Justin Clift wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Should I add a TODO to warn if FSM values are too small? Is that doable?
It sounds like it should be, and it would be a valuable pointer to
people, so yep.
Any idea who'd be interested in claiming it?
Turns out it was already on the TODO list:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Should I add a TODO to warn if FSM values are too small? Is that doable?
It sounds like it should be, and it would be a valuable pointer to
people, so yep.
Any idea who'd be interested in claiming it?
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
---(end of
Should I add a TODO to warn if FSM values are too small? Is that doable?
---
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Moved to -hackers where this belongs :)
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Justin Clift wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
snip
Yup.
On 11/4/2004 5:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Moved to -hackers where this belongs :)
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Justin Clift wrote:
Would making max_fsm_relations and max_fsm_pages dynamically update
themselves whilst PostgreSQL runs be useful?
Possibly, but it isn't
Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 11/4/2004 5:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
autovacuum would probably be a reasonable place to put it. We don't
currently have any good way for autovacuum to get at the information,
but I suppose that an integrated autovacuum daemon could do so.
Don't know why
Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Moved to -hackers where this belongs :)
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Justin Clift wrote:
Would making max_fsm_relations and max_fsm_pages dynamically update
themselves whilst PostgreSQL runs be useful?
Possibly, but it isn't happening in
Gaetano Mendola wrote:
Right but we can create a new segment and use it too. I don't know how
these segments are used but I used to do it in the past, of course you have
to create a memory manager that handle not ccntinuous segments.
The TelegraphCQ folks have already done this:
Neil Conway wrote:
Gaetano Mendola wrote:
Right but we can create a new segment and use it too. I don't know how
these segments are used but I used to do it in the past, of course you
have
to create a memory manager that handle not ccntinuous segments.
The TelegraphCQ folks have already
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Treat wrote:
| On Friday 05 November 2004 07:48, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
|
|Neil Conway wrote:
| Gaetano Mendola wrote:
| Right but we can create a new segment and use it too. I don't know how
| these segments are used but I used to do it in
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Moved to -hackers where this belongs :)
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Justin Clift wrote:
Would making max_fsm_relations and max_fsm_pages dynamically update
themselves whilst PostgreSQL runs be useful?
Possibly, but it isn't happening in the foreseeable
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Moved to -hackers where this belongs :)
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Justin Clift wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
snip
Yup. 2 23072, so you're losing some proportion of FSM entries.
What's worse, the FSM relation table is maxed out (1000 = 1000) which
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
I'm not sure if I like this one too much ... but it would be nice if
something like this triggered a warning in the logs, maybe a feature of
pg_autovacuum itself?
autovacuum would probably be a reasonable place to put it. We don't
currently have any good way
Moved to -hackers where this belongs :)
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Justin Clift wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
snip
Yup. 2 23072, so you're losing some proportion of FSM entries.
What's worse, the FSM relation table is maxed out (1000 = 1000) which
suggests that there are relations not being tracked at all;
13 matches
Mail list logo
