Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Simon's page is in the patches queue. What would you like changed,
> exactly?
I'm not going to have time to comment on this any time soon, sorry :( ..
I guess I will try to look at it for 8.2.
-O
---(end of broadcast)---
TI
Hi,
I basically have a functional version for aligned output, examples at
the bottom of this email. It handles multiline data values and
multiline headers. However, there are some areas where I could use some
input.
1. To be able to control the spacing, psql now has to be very careful
about its o
On Fri, 2005-09-23 at 12:48 -0400, Ron Peacetree wrote:
> > I have some indications from private tests that very high memory settings
> >may actually hinder performance of the sorts, though I cannot explain that
> >and wonder whether it is the performance tests themselves that have issues.
> >
> H
On Fri, 2005-09-23 at 11:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Since we know the predicted size of the sort set prior to starting the
> > sort node, could we not use that information to allocate memory
> > appropriately? i.e. if sort size is predicted to be more th
Inserting into a time field with limited precision rounds off, which
is good except for this case:
regression=# select '23:59:59.9'::time(0);
time
--
24:00:00
(1 row)
This is bad because:
regression=# select '24:00:00'::time(0);
ERROR: date/time field value out of range: "24:00:0
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Perhaps VACUUM could send some statistics after each N pages and this
> would then be available through something similar to pg_statistics
> table.
Why not just have it send some text to be displayed in the "current
command" field of pg_stat_activity? T
Hannu Krosing wrote:
On L, 2005-09-24 at 20:25 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Actually this also probably would not gain you much in 8.1
as vacuum in theory is already dealing with itself.
Interesting. Could you explain it in a more detailed way ?
How does vacuum "deal with itself" in
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I rely on the signal handler that the JVM uses for page-faults (which a
stack overflow generally amounts to) and fpe exeptions so I know that
they will generate java exceptions in a controlled way (which I in turn
translate to elog(ERROR) on the main thread).
On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 07:18:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Well, it seems we are going to have to fix it somehow for 8.1. It is
> not crashing here so I can't work up a patch. Can you submit a minimal
> fix for 8.1? Thanks.
Ah, it would only happen if your encoding was UTF-8 since that
On L, 2005-09-24 at 18:59 -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> I have a client with a database that contains 4000 relations according
> to vacuum verbose, and \d in psql is painfully slow. In particular...
>
>-> Seq Scan on pg_class c (cost=0.00..2343.09 rows=6124 width=73)
> (actual time=0.325..22
On L, 2005-09-24 at 19:32 -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 07:21:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Of course maybe a better question is why we even limit based on the
> > > number of relations...
> >
> > Shared memory is fixed-size.
>
> True, but can't the fixed memory require
On L, 2005-09-24 at 20:25 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Actually this also probably would not gain you much in 8.1
> as vacuum in theory is already dealing with itself.
Interesting. Could you explain it in a more detailed way ?
How does vacuum "deal with itself" in 8.1 ?
> >Also, would it be p
12 matches
Mail list logo
