On 2015-04-07 18:41:59 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
@@ -331,8 +331,8 @@ ReplicationSlotAcquire(const char *name)
volatile ReplicationSlot *vslot = s;
SpinLockAcquire(s-mutex);
- active = vslot-active;
-
On 2015/04/21 10:07, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
At Mon, 20 Apr 2015 16:40:52 +0900, Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote
in 5534ad84.3020...@lab.ntt.co.jp
However, I'd
like to propose to rename Foreign Update (Foreign Delete) of
ModifyTable simply to Update (Delete) not only because
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Oh, hang on, that's not necessarily true. On promotion, the standby
archives
the last, partial WAL segment from the old timeline. That's just wrong
(http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/52fcd37c.3070...@vmware.com), and in
fact I
On 2015-04-20 17:13:29 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Didn't you think any of the TODO threads had workable solutions? And
don't expect adding an additional file per relation will be zero cost
--- added over the lifetime of 200M transactions, I question if this
approach would be a win.
Note
Dean,
* Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 7 April 2015 at 16:21, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Agreed and we actually have a patch from Dean already to address this,
it's just been waiting on me (with a couple of other ones). It'd
certainly be great if you have
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
You'd need some kind of
API that says pretend I'm waiting for this lock, but don't really
wait for it, and you'd need to be darn sure that you removed yourself
from the wait queue again before doing any other
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-04-21 10:53:08 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I don't really like the 'pid' field for pg_replication_slots. About
naming it 'active_in' or
Background:
The main sources of contention, buffer_strategy_lock, has been removed
FWICT via 5d7962c6 and d72731a7. However, during the sweep each tick
locks the buffer header via spinlock in order to to adjust
usage_count. I believe that removing this lock is possible
optimization fruit. I
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
I see that you're using git format-patch to generate this. But the
patch is only patch 1/4. Is that intentional? Where are the other
pieces?
I think that the parallel seqscan patch, and the assessing parallel
safety
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:56 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Well, it's not actually the same message. They're all a bit
different. Or mostly all of them. And the variable part is not a
command name, as in the PreventTransactionChain() case, so it would
affect
On 20 April 2015 at 09:28, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-04-20 11:26:29 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I just realized that it talks about replication identifier as the new
fundamental concept. The system table is called
pg_replication_identifier.
But that's like
Hi, thank you. My understanding became a bit clearer.
At Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:35:41 +0900, Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp
wrote in 5535efbd.8030...@lab.ntt.co.jp
On 2015/04/21 10:07, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
At Mon, 20 Apr 2015 16:40:52 +0900, Etsuro Fujita
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
On 04/21/2015 09:53 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Oh, hang on, that's not necessarily true. On promotion, the standby
archives
the last, partial WAL segment
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Asif Naeem anaeem...@gmail.com wrote:
The v2 patch looks good to me, just a minor concern on usage message i.e.
C:\PG\postgresql\src\tools\msvcinstall
Invalid command line options.
Usage: install.bat targetdir [installtype]
installtype: client
It seems
On 04/21/2015 09:53 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Oh, hang on, that's not necessarily true. On promotion, the standby
archives
the last, partial WAL segment from the old timeline. That's just wrong
On 21 April 2015 at 06:26, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:34 AM, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com wrote:
In summary it sounds like with my idea we get:
Pros
* Optimal plan if no workers are available at execution time.
* Parallelism possible if the
The v2 patch looks good to me, just a minor concern on usage message i.e.
C:\PG\postgresql\src\tools\msvcinstall
Invalid command line options.
Usage: install.bat targetdir [installtype]
installtype: client
It seems that there are two install options i.e. client, all (any other
string other
Hi,
Since we now allow CHECK constraints to be placed on foreign tables, not
only NOT NULL, I think it'd be better to update docs on considerations
about constraints on foreign tables in fdwhandler.sgml, so as to provide
more general considerations. Please find attached a patch.
Best regards,
On 21 April 2015 at 15:19, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-04-07 18:41:59 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
@@ -331,8 +331,8 @@ ReplicationSlotAcquire(const char *name)
volatile ReplicationSlot *vslot = s;
SpinLockAcquire(s-mutex);
-
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I don't really like the 'pid' field for pg_replication_slots. About
naming it 'active_in' or such?
It was originally named active_pid, but changed based on feedback from
others that 'pid' would be consistent with
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 07:13:38PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 04:19:22PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
This seems simple to implement: keep two counters, where the second one
is pages we skipped cleanup in. Once
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
On 4/20/15 2:45 AM, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
Current patch adds new source file src/backend/access/heap/frozenmap.c
which is quite similar to visibilitymap.c. They have similar code but
are separated for now. I do
Svenne == Svenne Krap sve...@krap.dk writes:
Svenne I have the explains,
Can you post the explain analyze outputs?
