On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Gurjeet Singh
> wrote:
> > On Dec 13, 2015 9:56 PM, "Michael Paquier"
> > wrote:
> >> If the node has no WAL receiver active, a tuple with NULL values is
>
On Dec 13, 2015 9:56 PM, "Michael Paquier"
wrote:
>
> If the node has no WAL receiver active, a tuple with NULL values is
> returned instead.
IMO, in the absence of a WAL receiver the SRF (and the view) should not
return any rows.
(adding Heikki, since that macro was touched by his commit 04e298b8)
Does my previous description of the problem make sense, or am I fretting
over something that's a non-issue.
Best regards,
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> Gin code respects the XLR_MAX_BLOCK
(XLR_MAX_BLOCK_ID).
The attached patch redefines GIST_MAX_SPLIT_PAGES so that in case of a
split, gistplacetopage() now throws an error when the block-ids needed
exceed 32.
I have used Min(75, XLR_MAX_BLOCK_ID) as the macro expansion, but I believe
it can be set to plain XLR_MAX_BLOCK_ID.
--
Gurjeet
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-07-07 09:42:54 -0700, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > /*
> > + * Grab and save an LSN value to prevent WAL recycling past that point.
> > + */
> > +void
> > +ReplicationSlotRegisterRestartLSN()
> >
On Jul 30, 2015 2:23 PM, "Tom Lane" wrote:
>
> Gavin Flower writes:
> > On 31/07/15 02:24, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> There is a big downside to expanding xmin/xmax to 64 bits: it takes
> >> space. More space means more memory needed for caching, more memory
> >> bandwidth, more I/O, etc.
>
>
On Jul 22, 2015 12:07 PM, "Jolly Chen" wrote:
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> You have probably heard that Mike Stonebraker recently won the Turing
award. A recording of his award lecture is available at:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbGeKi6T6QI
>
> It is an entertaining talk overall. If you fast forw
fails if there are any FKeys
pointing to this table.
[2]: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/sql-altertable.html
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
t this as a bug, and "fix" the bug
by disallowing an index with attributes that cannot be present in an index
created by PRIMARY KEY constraint. The collation attribute on one of the
keys may be just one of many such attributes.
In the long term, we may want to allow coll
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Brendan Jurd wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 at 06:03 Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>
>
>> s/proportion/fraction/
>>
>
> I think of these as synonymous -- do you have any particular reason to
> prefer "fraction"? I don't fe
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Sawada Masahiko
wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> >> log_min_messages acts as a single gate for everything headed for the
> >> server log
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 6:49 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-07-07 06:41:55 -0700, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > There seems to be a misplaced not operator ! in that if statement, as
> > well. That sucks :( The MacOS gcc binary is actually clang, and its
> output
> > is
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-06-10 13:13:41 -0700, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * Log an xid snapshot for logical replication.
> It's not needed for
> > + * ph
e value of log_min_messages. So by default, the
users will get the same behaviour as today, but can choose to tweak per
background-process logging when needed.
Absent such a feature, one hack is to set the desired log_min_messages
value in conf file and send SIGHUP to just the process of
he whole shared_buffers.
s/rel_count/rel_num/
Reduce indentation/tab in header-comments of DropForkSpecificBuffers(). But
I see there's precedent in neighboring functions, so this may be okay.
Doing pfree() of num_blocks, num_fsm_blocks and num_vm_blocks in one place
(instead of two, at differ
raw some objections based on lack of necessity.
>
> merlin
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
>
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>
> I am in the process of writing up a doc patch, and will submit that as
> well in a short while.
>
Please find attached the patch with the doc update.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurj
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-06-10 08:24:23 -0700, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Andres Freund
> wrote:
> > > That doesn't look right to me. Why is this code logging a standby
> > > snapshot for ph
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-06-10 08:00:28 -0700, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>
> > pg_create_logical_replication_slot() prevents LSN from being
> > recycled that by looping (worst case 2 times) until there's no
> > conflict with t
27;activate' which user can use to allocate restart_lsn as
part of the creation process.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
physical_repl_slot_activate_restart_lsn.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To
y
-23:37:00' == '00:23:00', then it seems pointless to confuse the user
by showing two different representations of the same datum. This also
increases the code complexity required in applications/ORMs to parse
interval data's text representation.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http:
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> In preparing to push the patch, I noticed I hadn't responded to this:
>
> Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>> Kevin Grittner wrote:
>>> I have reviewed this patch, and think we should do what the patch
>>>
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Cédric Villemain wrote:
> Le lundi 3 février 2014 19:18:54 Gurjeet Singh a écrit :
>
>> Possible enhancements:
>> - Ability to save/restore only specific databases.
