On 09/30/2014 09:10 PM, Gregory Smith wrote:
On 9/29/14, 2:30 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Can we explain those reasons in the form of documentation?
Yes. Try and benchmark it. It'll be hardware and workload dependant.
I missed this whole thing, and eventually I have to circle back to it.
I
On 09/30/2014 04:56 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
There seems to be no decisive consensus here. I'm going to put my foot
on the ground and go remove it, as I'm leaning towards that option, and
we need to get the release out. But if someone objects loudly enough to
actually write the
On 9/29/14, 2:30 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Can we explain those reasons in the form of documentation?
Yes. Try and benchmark it. It'll be hardware and workload dependant.
I missed this whole thing, and eventually I have to circle back to it.
I could do it this week. Could you (or someone
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
So, can we get Beta3 out now?
If nobody else steps up and says they want to do some performance
testing, I'll push the latest lengths+offsets patch tomorrow.
Are any of the other open
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-09-29 11:50:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
The items I see are:
- Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!!
The text seems to indicate that there's some disagreement on this
point. I don't
On 2014-09-29 11:50:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
The items I see are:
- Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!!
The text seems to indicate that there's some disagreement on this
point. I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not to keep the
GUC, but if we're going to
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-09-29 11:50:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
- pg_dump fails with --if-exists and blobs
This looks like a 9.4 regression.
Alvaro, IIRC you were looking at this one?
I am.
--
Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development,
Dne 29.9.2014 18:00 Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net napsal(a):
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 2014-09-29 11:50:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
The items I see are:
- Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!!
The text
On 2014-09-29 11:28:07 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 09/29/2014 08:53 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
- Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!!
The text seems to indicate that there's some disagreement on this
point. I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not to keep
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
The items I see are:
- Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!!
The text seems to indicate that there's some disagreement on this
point. I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not to keep the
GUC, but if we're going to remove
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2014-09-29 14:44:42 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Personally I think a hardwired #define should be plenty. What's the
argument that users will need to tune this at runtime?
That right now it can make quite noticeable differences in
scalability. And
On 2014-09-29 16:35:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2014-09-29 16:16:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I wonder why it's a fixed constant at all, and not something like
wal_buffers / 8.
Because that'd be horrible performancewise on a system with many
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
The items I see are:
- Remove xloginsert_slots/xloginsert_locks GUC - Not yet!!
The text seems to indicate that there's some disagreement on this
point. I don't have a strong
13 matches
Mail list logo
