On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Handling for OID is not clear, shall we allow it or not in check
constraint?
In my current patch OID will not be allowed in check
Hello Noah,
Thanks a lot for all these comments!
I'm not planning to apply all of them directly, especially removing
features that I think really desirable. Please find a defense against some
of your suggestions. I wish to wait for some more feedback about these
arguments before spending
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 4:55 AM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote:
I suggest getting the term stddev in there somehow, maybe like this:
progress: 37.0 s, 115.2 tps, latency avg=8.678 ms stddev=1.792
My issue is to try to keep the line width under control so as to avoid
line
Moreover, using 'xxx=figure breaks simple cut pipelining to extract the
figures, so I would prefer to stick to spaces.
Maybe:
progress: 36.0 s, 115.2 tps, lat avg 9.678 ms stddev 1.792, lag 0.143 ms
but I liked my +- approach:-)
100 +- 3 implies a range of 97 to 103 and no values are
Folks,
In order to make sure that nobody is prevented from reviewing due to not
having a suitable development environment available, the PostgreSQL
community is offering free virtual machines for reviewing and testing
patches for this CommitFest.
If you want a VM for this purpose, please email
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 10:55:54AM +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
Improve pgbench measurements progress report
These changes are loosely coupled; please separate them into several patch
files:
I thought about this. I submitted a bunch of very small pgbench patches
to the previous commit
Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2013-09-20 13:55:36 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
When a tuple is predicate-locked, the key of the lock is ctid+xmin.
However, when a tuple is frozen, its xmin is changed to FrozenXid.
That
effectively
Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com schrieb:
Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2013-09-20 13:55:36 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
When a tuple is predicate-locked, the key of the lock is
ctid+xmin.
However, when a tuple is frozen,
On 09/21/2013 10:46 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com schrieb:
Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2013-09-20 13:55:36 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
When a tuple is predicate-locked, the key of the lock
On 9/19/13 7:08 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
FWIW, we've written a framework (currently available in the EnovaTools
project on pgFoundry) that allows for very, very fine-grain control over
asserts.
- Every assert has a name (and an optional sub-name) as well as a level
- You can
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to wrote:
On 9/20/13 12:09 PM, Amit Khandekar wrote:
On 16 September 2013 03:43, Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to wrote:
I think it would be extremely surprising if a command like that got
optimized away based on a GUC, so I don't think
I think the point here is that, at least as I understand it, encoding
conversion and sanitization happens at a very early stage right now,
when we first receive the input from the client. If the user sends a
string of bytes as part of a query or bind placeholder that's not
valid in the
3. Preference for CentOS or Ubuntu.
Windows VMs are also available, but I don't have the ability to
preconfigure them with tools.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your
Hi Stephen,
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
I'm not sure I follow this completely- you're saying that a definition
of 'upsert' which includes having to lock rows which aren't in your
current snapshot (for reasons stated) isn't a useful one. Is the
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Windows VMs are also available, but I don't have the ability to
preconfigure them with tools.
Wasn't there an EC2 image doing the rounds that Magnus created, that
took care of all of that for you?
On 09/21/2013 06:48 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Windows VMs are also available, but I don't have the ability to
preconfigure them with tools.
Wasn't there an EC2 image doing the rounds that Magnus created, that
took care of
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I'll find it very difficult to accept any implementation that is going
to bloat things even worse than our upsert looping example.
How would any even halfway sensible example cause *more* bloat than the
upsert
On 09/20/2013 06:33 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
The points I find daunting are the semantics, like:
* How do we control whether a standby is allowed prevent WAL file
removal. What if archiving is configured?
* How do we control whether a standby is allowed to peg xmin?
* How long do we
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
ProcLockWakeup() only wakes as many waiters from the head of the queue
as can all be granted the lock without any conflicts. So I don't
think there is a race condition in that path.
Right, but what about
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
So because this isn't a tuple-level lock - it's really a value-level
lock - LockTuple() is not called by the btree code at all, and so
arbitration of who gets the lock is, as I've said, essentially
undefined.
Addendum: It
El 21/09/2013 18:09, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net escribió:
On 09/21/2013 06:48 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Windows VMs are also available, but I don't have the ability to
preconfigure them with tools.
Wasn't
El 21/09/2013 17:16, Jaime Casanova ja...@2ndquadrant.com escribió:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to wrote:
On 9/20/13 12:09 PM, Amit Khandekar wrote:
On 16 September 2013 03:43, Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to wrote:
I think it would be extremely surprising if
On 09/21/2013 10:48 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
El 21/09/2013 18:09, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net
mailto:and...@dunslane.net escribió:
On 09/21/2013 06:48 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com
mailto:j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
On Mon, 2013-09-16 at 17:31 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Looks good to me, except that pg_asprintf seems to be checking ret
instead of rc.
Ah, good catch!
Is there a reason for the API discrepancy of pg_asprintf vs. psprintf?
I don't see that we use the integer return value anywhere.
On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 15:13 +0500, Asif Naeem wrote:
1. It seems that you have used strdup() on multiple places in the
patch, e.g. in the below code snippet is it going to lead crash if
newp-ident is NULL because of strdup() failure ?
static EPlan *
find_plan(char *ident,
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 17:07 +0200, Ronan Dunklau wrote:
I am using approximatively the layout that was proposed here:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/51bb1b6e.2070...@dunslane.net
It looks like everything is hard-coded to take the source and the
gcda, gcno files in the base directory, but
26 matches
Mail list logo
