On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Matthew Draper matt...@trebex.net wrote:
On 25/01/12 18:37, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
I'm still not sure whether to just revise (almost) all the SQL function
examples to use parameter names, and declare them the right choice; as
it's currently written, named
Thank you for comments, this is revised version of the patch.
The gain of performance is more than expected. Measure script now
does query via dblink ten times for stability of measuring, so
the figures become about ten times longer than the previous ones.
sec% to
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Igor Schtein ischt...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it possible to use a standby instance as a master/primary for another
standby in Postgres 9.0? In other words, does PG 9.0 supports cascading
standby configuration?
No, but 9.2 will support that feature, known as
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Also, what's the point of testing update_ctid? I don't see that
it matters whether the outdate was a delete or an update.
The update_ctid
Thanks Tom for giving a stronger case. I found the problem whille looking
at inherited tables, and didn't think beyond inherited tables. Since
inherited tables are expanded when subquery planner is invoked, I thought
the problem will occur only in Explain output as we won't generate queries,
that
I'm sorry.
Thank you for comments, this is revised version of the patch.
The malloc error handling in dblink.c of the patch is broken. It
is leaking memory and breaking control.
i'll re-send the properly fixed patch for dblink.c later.
# This severe back pain should have made me stupid :-p
I'm sorry.
Thank you for comments, this is revised version of the patch.
The malloc error handling in dblink.c of the patch is broken. It
is leaking memory and breaking control.
i'll re-send the properly fixed patch for dblink.c later.
# This severe back pain should have made me stupid :-p
Hi,
Is it possible to use a standby instance as a master/primary for another
standby in Postgres 9.0? In other words, does PG 9.0 supports cascading
standby configuration?
Thanks,
Igor
At 2012-01-27 09:47:05 +0530, a...@toroid.org wrote:
I've started reviewing this patch, but it'll take me a bit longer to go
through json.c properly.
OK, I finished reading json.c. I don't have an answer to the detoasting
question in the XXX comment, but the code looks fine.
Aside: is
On 27.01.2012 15:38, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Yeah, we have to be careful with any overhead in there, it can be a hot
spot. I wouldn't expect any measurable difference from the above, though.
Could I ask
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Pierre C li...@peufeu.com wrote:
Right. I think it makes more sense to try to get parallelism working
first with the infrastructure we have. Converting to use threading,
if we ever do it at all, should be something we view as a later
performance optimization.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Tareq Aljabban
tareq.aljab...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed, I'm a beginner in Make, but I read few tutorials and was able to
do what I wanted outside of PG using a simple make file.
Now, when moving to PG, I found the Make structure much more complicated and
didn't
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that even in normal (non-initialization) usage, this message
should be suppressed when the provided scale factor
is equal to the pgbench_branches table count.
The attached patch does just that. There is probably
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Dan Scales sca...@vmware.com wrote:
The advantage of putting the checksum calculation in smgrwrite() (or
mdwrite()) is that it catches a bunch of page writes that don't go through
the buffer pool (see calls to smgrwrite() in nbtree.c, nbtsort.c, spginsert.c)
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
I committed this. I ran pgbench test on an 8-core box and didn't see any
slowdown. It would still be good if you get a chance to rerun the bigger
test, but I feel confident that there's no measurable
On 30.01.2012 17:18, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
I committed this. I ran pgbench test on an 8-core box and didn't see any
slowdown. It would still be good if you get a chance to rerun the bigger
test, but I
On 01/30/2012 09:54 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
At 2012-01-27 09:47:05 +0530, a...@toroid.org wrote:
I've started reviewing this patch, but it'll take me a bit longer to go
through json.c properly.
OK, I finished reading json.c. I don't have an answer to the detoasting
question in the XXX
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that even in normal (non-initialization) usage, this message
should be suppressed when the provided scale factor
is equal to the
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:18 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@toroid.org wrote:
At 2012-01-12 12:31:20 +, si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The following patch adds a pgbench option -I to load data using
INSERTs
This is just to confirm that the patch applies and builds and works
fine (though of
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 01/28/2012 07:48 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
I haven't inspected that deep fall off at 30 clients for the patch.
By way of reference, if I turn off synchronous commit, I get
tps=1245.8 which is 100% CPU limited. This sets
Ashutosh Bapat ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com writes:
So, as I understand we have two problems here
1. Prefixing schemaname to the fake alises if there is another RTE with
same name. There may not be a relation with that name (fake alias name
given) in the schema chosen as prefix.
2. Fake
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Joachim Wieland j...@mcknight.de writes:
I know that you took back some of your comments, but I'm with you
here. Archive is allocated as an ArchiveHandle and then casted back to
Archive*, so you always know that an Archive is
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:18 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@toroid.org wrote:
At 2012-01-12 12:31:20 +, si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The following patch adds a pgbench option -I to load data using
INSERTs
This is just
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that even in normal (non-initialization) usage, this message
should
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:30:49AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
hubert depesz lubaczewski dep...@depesz.com writes:
anyway - the point is that in \df date_part(, timestamp) says it's
immutable, while it is not.
