Re: [HACKERS] What does it mean by XLOG_BACKUP_RECORD?

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> While reading source codes I found the following comment in xlog.c. >> >> /* >> * Have we passed our safe starting point?

Re: [HACKERS] What does it mean by XLOG_BACKUP_RECORD?

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > While reading source codes I found the following comment in xlog.c. > > /* > * Have we passed our safe starting point? Note that minRecoveryPoint is > * known to be incorrectly set if

[HACKERS] What does it mean by XLOG_BACKUP_RECORD?

Hi, While reading source codes I found the following comment in xlog.c. /* * Have we passed our safe starting point? Note that minRecoveryPoint is * known to be incorrectly set if ControlFile->backupEndRequired, until * the XLOG_BACKUP_RECORD arrives to advise us of the correct *

Re: [HACKERS] what does this mean: running xacts with xcnt == 0

On 11/12/14 10:59 AM, Andres Freund wrote: No, I really don't want to do that. When trying to see whether logical replication started that's imo quite an importantdetail. Especially when first seing ereport(LOG, (errmsg(logical decoding found initial

Re: [HACKERS] what does this mean: running xacts with xcnt == 0

On 11/12/14 1:04 PM, Robert Haas wrote: I suggest: 1. Logical decoding will begin using saved snapshot. 2. Transaction ID %u finished; no more running transactions. 3. There are no running transactions. I went with that. Thank you. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] what does this mean: running xacts with xcnt == 0

On 2014-11-13 21:03:57 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 11/12/14 1:04 PM, Robert Haas wrote: I suggest: 1. Logical decoding will begin using saved snapshot. 2. Transaction ID %u finished; no more running transactions. 3. There are no running transactions. I went with that. Thank

[HACKERS] what does this mean: running xacts with xcnt == 0

Could someone translate this detail message to English: ereport(LOG, (errmsg(logical decoding found consistent point at %X/%X, (uint32) (lsn 32), (uint32) lsn), errdetail(running xacts with xcnt == 0))); (or downgrade to debug

Re: [HACKERS] what does this mean: running xacts with xcnt == 0

Hi, On 2014-11-12 09:03:40 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Could someone translate this detail message to English: ereport(LOG, (errmsg(logical decoding found consistent point at %X/%X, (uint32) (lsn 32), (uint32) lsn),

Re: [HACKERS] what does this mean: running xacts with xcnt == 0

Andres Freund wrote: Hi, On 2014-11-12 09:03:40 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Could someone translate this detail message to English: ereport(LOG, (errmsg(logical decoding found consistent point at %X/%X, (uint32) (lsn 32), (uint32)

Re: [HACKERS] what does this mean: running xacts with xcnt == 0

On 2014-11-12 11:56:01 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andres Freund wrote: Hi, On 2014-11-12 09:03:40 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Could someone translate this detail message to English: ereport(LOG, (errmsg(logical decoding found consistent point at

Re: [HACKERS] what does this mean: running xacts with xcnt == 0

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2014-11-12 11:56:01 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andres Freund wrote: Hi, On 2014-11-12 09:03:40 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Could someone translate this detail message to English:

Re: [HACKERS] what does this mean: running xacts with xcnt == 0

On 2014-11-12 12:40:41 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2014-11-12 11:56:01 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andres Freund wrote: Hi, On 2014-11-12 09:03:40 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Could someone

Re: [HACKERS] what does this mean: running xacts with xcnt == 0

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: So maybe 'Encountered xl_running_xacts record with xcnt = 0.'? That's not very user-facing, is it -- I mean, why bother the user with the names of structs and members thereof? It seems better to describe what

[HACKERS] what does it mean

Hi, I've upgraded my production system to 741 yesterday, and just discovered this log message: statistic buffer is full. What does it mean? filing up too fast, no more stats, need to grow? What should I do? Also, Many thanks for this great versionn of PostgreSQL, keep going... Revgards --

Re: [HACKERS] what does it mean

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've upgraded my production system to 741 yesterday, and just discovered this log message: statistic buffer is full. If you see this a lot, it might be worth increasing PGSTAT_RECVBUFFERSZ. regards, tom lane ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] what does it mean

] what does it mean [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've upgraded my production system to 741 yesterday, and just discovered this log message: statistic buffer is full. If you see this a lot, it might be worth increasing PGSTAT_RECVBUFFERSZ. regards, tom lane -- Olivier

Re: [HACKERS] what does it mean

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've upgraded my production system to 741 yesterday, and just discovered this log message: statistic buffer is full. If you see this a lot, it might be worth increasing PGSTAT_RECVBUFFERSZ. How much is a lot? it occured ~30 times since 23pm (it's 17:48 pm now) Hm.

Re: [HACKERS] what does it mean

--On Monday, January 26, 2004 12:11:19 -0500 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've upgraded my production system to 741 yesterday, and just discovered this log message: statistic buffer is full. If you see this a lot, it might be worth increasing PGSTAT_RECVBUFFERSZ.

Re: [HACKERS] what does it mean

On Mon, 26 Jan 2004, Tom Lane wrote: Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 12:11:19 -0500 From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: pgsql-hackers list [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [HACKERS] what does it mean [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've upgraded