>> - Control how many BlockReaders are active at a time; to avoid I/O
&g
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 2:51 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>>
>> I don't have intimate knowledge of recovery but I think the above
>> assessment of recovery's operations holds true. If you still think
>> this i
AICT was part of 8.3.
So I guess all the supported releases it is.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EDB : www.EnterpriseDB.com : The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
diff --git a/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c b/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c
index 3ab1428..c7f41a5 100644
-
a bit old, but I'm sure I would've tested the patch before
submitting.
> I have attached a suggested patch which I think
> would work. Gurjeet, could you take a look at it?
The patch, when considered together with Tom's suggestion upthread,
looks good to me.
Best regards,
-
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh writes:
>> While I'd love to reduce the number of future installations without
>> this fix in place, I respect the decision to honor project policy. At
>> the same time, this change does not break a
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh writes:
>> would it be possible to include this in 9.4 as well?
>
> While this is clearly an improvement over what we had before, it's
> impossible to argue that it's a bug fix, and we are way p
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh writes:
>
>> Please find attached the patch. It includes the doc changes as well.
>
> Applied with some editorialization.
Thanks!
would it be possible to include this in 9.4 as well?
Best regards,
--
Thanks!
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Gurjeet Singh writes:
>>> I tried to eliminate the 'pending' list, but I don't see a way around it.
>>> We need temporary storage somewhere to store the branches encountered on
>&
JUST_VALUE is defined, that's
> the string we write, otherwise we write "0".
Please find attached the patch. It includes the doc changes as well.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EDB www.EnterpriseDB.com
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml b/doc/src/sg
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>> And it's probably accepted by now that such a bahviour is not
>> catastrophic, merely inconvenient.
>
> I think the whole argument for having pg_hibernator i
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>> > Yeap, but if it crashes before writing checkpoint record, it will lead
>> > to
&
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>
>> > Buffer saver process itself can crash while saving or restoring
>> > buffers.
>>
re
present in original DB's shared-buffers at the time of shutdown. So,
this would fetch blocks into shared-buffers that may be completely
unrelated to the blocks recently operated on by the recovery process.
And it's probably accepted by now that such a bahviour is not
catastrophic, mer
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 1:13 PM, David G Johnston
wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh-4 wrote
>> So the argument that this GUC is a security concern, can be ignored.
>> Root user (one with control of start script) still controls the lowest
>> badness setting of all Postgres processes. If
eak the intended behavior.
>
> Robert's idea of having the start script set an environment variable to
> control the OOM adjustment reset seems like it would satisfy my concern.
I'm fine with this solution. Should this be a constant 0, or be
configurable based on env. variable'
ing killed by
OOM killer, but let the child processes be still subject to OOM
killer's whim.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EDB www.EnterpriseDB.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
process' badness to be lower than postnaster's
$ sudo echo -101 > /proc/1837/oom_score_adj
[sudo] password for gurjeet:
$ for p in $(echo $(pgserverPIDList)| cut -d , ...
1835 -100
/home/gurjeet/dev/pgdbuilds/oom_guc/db/bin/postgres-D/home/gurjeet/dev/pgdbuilds/oom_guc/db/data
1837 -1
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-06-10 07:56:01 -0400, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>> Providing it as GUC would have given end users both the peices, but
>> with a compile-time option they have only one half of the solution;
>> except if they go compi
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh writes:
>> Startup scripts are not solely in the domain of packagers. End users
>> can also be expected to develop/edit their own startup scripts.
>
>> Providing it as GUC would have given end users both t
feeling that if Postgres wishes to provide a control
over child backend's oom_score_adj, it should be a GUC parameter
rather than a compile-time option. Yesterday a customer wanted to
leverage this and couldn't because they refuse to maintain their own
fork of Postgres code.
Please find atta
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Cédric Villemain wrote:
> Le samedi 7 juin 2014 08:35:27 Gurjeet Singh a écrit :
>
>> PS: Please note that I am not proposing to add support for the
>> optimizer hint embedded in Mitsuru's query.
>
> :-)
Even though I (sometimes) f
m not proposing to add support for the
optimizer hint embedded in Mitsuru's query.
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EDB www.EnterpriseDB.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>> Case 2 also won't cause any buffer restores because the save-files are
>> created only
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Another thing is don't you want to handle SIGQUIT signal in bg saver?
I think bgworker_quickdie registered in StartBackgroundWorker() serves
the purpose just fine.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.
ch is the normal
behaviour.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EDB www.EnterpriseDB.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
cluded from the
> basebackup...
Yes, they will be excluded, provided the BlockReader processes have
finished, because each BlockReader unlinks its save-file after it is
done restoring buffers listed in it.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EDB www.EnterpriseDB.com
-
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>>
>> For sizeable shared_buffers size, the restoration of the shared
>> buffers can take several seconds.
