I have few doubts regarding logic of ResourceOwnerRememberLock() and
ResourceOwnerForgetLock():
1. In function ResourceOwnerRememberLock(), when lock count is
MAX_RESOWNER_LOCKS, it will not add the lock to lock array but increment the
count to make it 11.
Now in ResourceOwnerForgetLock(), it canno
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 22:16 -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> Note that, currently, only VACUUM sets PD_ALL_VISIBLE and visibility map bits.
> Would you make something else like heap_multi_insert() be able to do so?
That was the plan (roughly). I was thinking about doing it at the time a
new page was all
>>Uh... no. The whole point of doing things in shared buffers is that
>>you don't have to write and fsync the buffers immediately. Instead,
>>buffer evicting handles that stuff for you.
So you mean to say that there exists operations where Xlog is not required
even though it marks the buffer as
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 08:55:13PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of dom jun 10 15:20:34 -0400 2012:
> > Run pgindent on 9.2 source tree in preparation for first 9.3
> > commit-fest.
>
> Hm, does this touch stuff that would also be modified by perltidy? I
Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of dom jun 10 15:20:34 -0400 2012:
> Run pgindent on 9.2 source tree in preparation for first 9.3
> commit-fest.
Hm, does this touch stuff that would also be modified by perltidy? I
wonder if we should refrain from doing entab/detab on perl files and
instead
On May 26, 2012, at 9:17 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Would you guys please try this in the problem databases:
>
> select a.ctid, c.relname
> from pg_attribute a join pg_class c on a.attrelid=c.oid
> where c.relnamespace=11 and c.relkind in ('r','i')
> order by 1 desc;
>
> If you see any block numbers
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> On sön, 2012-06-10 at 09:41 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
If we add
secondary_socket_dirs, I think we will also need secondary_ports. One
idea might
Robert Haas writes:
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> Agreed. We now have $OLD_SUBJECT, but this is a win independently. I have
>> reviewed the code that runs between the old and new call sites, and I did not
>> identify a hazard of moving it as you describe.
> I looked a
Robert Haas writes:
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On sön, 2012-06-10 at 09:41 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> If we add
>>> secondary_socket_dirs, I think we will also need secondary_ports. One
>>> idea might be to have one new GUC that serves both purposes:
>>>
>>>
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 03:38:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Merlin Moncure writes:
>> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Daniel Farina wrote:
>> >> At Heroku we use CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY with great success, but
>> >> recently when frobbin
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On sön, 2012-06-10 at 09:41 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I think we should consider this in the context of allowing both
>> additional UNIX sockets and additional TCP ports. In the case of TCP
>> ports, it's clearly no good to turn "port"
On sön, 2012-06-10 at 09:41 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think we should consider this in the context of allowing both
> additional UNIX sockets and additional TCP ports. In the case of TCP
> ports, it's clearly no good to turn "port" into a list, because one
> port number has to be primary, sinc
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 04:25:06PM +0200, Marco Nenciarini wrote:
> Il giorno lun, 19/03/2012 alle 18.41 +0100, Marco Nenciarini ha scritto:
> >
> > Attached is v5, which should address all the remaining issues.
>
> Please find attached v6 of the EACH Foreign Key patch. From v5 only
> cosmetic ch
Noah Misch writes:
> On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 01:26:20PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I haven't ever heard anyone propose to redefine CREATE LOCAL TEMP
>> TABLE to mean anything different than CREATE TEMP TABLE, so I'm
>> disinclined to warn about that.
> From a documentation perspective, it will
As discussed in several different email threads here and on
performance , when using pg_dump a on large number of objects, the
server has a quadratic behavior in LockReassignCurrentOwner where it
has to dig through the entire local lock table to push one or two
locks up from the portal being droppe
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 03:38:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Merlin Moncure writes:
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Daniel Farina wrote:
> >> At Heroku we use CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY with great success, but
> >> recently when frobbing around some indexes I realized that there is no
> >> equ
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Joshua Berkus wrote:
> So currently we have a major limitation in binary replication, where it is
> not possible to "remaster" your system (that is, designate the most caught-up
> standby as the new master) based on streaming replication only. This is a
> majo
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 02:58:03PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 01:47:10PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 09:40:45PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:21:14AM -0400
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 01:47:10PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 09:40:45PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:21:14AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > >> > Is everyone re
So currently we have a major limitation in binary replication, where it is not
possible to "remaster" your system (that is, designate the most caught-up
standby as the new master) based on streaming replication only. This is a
major limitation because the requirement to copy physical logs over
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 09:40:45PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:21:14AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian writes:
> >> > Is everyone ready for me to run pgindent? ?We are nearing the first
> >> > commit-fe
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 01:26:20PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:55:15PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> >> Concerning everyone's favorite topic, how to name the new type of table, I
> >> liked Tom's proposal[1] to make CRE
> Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" writes:
>> Because the current support for temporary tables is relatively
>> similar to the standard's description of LOCAL TEMPORARY TABLES,
>> but nothing at all like the standard's descri0ption of GLOBAL
>> TEMPORARY TABLES.
