On 03.05.2012 03:41, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Adding any contention at all to XLogInsert doesn't seem like a smart
idea, even if you failed to measure any problem in the specific tests
you made. I wonder whether we could not improve
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
According to
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2012-04/msg00374.php
advisory locks now cause problems for prepared transactions, which
ought to ignore them. It appears to me that this got broken by
commit
On 02/05/12 20:18, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
This doesn't work anymore with Python 3:
rv = plpy.execute(...)
do_something(rv[0:1])
Apparently, they changed the C API for doing slicing, or rather made one
of the two APIs for it silently do nothing. Details are difficult to
find, but this email
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Michael,
What is the use case for temporary tables on a hot standby server?
Perhaps this is a noobie question, but it seems to me that a hot standby
server's use by* applications* or *users* should be limited to
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Daniel Farina dan...@heroku.com wrote:
Besides accuracy, there is a thornier problem here that has to do with
hot standby (although the use case is replication more generally) when
one has heterogeneously sized database resources. As-is, it is
required that
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:23 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Daniel Farina dan...@heroku.com wrote:
Besides accuracy, there is a thornier problem here that has to do with
hot standby (although the use case is replication more generally) when
one has
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:41 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
It is getting a bit late to be considering such changes for 9.2, but
I'm willing to review and commit this if there's not anybody who feels
strongly that
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 14:32 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On ons, 2012-05-02 at 13:40 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
How hard would it be to add support for LIKE syntax, similar to table
def in field list declaration for
Hello
(1 row)
This works the same indeed, just seems to be a hack, though a cool
one :)
hannu=# insert into test
hannu-# SELECT * FROM populate_record(null::test,
'id=456, data=zzz');
INSERT 0 1
few years back I proposed anytypename type
with this feature,
I had a request from a customer asking if we could make a switch to
specifically disable the unexpected EOF message that fills lots of
peoples logs. Along the same way that we have a flag to turn off the
nonstandard use of string escapes message that is another culprit
(that's actually a much
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
I had a request from a customer asking if we could make a switch to
specifically disable the unexpected EOF message that fills lots of
peoples logs. Along the same way that we have a flag to turn off the
nonstandard use
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
I had a request from a customer asking if we could make a switch to
specifically disable the unexpected EOF message that fills lots of
peoples
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Would we consider adding such a switch (it should be easy enough to
do), or do we want to push this off to the mythical let's improve the
logging subsystem project that might eventually materialize if we're
lucky?
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Vik Reykja vikrey...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Would we consider adding such a switch (it should be easy enough to
do), or do we want to push this off to the mythical let's improve the
logging
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Also, AFAIK we don't *have* a message type at this point (one of
the things said mythical project wanted to look at), so the only
thing we could really filter on would be the whole text of the
message, no?
We have SQLSTATE, but this seems to be one of those
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
I think it can be removed, or rather deprecated.
datconnlimit can be set to 0
If
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Having said all that, I wasn't really arguing that this was a guaranteed
safe thing for us to rely on; just pointing out that it's quite likely
that the issue hasn't been seen in the field because of this type of
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
I think
Hi,
It seems that when Heikki added the multi_insert code the following comment in
htup.h wasn't updated:
/*
* We ran out of opcodes, so heapam.c now has a second RmgrId. These opcodes
* are associated with RM_HEAP2_ID, but are not logically different from
* the ones above associated with
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:11 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
which seems to me to be actually harder than just rewriting as derived
table and isn't an option on Microstrategy etc, hence my observation
that GTTs don't help HS much. What I would like to see, one day, is
for temp
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello
(1 row)
This works the same indeed, just seems to be a hack, though a cool
one :)
Yeah -- the syntax isn't great, but IMO it's more generally usable
than what you're proposing because it's a scalar returning
2012/5/3 Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello
(1 row)
This works the same indeed, just seems to be a hack, though a cool
one :)
Yeah -- the syntax isn't great, but IMO it's more generally usable
than what
On 05/03/2012 09:43 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2012/5/3 Merlin Moncuremmonc...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Pavel Stehulepavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello
(1 row)
This works the same indeed, just seems to be a hack, though a cool
one :)
Yeah -- the syntax isn't great, but
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
It was never intended to be a user-accessible switch, just something to
protect template0.
I don't agree with
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
I had a request from a customer asking if we could make a switch to
specifically disable the unexpected EOF message that fills lots of
peoples logs.