>
> Incase of recovery, the shared buffers saved
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>>>> IMHO, all of these caveats, would affect a very small fraction of
>>>> use-case
their master database take up to a few minutes to start accepting
connections. From my tests [1], " In the 'App after Hibernator' [case]
... This took 70 seconds for reading the ~4 GB database."
[1]:
http://gurjeet.singh.im/blog/2014/04/30/postgres-hibernator-reduce-planned-da
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>
>> When the Postgres server is being stopped/shut down, the `Buffer
>> Saver` scans the
>> shared-buffers of Postgres, and stores the unique block ident
On May 29, 2014 12:12 AM, "Amit Kapila" wrote:
>
> I agree with you that there are only few corner cases where evicting
> shared buffers by this utility would harm, but was wondering if we could
> even save those, say if it would only use available free buffers. I think
> currently there is no su
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > Caveats
>> --
>>
>> - Buffer list is saved only when Postgres is shutdown in "smart" and
>> "fast" modes.
>>
>
ostgres-hibernator/)
[Demostrating Performance
Benefits](http://gurjeet.singh.im/blog/2014/04/30/postgres-hibernator-reduce-planned-database-down-times/)
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> Please find attached the pg_hibernate extension. It is a
> set
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>
>> > Because simpler code is less likely to have bugs and is easier to
>> > maintain.
>>
>> I agree with that point, but one should also r
to
report.
Besides, there's already a throttle built in using the PGSTAT_STAT_INTERVAL
limit.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EDB www.EnterpriseDB.com <http://www.enterprisedb.com>
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh writes:
> > Please find attached the patch to send transaction commit/rollback stats
> to
> > stats collector unconditionally.
>
> That's intentional to reduce stats traffic. What kind of performa
in pg_stat_database do not
increment gradually as one would expect them to. But when such a backend
disconnects, the counts jump dramatically, giving the impression that the
database processed a lot of transactions (potentially thousands) in an
instant.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > > Gurjeet Singh writes:
> > > > I was looking for ways to reduce the noise in Postgres make output,
> > &
pg_buffercache where relblocknumber is not
null group by reldatabase;'
count
---
2264
17
(2 rows)
There are a few more blocks than the time they were saved, but all the
blocks from before the restart are present in shared buffers after the
restart.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet
Please find attached the patch that fixes a couple of comments, and adds
'static' qualifier to functions that are not used anywhere else in the code
base.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EDB www.EnterpriseDB.com <http://www.enterprisedb.com>
diff --git a
s a few
instructions. I don't know how to write a test case that can measure
savings of skipping a few instructions in a startup sequence that
potentially takes thousands, or even millions, of instructions.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EDB Corp. w
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterprsieDB Inc. www.enterprisedb.com
diff --git a/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c b/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
index ccb8b86..cdae6e5 100644
--- a/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
+++ b/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh writes:
> > I was looking for ways to reduce the noise in Postgres make output,
> > specifically, I wanted to eliminate the "Nothing to be done for `all' "
> > messages, since they don't a
the recipe that emits the message "All of PostgreSQL
successfully made. Ready to install."
For really quiet builds one can use the -s switch, but for someone who
wishes to see some kind of progress and also want a cleaner terminal
output, the --no-print-directory switch alone
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 11/5/13, 2:47 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Tom Lane > <mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote:
> >
> > But we're not buying much. A few instructions during
ust that it's establishing trust in the
opposite direction.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterprsieDB Inc. www.enterprisedb.com
plies), not in postmaster
shutdown. I hope that adds some weight to the argument.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh gurjeet.singh.im
EnterpriseDB Inc. www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Kapila writes:
> > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:41 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> >> Just a small patch; hopefully useful.
>
> > This is valid saving as we are filling array ListenSocket[] in
> > Strea
Just a small patch; hopefully useful.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterpriseDB Inc.
diff --git a/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c b/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
index ccb8b86..48dc7af 100644
--- a/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c
+++ b/src/backend
etrees that haven't reached the
> planner. It doesn't appear to me that you've done any research on that
> point whatsoever
No, I haven't, and I might not be able to research it for a few more weeks.
> you have not even updated the comment for BoolExpr
> (in p
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > Agreed that there's overhead in allocating list items, but is it more
> > overhead than pushing functions on the call stack? Not sure, so I leave
> it
>
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>
> What's the procedure of moving a patch to the next commitfest?
>
Never mind, I see an email from Josh B. regarding this on my corporate
account.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterpriseDB Inc.
dure of moving a patch to the next commitfest? Do I make a
fresh submission there with a link to current submission, or is the move
doable somehow in the application itself.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterpriseDB Inc.
further discussion of this patch, or do I return it?
>
> Considering it's not been updated, nor my comments responded to, in
> almost two weeks, I think we return it at this point.
>
Sorry, I didn't notice that this patch was put back in 'Waiting on Author'
state.