If need be, you can anonymize the table and column names and any
identifiers by using the anonymization option of explain.depesz.com, but
please only do that if you actually need
Tom, all,
Looks like preprocess_targetlist() should have been adjusted with the
changes to ExecBuildAuxRowMark() to support foreign tables being part
of inheritance trees (cb1ca4d800621dcae67ca6c799006de99fa4f0a5) to
also include the tableoid regardless of the rowMark type, if the
Andres Freund wrote:
I'm working on changing this (I've implemented the missing WAL
bits). I'd like to discuss the new terms for a sec, before I go and
revise the docs.
I'm now calling the feature 'replication progress tracking'. There's
replication origins and there's progress tracking
On 2015-04-21 10:53:08 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I don't really like the 'pid' field for pg_replication_slots. About
naming it 'active_in' or such?
It was originally named active_pid, but changed based on feedback
On 2015-04-19 21:37:51 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
Attached patch, V3.4, implements what I believe you and Heikki have in
mind here.
I'm not 100% sure Heikki and I am on exactly the same page here :P
I'm looking at git diff $(git merge-base upstream/master HEAD).. where
HEAD is
On 2015-04-21 23:59:45 +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
The page as frozen could have the dead tuple for now, but I think to change
to that the frozen page guarantees that page is all frozen *and* all
visible.
It shouldn't. That'd potentially cause corruption after a wraparound. A
tuple's
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-04-21 23:59:45 +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
The page as frozen could have the dead tuple for now, but I think to change
to that the frozen page guarantees that page is all frozen *and* all
visible.
It
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 11:58 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
One disadvantage of retaining parallel-paths could be that it can
increase the number of combinations planner might need to evaluate
during
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:34 AM, Amit Langote langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp
wrote:
On 2015-04-21 AM 03:29, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:38 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
On 08-04-2015 PM 12:46, Amit Kapila wrote:
Going forward, I think we can improve the same if we decide not to
On 2015-04-20 10:28:02 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-04-20 11:26:29 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I just realized that it talks about replication identifier as the new
fundamental concept. The system table is called pg_replication_identifier.
But that's like talking about index
On 04/21/2015 12:04 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
Note that even though we don't archive the partial last segment on the
previous timeline, the same WAL is copied to the first segment on the new
timeline. So the WAL isn't
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:29 PM, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com wrote:
I've also been thinking about how, instead of having to have a special
PartialSeqScan node which contains a bunch of code to store tuples in a
shared memory queue, could we not have a TupleBuffer, or
ParallelTupleReader
Stephen Frost wrote:
Tom, all,
Looks like preprocess_targetlist() should have been adjusted with the
changes to ExecBuildAuxRowMark() to support foreign tables being part
of inheritance trees (cb1ca4d800621dcae67ca6c799006de99fa4f0a5) to
also include the tableoid regardless of the
Thank you Michael, latest patch looks good to me. I have changed its status
to ready for committer.
Regards,
Muhammad Asif Naeem
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Asif Naeem anaeem...@gmail.com wrote:
The v2
On 2015-04-21 16:57:45 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
* I still think it's unacceptable to redefine
XLOG_HEAP_LAST_MULTI_INSERT as XLOG_HEAP_SPECULATIVE_TUPLE like you
did. I'll try to find something better.
I think we should just split this into different flag values for
On 2015-04-22 00:15:53 +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-04-21 23:59:45 +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
The page as frozen could have the dead tuple for now, but I think to change
to that the frozen page guarantees
On 2015-04-21 12:20:42 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
Catalog wise there's an actual table 'pg_replication_origin' that maps
between 'roident' and 'roname'. There's a pg_replication_progress view
(used to be named pg_replication_identifier_progress). I'm not sure if
the
Alvaro,
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Stephen Frost wrote:
Tom, all,
Looks like preprocess_targetlist() should have been adjusted with the
changes to ExecBuildAuxRowMark() to support foreign tables being part
of inheritance trees
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Etsuro Fujita
fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote:
Since we now allow CHECK constraints to be placed on foreign tables, not
only NOT NULL, I think it'd be better to update docs on considerations
about constraints on foreign tables in fdwhandler.sgml, so as to
On 4/21/15 4:45 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
This comment made me wonder... has anyone considered handing the pruning
work off to a bgworker, at least for SELECTs? That means the selects
themselves wouldn't be burdened by the actual prune work, only in
notifying the bgworker. While that's not going to
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
I've now named the functions:
* pg_replication_origin_create
* pg_replication_origin_drop
* pg_replication_origin_get (map from name to id)
* pg_replication_progress_setup_origin : configure session to replicate
from
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 04:19:22PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
This seems simple to implement: keep two counters, where the second one
is pages we skipped cleanup in.