Yes, if the new parameter
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
On 05/03/2012 09:43 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2012/5/3 Merlin Moncuremmonc...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Pavel Stehulepavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello
(1 row)
This works the same indeed, just
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
It was never intended to be a user-accessible
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
that controls the datallowconn, or is it just something missed out?
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Is there a particular reason we don't have an ALTER DATABASE switch
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
You guys seem to be taking the original proposal off into the weeds. I
have often wanted to be able to use LIKE in type expressions, and I'd
like to see exactly that implemented.
This notion of anytypename is utterly unworkable anyway; there's no
2012/5/3 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
You guys seem to be taking the original proposal off into the weeds. I
have often wanted to be able to use LIKE in type expressions, and I'd
like to see exactly that implemented.
This notion of anytypename is
On 05/03/2012 10:18 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Andrew Dunstanand...@dunslane.net wrote:
On 05/03/2012 09:43 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2012/5/3 Merlin Moncuremmonc...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Pavel Stehulepavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Also, AFAIK we don't *have* a message type at this point (one of
the things said mythical project wanted to look at), so the only
thing we could really filter on would be the whole text
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
I had a request from a customer asking if we could make a switch to
specifically disable the unexpected EOF
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
2012/5/3 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
This notion of anytypename is utterly unworkable anyway; there's no
way for the parser to know soon enough that a given argument position
needs to be read as a type name rather than a normal expression.
type
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I agree with Simon --- a disable for that specific message seems like a
kluge, and an ugly one at that. (The right solution for this customer
is to fix their broken application.)
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Why would you always need FROM?
that was coming from Hannu's original example:
insert into test2
select * from json_to_record(jrec json) as (like test2);
how do you work it so you can call:
select json_to_record(jrec
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I agree with Simon --- a disable for that specific message seems like a
kluge, and an ugly one at that. (The right
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 04:39:32PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 09:29:39PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I propose that we remove support for the following OS ports from our
source tree. They are totally dead, definitely don't work, and/or
probably no one remembers
2012/5/3 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
2012/5/3 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
This notion of anytypename is utterly unworkable anyway; there's no
way for the parser to know soon enough that a given argument position
needs to be read as a type name
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Are you thinking basically regexp against the main text, or
something else, when you say generic filter capacity?
In the context of
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
2012/5/3 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
No, it isn't, at least not if you have any ambition to support array
types for instance; to say nothing of types whose standard names are
keywords, multiple words, etc.
we can identify a position anytypename
Excerpts from Magnus Hagander's message of jue may 03 10:58:12 -0400 2012:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In the context of yesterday's discussions, I wonder whether a filter by
SQLSTATE would be appropriate.
I'm worried it's not really granular enough.
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Hey, maybe we could add a UUID to each ereport() call site ;-)
I can't help but feel we're designing a $10.00 solution to a $0.25
problem. I think I'd actually support adding something like a UUID to
every ereport
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Are you planning to commit Noah's patch?
I wasn't intending to do so personally in the near future; I've got
other things on my to-do list. I won't object if somebody else
commits it though.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Hey, maybe we could add a UUID to each ereport() call site ;-)
I can't help but feel we're designing a $10.00 solution to a $0.25
problem. I think I'd actually support
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Hey, maybe we could add a UUID to each ereport() call site ;-)
I can't help but feel we're designing
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Magnus Hagander's message:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In the context of yesterday's discussions, I wonder whether a
filter by SQLSTATE would be appropriate.
I'm worried it's not really granular enough.
Yeah.
Just to
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
If this patch weren't already in a released branch I would be arguing
for reverting it. As is, I think we're going to have to clean it up.
I don't have time to look at it in detail
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Maybe some keyword can help to us. What do you think about new
operator TYPE that can returns regtype value and can be used together
with polymorphic functions.
Doesn't have any more attraction for me than the proposed LIKE
On tor, 2012-05-03 at 10:59 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Having received no replies on general from bsdi users considering
upgrading to 9.2, I have removed the port.
I think that was quite premature. There is no requirement that bsdi
users need to read pgsql-general, especially if you give them
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'm inclined to think that a saner implementation would involve
splitting the userlock lockmethod into two, one transactional and one
not. That gets rid of the when-to-release kluges, but instead we have
to think of a way for
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'm inclined to think that a saner implementation would involve
splitting the userlock lockmethod into two, one transactional and one
not.
