Are you able to take some 'perf top' during high CPU spike and see
what's burning CPU there? Though the issue is related to blocking, but
high CPU spikes may hint some spinning to acquire behavior.
Will do, although hopefully the spikes were only growing pains after the
upgrade.
If your
Geoff Speicher wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Qingqing Zhou zhouqq.postg...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 5:09 AM, Geoff Speicher gspeic...@umtechx.com
wrote:
ZFS implements copy-on-write, so when PostgreSQL modifies a block on disk,
the filesystem writes a new block
On 2015-04-16 14:23:25 -0700, Qingqing Zhou wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Andomar ando...@aule.net wrote:
After upgrading our database from 9.3.5 to 9.4.1 last night, the server
suffers from high CPU spikes. During these spikes, there are a lot of these
messages in the logs:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 5:24 AM, Albe Laurenz laurenz.a...@wien.gv.at
wrote:
Even with COW, I can see fillfactor 100% still have its virtues. For
example, HOT update can avoid adding an extra index item on the index
page if it finds the new item can be inserted in the same heap page.
On 04/16/2015 05:52 PM, Octavi Fors wrote:
Hi Adrian,
I didn't received any answer from Andrews.
Yes, sorry I didn't describe completely my migration plan.
Right now the database 'db' is in NAS1 mounted via nfs with computer 1
(running ubuntu 12.04 postgresql 9.2).
I want to migrate 'db' to a
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
Hm. I'm not aware of related changes in 9.4? 9.5 should be a bit better,
but I don't think 9.4 will make much of a difference.
You are right. I mis-read the check-in log.
I don't really agree that that's the most
On 4/17/15 1:10 PM, Ray Cote wrote:
(Not an IEEE floating point expert, but...) I've learned the hard way to
never rely on comparing two floating point numbers for equality -- and
that's what you are doing if you join on them as primary keys. If you
must use the underlying numeric data for
On 4/16/15 4:39 PM, Andomar wrote:
Thanks for your reply.
This issue has been complained several times, and here is the most
recent one:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/0ddfb621-7282-4a2b-8879-a47f7cecb...@simply.name
That post is about a server with huge shared_buffers, but ours is just
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 11:56 AM, David G. Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
MD
I'm not sure what you mean by doubles. Do you mean bigint data type, or do
you mean use two columns for a primary key? Either way it's pretty simple.
MD
If you mean a bigint, then probably
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Melvin Davidson melvin6...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Kynn Jones kyn...@gmail.com wrote:
One consideration that is complication the choice of primary key
is wanting to have the ability to store chunks of the data
table (not the
I have some data in the form of a matrix of doubles (~2 million
rows, ~400 columns) that I would like to store in a Pg table,
along with the associated table of metadata (same number of rows,
~30 columns, almost all text). This is large enough to make
working with it from flat files unwieldy.
First, please ALWAYS include the version and O/S, even with basic questions.
I'm not sure what you mean by doubles. Do you mean bigint data type, or do
you mean use two columns for a primary key? Either way it's pretty simple.
If you mean a bigint, then probably best to use serial data type,
On 4/15/15 9:22 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote:
På onsdag 15. april 2015 kl. 16:05:22, skrev Adam Hooper
a...@adamhooper.com mailto:a...@adamhooper.com:
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh
andr...@visena.com wrote:
På onsdag 15. april 2015 kl. 15:50:36,
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Kynn Jones kyn...@gmail.com wrote:
I have some data in the form of a matrix of doubles (~2 million
rows, ~400 columns) that I would like to store in a Pg table,
along with the associated table of metadata (same number of rows,
~30 columns, almost all text).
On Apr 17, 2015 8:35 AM, Kynn Jones kyn...@gmail.com wrote:
(The only reason for wanting to transfer this data to a Pg table
is the hope that it will be easier to work with it by using SQL
800 million 8-byte numbers doesn't seem totally unreasonable for
python/R/Matlab, if you have a lot of
Thanks Adrian! Changing the declaration row_data to be of type RECORD
(rather than pg_catalog.pg_class%ROWTYPE) resolved the error :)
- Will
*Will J Dunn*
*willjdunn.com http://willjdunn.com/*
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Adrian Klaver adrian.kla...@aklaver.com
wrote:
On 04/16/2015 07:52
På fredag 17. april 2015 kl. 21:11:05, skrev Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com
mailto:jim.na...@bluetreble.com: On 4/15/15 9:22 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh
wrote:
På onsdag 15. april 2015 kl. 16:05:22, skrev Adam Hooper
a...@adamhooper.com mailto:a...@adamhooper.com:
On Wed, Apr 15,
Hello,
I'm trying to upgrade from 9.3 to 9.4 on my laptop and encountering this
error:-
postgres@roblaptop:/usr/lib/postgresql/9.4/bin$ ./pg_upgrade
-b /usr/lib/postgresql/9.3/bin -B /usr/lib/postgresql/9.4/bin
-d /home/postgres/data93/userqueries
-D /home/postgres/data94/userqueries -U
Yes, but did you have the same workload when you upgraded to 9.3 as
you do today?
