't think this item qualifies ...
Got it. I will submit a patch for HEAD.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:22 AM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please do --- I have a lot of other stuff on my plate.
Please see the attached patch. One change I made is to hold the SHARE lock
on the page while ANALYZE is reading tuples from it. I thought it would
be a right thing to do
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 13:07 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
Please see the attached patch. One change I made is to hold the SHARE lock
on the page while ANALYZE is reading tuples from it. I thought it would
be a right thing to do instead of repeatedly acquiring/releasing the lock.
ANALYZE is a
Please do --- I have a lot of other stuff on my plate.
Please see the attached patch. One change I made is to hold the SHARE lock
on the page while ANALYZE is reading tuples from it. I thought it would
be a right thing to do instead of repeatedly acquiring/releasing the lock.
I have
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 10:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
In the fourth, if we actually believed this was a problem we'd
need to redesign VACUUM too, as it does the same thing.
VACUUM waits until nobody else has the buffer pinned, so lock contention
is much
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 13:07 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
Please see the attached patch. One change I made is to hold the SHARE lock
on the page while ANALYZE is reading tuples from it. I thought it would
be a right thing to do instead of repeatedly
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 10:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 13:07 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
Please see the attached patch. One change I made is to hold the SHARE lock
on the page while ANALYZE is reading tuples from it. I thought it
Pavan Deolasee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Seems like the redirected-dead line pointers are playing spoil-sport here.
In this particular example, the deleted tuples may get truncated to
redirected-dead line pointers. Analyze would report them as empty
slots and not as dead tuples. So in the
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ Please see if you can stop using the redirected dead terminology ]
Apologies, will keep that in mind. Seems like a hang-over from the past :-)
Yeah, I think I agree. The page pruning code is set up so that changing
a
Pavan Deolasee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It looks like there's no trivial way to get ANALYZE to do things that
way, though. heap_release_fetch() doesn't distinguish a DEAD line
pointer from an unused or redirected one. But in
16 matches
Mail list logo