>
> Um ... did you read the spe
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> How about this?
+ /*
+* Set flushed position to the last byte in the
previous
+* file. Per above we know that
xrecoff%XLOG_SEG_SIZE=0
+
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> Whee, testing is fun. Second try.
>
> I'm concerned by the fact that neither the original nor the new code
> bother to test whether the relation is WAL-loggable. It may be that
> ginbuildempty cannot be invoked for temp t
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Amit kapila wrote:
>>On further review, I think that we ought to make MarkBufferDirty() the
>>caller's job, because sometimes we may need to xlog only if
>>XLogIsNeeded(), but the buffer's got to get marked dirty either way.
>
> Incase the place where Xlog is not re
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> On lör, 2012-06-09 at 18:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> That's not actually quite the same thing as what I suggest above.
>>> Currently, unix_socket_directory *overrides* the compiled-in choice.
>>> I'm suggesting that
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Although HEAD builds seem to still be happy, all back branches have
> been failing with git errors for the last six hours or so. Who broke
> what?
We had a server failure on the box that runs git.postgresql.org, so it
was unavailable for a few h
Although HEAD builds seem to still be happy, all back branches have
been failing with git errors for the last six hours or so. Who broke
what?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
ht
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Yeah, good arguments all around, i agree too :-) Next question is -
>>> suggestions for naming of said paramter?
>>
>>
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On lör, 2012-06-09 at 18:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> That's not actually quite the same thing as what I suggest above.
>> Currently, unix_socket_directory *overrides* the compiled-in choice.
>> I'm suggesting that it would be better to invent a list that is *added
>> t
On 10.06.2012 14:28, Erik Rijkers wrote:
Searching for Boyer-Moore in the manual, one only finds the following line (in
the 8.4 release
notes):
"Improve the performance of text_position() and related functions by using
Boyer-Moore-
Horspool searching (David Rowley)"
I have two questions:
1.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On tis, 2012-05-29 at 22:31 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Yeah, good arguments all around, i agree too :-) Next question is -
>> suggestions for naming of said paramter?
>
> --xlog-method=something? And/or -Xsomething, which would autom
Searching for Boyer-Moore in the manual, one only finds the following line (in
the 8.4 release
notes):
"Improve the performance of text_position() and related functions by using
Boyer-Moore-
Horspool searching (David Rowley)"
I have two questions:
1. Where in postgres is the Boyer-Moore algor
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On 7 June 2012 23:40, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> On 7 June 2012 23:15, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Please join me in welcoming him aboard.
>>
>> Congratulations, Kevin.
>
> Idle thought for the web team: Now might be a good time to take down
> the
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thursday, June 7, 2012, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Magnus Hagander
>> wrote:
>> > On Thursday, June 7, 2012, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:05 AM, Magnus Hagander
>> >> wrote:
>> >
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:42 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Works for me. We still need a (reworked) patch, though, right? We just
>> move where the move between seconds and milliseconds happens?
>
> Attached is the updated version of the patch.
2012/6/8 Simon Riggs :
> On 25 April 2012 10:40, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>
>> I tried to implement a patch according to the idea. It allows extensions
>> to register an entry point of the self-managed daemon processes,
>> then postmaster start and stop them according to the normal manner.
>
> The patc
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 3:16 AM, Brar Piening wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>> I don't have too much hope for them actually changing it - they seem
>> hell-bent on forcing everybody into metro, and this seems to be yet another
>> way to do that. But we can always hope...
>
>
> Looks like they
Sorry for my late reply.
2012/6/6 Florian Pflug :
> On Jun5, 2012, at 22:33 , Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>> 2012/6/5 Florian Pflug :
>>> I can live with any behaviour, as long as it doesn't depends on details
>>> of the query plan. My vote would be for always using the role which was
>>> active at statem
On Sunday, June 10, 2012, Brar Piening wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>> I don't have too much hope for them actually changing it - they seem
>> hell-bent on forcing everybody into metro, and this seems to be yet another
>> way to do that. But we can always hope...
>>
>
> Looks like they've lea
On 9 June 2012 17:19, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
>> On 9 June 2012 16:46, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I don't believe there was actual consensus for this change,
>
>> It was hardly a subject of marked disagreement.
>
> It was hardly a subject of discussion, as yet.
>
> Personally I'm pretty d
42 matches
Mail list logo