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 05:04:14PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Slightly improved patch applied.
Is it?
The patch has a slightly modified 'if'
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 7:59 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ca+tgmoaemnolzmvbb8gvy69na8zw9bwpiz9+tlz-lnabozi...@mail.gmail.com
has a WIP patch that goes the route of using a tuple flag to indicate
frozen, but also raises a lot of concerns
On 2015-04-21 14:46:04 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
The main sources of contention, buffer_strategy_lock, has been removed
FWICT via 5d7962c6 and d72731a7. However, during the sweep each tick
locks the buffer header via spinlock in order to to adjust
usage_count.
FWIW, I think the best
On 4/21/15 10:04 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
One thing to consider is how we handle pruning of index scans that hit
multiple heap pages. Do we still write X% of the pages in the table, or
%X of the heap pages we actually access via SELECT? With the
write-then-skip approach, we would do X% of the
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Yes, it might be too much optimization to try to get the checkpoint to
flush all those pages sequentially, but I was thinking of our current
behavior where, after an update of all rows, we effectively write out
the entire
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
I think that would help, but it still leaves user backends trying to advance
the clock, which is quite painful. Has anyone tested running the clock in
the background? We need a wiki page with all the ideas that have been
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-04-21 16:21:47 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
All that having been said, I don't think adding a new fork is a good
approach. We already have problems pretty commonly where our
customers complain about running out of
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 11:58 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
One disadvantage of retaining parallel-paths could be that it can
There's been far more ideas and testing done around improving shared
buffer management than I can remember, and I suspect I'm not alone in
that regard. So I've created a wiki page as a place to pull this
information together. I'll try and keep highlights/important links
posted there, but help
On 4/16/15 8:42 AM, Jacek Wielemborek wrote:
I had a brief discussion on #postgresql and thought that perhaps there
might be a need for a tool that would enable a fine-tuning of PostgreSQL
performance settings by conveniently testing them with a sample SQL
query with the aid of a simple GUI
On 21 April 2015 at 20:50, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Thanks a lot for this. Please take a look at the attached.
I've given this a quick read-through, and it looks good to me. The
interaction of permissive and restrictive policies from hooks matches
my expections, and it's a
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-04-21 14:46:04 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
The main sources of contention, buffer_strategy_lock, has been removed
FWICT via 5d7962c6 and d72731a7. However, during the sweep each tick
locks the buffer header via
On 4/21/15 3:21 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
It's possible that we could use this infrastructure to freeze more
aggressively in other circumstances. For example, perhaps VACUUM
should freeze any page it intends to mark all-visible. That's not a
guaranteed win, because it might increase WAL volume:
I'm trying to review this patch and applied
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/37123/Let_pg_ctl_check_the_result_of_a_postmaster_config_reload.patch
to postgres. gmake check passed but while starting postgres I see:
[postgres@vagrant-centos65 data]$ LOG: incomplete data in
GSoC should be treated as a full-time job, that's how much time you're
expected to dedicate to it. Having bachelor's degree exams in June would be
a serious problem. You'll need to discuss with the potential mentors on how
to make up for that time.
My bachelor's diploma is almost done and I
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Asif Naeem anaeem...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you Michael, latest patch looks good to me. I have changed its
status to ready for committer.
Thanks!
--
Michael
On 04/21/2015 07:13 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
Hi all,
As mentioned in $subject, the TAP tests of pg_rewind are currently not
run by buildfarm machines as the buildfarm client uses installcheck to
run the tests in src/bin. A patch is attached to correct the problem.
Thanks, applied.
(I left
On April 21, 2015 1:17:32 PM GMT+03:00, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 15:19, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-04-07 18:41:59 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
@@ -331,8 +331,8 @@ ReplicationSlotAcquire(const char *name)
volatile
On 21 April 2015 at 05:49, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
Moved patch to CF 2015-02 to not lose track of it, also because it does
not
seem it received a proper review.
This patch does not apply anymore, so attached
On 2015-04-21 16:21:47 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
All that having been said, I don't think adding a new fork is a good
approach. We already have problems pretty commonly where our
customers complain about running out of inodes. Adding another fork
for every table would exacerbate that problem
On 2015-04-21 16:26:08 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
I've now named the functions:
* pg_replication_origin_create
* pg_replication_origin_drop
* pg_replication_origin_get (map from name to id)
*
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
On 04/21/2015 12:04 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi
wrote:
Note that even though we don't archive the partial last segment on the
previous timeline, the
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:54:57PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-04-21 10:53:08 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I don't really like the 'pid' field for pg_replication_slots. About
naming it 'active_in' or such?
67 matches
Mail list logo
