On 12.9.2014 22:24, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Tomas Vondra t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
On 12.9.2014 18:49, Robert Haas wrote:
I'm comfortable with this version if you are, but (maybe as a
follow-on commit) I think we could make this even a bit smarter. If
inner_rel_bytes +
On 12.9.2014 22:24, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Tomas Vondra t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
Yes, I like those changes and I think your reasoning is correct in both
cases. It certainly makes the method shorter and more readable - I was
too stuck in the original logic, so thanks
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Alexander Korotkov
aekorot...@gmail.com wrote:
Done. Patch is splitted.
I took a quick look at this.
Have you thought about making your new cmpSortSkipCols() function not
use real
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Tomas Vondra t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
I'm actually quite surprised that you find batching to be a better
strategy than skimping on buckets, because I would have expect the
opposite, almost categorically. Batching means having to write out
the tuples we can't
On 09/11/2014 12:16 PM, Костя Кузнецов wrote:
After discussion of gist seaq access in vaccum there are 2 issue:
Heikki says :
Vacuum needs to memorize the current NSN when it begins
1) how i may getting corect NSN.
The current NSN is just current WAL insert location, so
GetXLogInsertRecPtr()
On 12.9.2014 23:22, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Tomas Vondra t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
I'm actually quite surprised that you find batching to be a
better strategy than skimping on buckets, because I would have
expect the opposite, almost categorically. Batching means having
I am researching some problems with formatting.c, and I now see that the
naming of things makes the code pretty incomprehensible.
Is everyone OK with me renaming some variables, structures, and macros?
It will make back-patching harder, but will allow us to properly maintain
that file.
Right
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
Is everyone OK with me renaming some variables, structures, and macros?
It will make back-patching harder, but will allow us to properly maintain
that file.
The back-patching problem could be addressed by back-patching the
renaming. If it's purely a
That's not entirely true. CRC-32C beats pretty much everything with the
same length quality-wise and has both hardware implementations and highly
optimized software versions.
Em 12/09/2014 17:18, Ants Aasma a...@cybertec.at escreveu:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
Em 12/09/2014 17:23, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com escreveu:
On 2014-09-12 23:03:00 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 09/12/2014 10:54 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
At 2014-09-12 22:38:01 +0300, hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
We probably should consider switching to a faster CRC
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com
wrote:
On 09/11/2014 11:47 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
+ Although it could be argued that Lehman and Yao isn't followed to the
+
On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 6:59 AM, Arthur Silva arthur...@gmail.com wrote:
That's not entirely true. CRC-32C beats pretty much everything with the same
length quality-wise and has both hardware implementations and highly
optimized software versions.
For better or for worse CRC is biased by
101 - 112 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