Agreed
That gets rid of the when-to-release kluges, but instead we have
to think of
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 07:11:47PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On tor, 2012-05-03 at 10:59 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Having received no replies on general from bsdi users considering
upgrading to 9.2, I have removed the port.
I think that was quite premature. There is no requirement
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
That gets rid of the when-to-release kluges, but instead we have
to think of a way for two different lockmethods to share the same
lock keyspace. If we don't split it then we
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'm inclined to think that a saner implementation would involve
splitting the userlock lockmethod into two, one transactional and one
not.
hm, would that be exposed through the
Currently, the following can happen:
1. A backend needs a new transaction, so it calls
GetNewTransactionId(). It acquires XidGenLock and then calls
ExtendCLOG().
2. ExtendCLOG() decides that a new CLOG page is needed, so it acquires
CLogControlLock and then calls ZeroCLOGPage().
3.
On 3 May 2012 17:21, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I think I was the only user left; I have never heard from a BSD/OS user
in the past 5-7 years.
I'm inclined to agree with Bruce. While it's not reasonable to assume
that the lack of a BSD/OS user complaining on -general indicates that
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Magnus Hagander's message:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In the context of yesterday's discussions, I wonder whether a
filter by SQLSTATE
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Well, nearby Tom and I discussed demoting the message to DEBUG1 when
no transaction is in progress. Presumably the two messages would
share the same SQL state, unless we're going to create separate SQL
states for connection-closed-not-in-a-txn and
On 03.05.2012 16:08, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
It seems that when Heikki added the multi_insert code the following comment in
htup.h wasn't updated:
/*
* We ran out of opcodes, so heapam.c now has a second RmgrId. These opcodes
* are associated with RM_HEAP2_ID, but are not logically
On 5/2/12 10:58 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 4/29/12 6:03 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
The DML-WITH-LIMIT-1 is required to do single logical updates on tables
with non-unique rows.
And as for any logical updates we will have huge performance problem
when doing UPDATE or DELETE on large table with
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
[ CLOG extension is horrid for concurrency ]
Yeah. When that code was designed, a page's worth of transactions
seemed like a lot so we didn't worry too much about performance glitches
when we crossed a page boundary. It's time to do something about it
Something that a in-core method might be able to do that an external one
can't would be to support a method of uniquely identifying rows in
tables with no PK's. A gross example (that undoubtedly wouldn't work in
the real world) would be using TID's. A real-world implementation might
be based
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Hey, maybe we could add a UUID to each ereport() call site ;-)
I can't help but feel we're designing
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I could support that with one tweak: it's only DEBUG1 if you don't
have an open transaction. Dropping the connection while in a
transaction *is* an application bug; I don't care how
Robert,
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
In all seriousness, this is not a great test case unless you can
provide some scripts to make it easy to run it in a reproducible
fashion. Can you?
Yeah, sure, I'll do that. The PostGIS folks have scripts, but they're
kind of ugly,
AFAICS you'd either use transactional or session level, but to use
both seems bizarre. And if you really did need both, you can put a
wrapper around the function to check whether a session level exists
before you grant the transaction level lock, or vice versa.
You wouldn't want to
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Well, nearby Tom and I discussed demoting the message to DEBUG1
when no transaction is in progress. Presumably the two messages
would share the same SQL state, unless we're going to create
separate SQL states for
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Would it make sense to use 08003 (connection_does_not_exist) when a
broken connection for an idle process is discovered, and 08006
(connection_failure) for the in transaction failure? What about a
failure just after COMMIT and before
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:09 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I could support that with one tweak: it's only DEBUG1 if you don't
have an open transaction. Dropping the
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
I do agree that depending on user-defined PKs raises a whole host of
issues which we'd rather just sidestep, though.
What do you have in mind instead?
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
AFAICS you'd either use transactional or session level, but to use
both seems bizarre.
I'm a bit confused by all this, because we use both transaction and
session level locks internally - on the same lock tags - so I
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
[ CLOG extension is horrid for concurrency ]
Yeah. When that code was designed, a page's worth of transactions
seemed like a lot so we didn't worry too much about performance glitches
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
AFAICS you'd either use transactional or session level, but to use
both seems bizarre.
I'm a bit confused by all this, because we use both transaction and
session level locks
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:09 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I could support that with one tweak: it's
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
AFAICS, all the 08 class is meant to be issued by client-side
code, not the server. I think we probably have to use nonstandard
SQLSTATEs for these messages.
OK, if we're going that route, how about using Class 2D * Invalid
Transaction Termination?