Be
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2013/6/30 Gurjeet Singh :
> > On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Pavel Stehule >
> > wrote:
> >
> > How about naming those 3 variables as follows:
> >
> > root_expr_kind
> > root_expr_name
&
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2013/6/30 Gurjeet Singh :
> > On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Pavel Stehule >
> > wrote:
> >
> > How about naming those 3 variables as follows:
> >
> > root_expr_kind
> > root_expr_name
&
, but more correct. Same not best name is
> "root_char", maybe "root_bool_op_name"
>
> or root_expr_type and root_op_name ???
>
How about naming those 3 variables as follows:
root_expr_kind
root_expr_name
root_bool_expr_type
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterpriseDB Inc.
is
> ready for commit
>
Thanks for the review Pavel.
Attached is the updated patch, v4. It has the above edits, and a few code
improvements, like not repeating the (root_kind == AEPR_AND ? .. : ..)
ternary expression.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterpriseDB
quot; cannot be changed without restarting the
server
DEBUG: configuration file
"/home/gurjeet/dev/pgdbuilds/report_guc_chanege_pre_reload/db/data/postgresql.conf"
contains errors; unaffected changes were applied
pg_test_reload_conf
-
t
(1 row)
postgres=# select
root_kind == AEXPR_AND ?
> "AND" : "OR");
> + exprs = lcons(expr, exprs);
> + }
>
> I don't see any other issues, so after fixing comments this patch is
> ready for commit
>
> Regards
>
> Pavel Stehule
>
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterpriseDB Inc.
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Christopher Browne wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 1:42 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> Joking about "640K" aside, it doesn't seem reasonable to expect a truly
>>> enormous query as is generated by the
where the UPDATE statement from any given client
always updates the same logical row.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterpriseDB Inc.
pgbench_add_cleint_number_variable.patch
Description: Binary data
test_update.sql
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-
this logic to turn
> out happily. I'd rather fix Slony (as done in the above patch).
>
Yes, by all means, fix the application, but that doesn't preclude the
argument that the database should be a bit more smarter and efficient,
especially if it is easy to do.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterpriseDB Inc.
IN construct. But the
point remains that Postgres should be capable of handling this simple
construct efficiently.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterpriseDB Inc.
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> When Postgres encounters a long list of AND/OR chains, it errors out at
> check_stack_depth() after a limit of few thousand. At around 10,000
> elements, the recursion at assign_expr_collations() causes the error. But
> at a l
t
non-recursively.
This is I guess the right thing to do, but then we'll have to make
similar tree-traversal changes in other places, for eg. in BoolExpr walking
in expression_tree_walker() or maybe just the stack below
assign_expr_collations().
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
http:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 01:34:49PM -0400, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > Can you also improve the output when it dies upon failure to fetch
> something?
> > Currently the only error message it emits is "fetching xyz"
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 04:50:45PM -0500, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > Please find attached the patch for some cleanup and fix bit rot in
> pgindent
> > script.
> >
> > There were a few problems with the script.
&
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 11:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh writes:
> > So, again, it is not guaranteed that all the scans on a relation will
> > synchronize with each other. Hence my proposal to include the term
> > 'probability' in the definition
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh writes:
> > If I'm reading the code right [1], this GUC does not actually
> *synchronize*
> > the scans, but instead just makes sure that a new scan starts from a
> block
> > that was reported by
] src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c
[2]
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/runtime-config-compatible.html#GUC-SYNCHRONIZE-SEQSCANS
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterpriseDB Inc.
Hopefully I am not wrong.
+/* Size of a varlena data, excluding header */
#define VARSIZE_ANY_EXHDR(PTR) \
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterprsieDB Inc.
exhdr_comment.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To
like a black-magic before the patch.
src/tools/pgindent/pgindent --build
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
EnterprsieDB Inc.
pgindent.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Euler Taveira wrote:
> On 09-02-2013 13:45, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > BTW, I hope I understand what selfcopy is: send a copy to yourself. Why
> would
> > that be turned on by default?
> >
> If you want to reply to yourself...
Wouldn&
haps you set it by mistake.
>
> You shold be able to set it from https://mail.postgresql.org. The
> setting you're looking for is "ackpost", and you'll want to turn it
> off.
>
> //Magnus
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>
2013 at 10:13 AM
Subject: Successful post to pgsql-hackers
To: Gurjeet Singh
Your message to the pgsql-hackers list, posted on
Sat, 9 Feb 2013 10:11:05 -0500
with subject
Re: pg_prewarm
is currently being delivered.
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
views. As
others have said, I don't see a reason why both can't coexist, maybe in
pgxn. I am all ears if you think otherwise.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
http://gurjeet.singh.im/
1 - 100 of 427 matches
Mail list logo