The workload is very similar. We upgraded from 9.1 to 9.3 only two
months ago, and our usage statistics have not changed much. There were
no remaining connection slots are reserved for non-replication
On Sat, 2015-04-18 at 00:25 +0200, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:09:43AM +1000, rob stone wrote:
I'm trying to upgrade from 9.3 to 9.4 on my laptop and encountering this
error:-
postgres@roblaptop:/usr/lib/postgresql/9.4/bin$ ./pg_upgrade
-b
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 08:09:43AM +1000, rob stone wrote:
I'm trying to upgrade from 9.3 to 9.4 on my laptop and encountering this
error:-
postgres@roblaptop:/usr/lib/postgresql/9.4/bin$ ./pg_upgrade
-b /usr/lib/postgresql/9.3/bin -B /usr/lib/postgresql/9.4/bin
-d
[skipped]
But remember that if you update or delete a row, removing it from an
index, the data will stay in that index until vacuum comes along.
Also, there's no point in doing a REINDEX after a VACUUM FULL;
vacuum full rebuilds all the indexes for you.
I was being
On 04/17/2015 03:09 PM, rob stone wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to upgrade from 9.3 to 9.4 on my laptop and encountering this
error:-
postgres@roblaptop:/usr/lib/postgresql/9.4/bin$ ./pg_upgrade
-b /usr/lib/postgresql/9.3/bin -B /usr/lib/postgresql/9.4/bin
-d /home/postgres/data93/userqueries
-D
On 4/17/15 9:53 PM, Pai-Hung Chen wrote:
Hi,
I am new to PostgreSQL and have a question about the new jsonb type in
9.4. Suppose I have a table called user that has two columns: (1)
user_id of type text, also the primary key, (2) setting of type
jsonb. With the following query pattern:
SELECT
On 4/17/15 7:39 PM, David G. Johnston wrote:
On Friday, April 17, 2015, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com
mailto:jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
I'm working on a function that will return a set of test data, for
unit testing database stuff. It does a few things, but ultimately
Hi all:
I'm looking to write a function to send email with result of a query.Is
it possible to send email with in a function. Any help is appreciated.
Thanks,
-Suresh Raja
On Friday, April 17, 2015, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
On 4/17/15 7:39 PM, David G. Johnston wrote:
On Friday, April 17, 2015, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com
mailto:jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
I'm working on a function that will return a set of test data, for
On Friday, April 17, 2015, Suresh Raja suresh.raja...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all:
I'm looking to write a function to send email with result of a query.
Is it possible to send email with in a function. Any help is appreciated.
Yes...though neither the neither the sql nor the plpgsql languages
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-04-16 14:23:25 -0700, Qingqing Zhou wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Andomar ando...@aule.net wrote:
b) How can you find the name of the relation being extended? based on
the
relation number.
Hi,
I am new to PostgreSQL and have a question about the new jsonb type in 9.4.
Suppose I have a table called user that has two columns: (1) user_id of
type text, also the primary key, (2) setting of type jsonb. With the
following query pattern:
SELECT *
FROM user
WHERE user_id IN [...]
ORDER BY
I'm working on a function that will return a set of test data, for unit
testing database stuff. It does a few things, but ultimately returns
SETOF record that's essentially:
RETURN QUERY EXECUTE 'SELECT * FROM ' || table_name;
Because it's always going to return a real relation, I'd like to
On Friday, April 17, 2015, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
I'm working on a function that will return a set of test data, for unit
testing database stuff. It does a few things, but ultimately returns SETOF
record that's essentially:
RETURN QUERY EXECUTE 'SELECT * FROM ' ||
On 4/17/15 4:22 PM, Andomar wrote:
Yes, but did you have the same workload when you upgraded to 9.3 as
you do today?
The workload is very similar. We upgraded from 9.1 to 9.3 only two
months ago, and our usage statistics have not changed much. There were
no remaining connection slots are
33 matches
Mail list logo