I
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Heh - we already used ERRCODE_CONNECTION_FAILURE on the errors in
copy.c. Since COPY can only happen when there is a transaction
(right?), I just changed those error messages for consistency.
Agreed on changing the message texts to match, but I
On Thursday, May 03, 2012 06:12:04 PM Simon Riggs wrote:
AFAICS you'd either use transactional or session level, but to use
both seems bizarre. And if you really did need both, you can put a
wrapper around the function to check whether a session level exists
before you grant the transaction
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
I still think it might be useful to differentiate in our server log
between the case where the transaction failed and the case where the
transaction committed but we don't know that the client got the news
of that. How about something like:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Why not switch to 1 WAL record per file, rather than 1 per page. (32
pages, IIRC).
We can then have the whole new file written as zeroes by a background
process, which needn't do that while holding the XidGenLock.
I
Tom,
So that I can test this properly, what is the specific use-case we'd
expect to be slow with this patch?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
One thing I wanted to mention is that non-binary replication has an
added advantage over binary from a DR standpoint: if corruption occurs
on a master it is more likely to make it into your replicas thanks to
full page writes. You might want to consider that depending on how
sensitive your
(on standby)
INSERT INTO s1 SELECT1;
SELECT ... FROM s1 WHERE ...
which seems to me to be actually harder than just rewriting as derived
table and isn't an option on Microstrategy etc, hence my observation
that GTTs don't help HS much. What I would like to see, one day, is
for temp tables
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Doing it a background process, though, may make sense. What I'm a
little worried about is that - on a busy system - we've only got about
2 seconds to complete each CLOG extension, and we must do an fsync in
order to get
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Why not switch to 1 WAL record per file, rather than 1 per page. (32
pages, IIRC).
We can then have the whole new file written as zeroes by a
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Heh - we already used ERRCODE_CONNECTION_FAILURE on the errors in
copy.c. Since COPY can only happen when there is a transaction
(right?), I just changed those error messages for
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
One thing I wanted to mention is that non-binary replication has
an added advantage over binary from a DR standpoint: if
corruption occurs on a master it is more likely to make it into
your replicas thanks to full page writes. You might want to
consider
Peter, where are we on this?
---
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 08:16:59PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On fre, 2012-03-23 at 07:52 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 06:05:30PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I haven't tried quex, but I have tried lemon (which can be broken out of
SQLite) and re2c and ragel.
I like ragel and lemon, but the combination supports a push-parser style
from memory, and many tools are inconvenient unless you are prepared to
suck in a whole message before parsing, or let
I wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
In fact I'm a bit confused by the original complaint for the same
reason - if LockRelationOid and LockRelationIdForSession can coexist,
why doesn't the same thing work for advisory locks?
The problem (or problems) is bad implementation, not
Doesn't that imply that a plan cache might be worthwhile?
But no matter: didn't the OP really have issue with packaging and
Windows support - and there are a lot of Windows users, and in general
there are many Windows devs: making it easier for them to contribute has
to be good doesn't it?
That's an interesting point. Out of curiosity, how did the
corruption originate?
We're still not sure. It appears to be in the system catalogs, though.
Note that the original master developed memory issues.
It suggests a couple questions:
(1) Was Slony running before the corruption
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:51 PM, james ja...@mansionfamily.plus.com wrote:
I haven't tried quex, but I have tried lemon (which can be broken out of
SQLite) and re2c and ragel.
I like ragel and lemon, but the combination supports a push-parser style
from memory, and many tools are inconvenient
I believe there are tools that are significantly faster than flex. I
believe re2c generates code that is faster. But the key thing is to
test, probably, or perhaps ask around. I'm out of touch, but from
memory flex wasn't the be-all and end-all.
Lemon is definitely easy to maintain/port
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Your two paragraphs have roughly opposite arguments...
Doing it every 32 pages would give you 30 seconds to complete the
fsync, if you kicked it off when half way through the previous file -
at current maximum rates. So
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'm inclined to say that you can PREPARE if your session holds a given
advisory lock at either session or transaction level, but not both.
This is a bit annoying but doesn't seem likely to be a real problem in
practice, so
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Possibly. I have some fear of ending up with too many background
processes, but we may need them.
I sort of care about this, but only on systems that are not very busy
and could otherwise get by with fewer resources --
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'm inclined to say that you can PREPARE if your session holds a given
advisory lock at either session or transaction level, but not both.
This is a bit annoying but doesn't seem likely
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