Hmm, you're right. I thought we'd fixed that way back when, but
obviously not. Or
On 1/29/12 8:36 PM, Igor Schtein wrote:
Hi,
Is it possible to use a standby instance as a master/primary for another
standby in Postgres 9.0? In other words, does PG 9.0 supports cascading
standby configuration?
No, that's a 9.2 feature in development.
If you can build PostgreSQL from
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:06:57PM +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
The gain of performance is more than expected. Measure script now
does query via dblink ten times for stability of measuring, so
the figures become about ten times longer than the previous ones.
sec
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
2012/1/28 Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp:
2012/1/26 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
2012/1/26 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
I'm wondering
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@iki.fi wrote:
Make group commit more effective.
When a backend needs to flush the WAL, and someone else is already flushing
the WAL, wait until it releases the WALInsertLock and check if we still need
to do the flush or if
Hello,
Yesterday I was facing a little issue with a backup software (NetBackup)
that do not report error when a post backup script is run. The problem
is that this script execute pg_stop_backup() and if there's any failure
PostgreSQL keeps running in on-line backup mode. So the backup is not
preferably I would see extract( epoch from timestamp ) to be really
immutable, i.e. (in my opinion) it should treat incoming data as UTC
- for epoch calculation.
Alternatively - perhaps epoch extraction should be moved to specialized
function, which would have swapped mutability:
We can't
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:35:21AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
preferably I would see extract( epoch from timestamp ) to be really
immutable, i.e. (in my opinion) it should treat incoming data as UTC
- for epoch calculation.
Alternatively - perhaps epoch extraction should be moved to
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
On 30.01.2012 17:18, Simon Riggs wrote:
I asked clearly and specifically for you to hold back committing
anything. Not sure why you would ignore that and commit without
actually asking myself or
On 30.01.2012 21:55, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
On 30.01.2012 17:18, Simon Riggs wrote:
Peter and I have been working on a new version that seems likely to
improve performance over your suggestions. We
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, I think the general approach is wrong. The only reason to have
these
On 30.01.2012 20:27, Robert Haas wrote:
Either this patch, or something else committed this morning, is
causing make check to hang or run extremely slowly for me. I think
it's this patch, because I attached to a backend and stopped it a few
times, and all the backtraces look like this:
Yeah,
On 30.01.2012 22:50, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 30.01.2012 20:27, Robert Haas wrote:
Either this patch, or something else committed this morning, is
causing make check to hang or run extremely slowly for me. I think
it's this patch, because I attached to a backend and stopped it a few
times,
On 30-01-2012 15:33, Gilles Darold wrote:
Yesterday I was facing a little issue with a backup software (NetBackup)
that do not report error when a post backup script is run. The problem
is that this script execute pg_stop_backup() and if there's any failure
PostgreSQL keeps running in on-line
On 30.01.2012 23:06, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 30.01.2012 22:50, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 30.01.2012 20:27, Robert Haas wrote:
Either this patch, or something else committed this morning, is
causing make check to hang or run extremely slowly for me. I think
it's this patch, because I
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
So, what's the approach you're working on?
I've had a few days leave at end of last week, so no time to fully
discuss the next steps with the patch. That's why you were requested
not to commit
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 03:47:16PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
The biggest item remaining is the point you raised about multixactid
wraparound. This is closely related to multixact truncation and the way
checkpoints are to be handled. If we think that MultiXactId wraparound
is possible, and
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
But the immediate problem is that pg_dump.c is heavily reliant on
global variables, which isn't going to fly if we want this code to use
threads on Windows (or anywhere else). It's also bad style. So I
suggest that we refactor pg_dump.c to get rid of
hubert depesz lubaczewski dep...@depesz.com writes:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:35:21AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
We can't have functions which are immutable or not depending on their
inputs. That way lies madness.
but this is exactly what's happening now.
Well, the current marking is
This is fixed version of dblink.c for row processor.
i'll re-send the properly fixed patch for dblink.c later.
- malloc error in initStoreInfo throws ERRCODE_OUT_OF_MEMORY. (new error)
- storeHandler() now returns FALSE on malloc failure. Garbage
cleanup is done in dblink_fetch() or
On 1/30/12 5:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
hubert depesz lubaczewski dep...@depesz.com writes:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:35:21AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
We can't have functions which are immutable or not depending on their
inputs. That way lies madness.
but this is exactly what's happening
I don't believe that the problem has anything to do with the names of
other tables that might happen to exist in the database. It's a matter
of what RTE names/aliases are exposed for variable references in
different parts of the query.
Names of other tables come into picture when we schema
[ Note: please follow-up to pgsql-hackers not pgsql-general; I think
this discussion needs to move there ]
hubert depesz lubaczewski dep...@depesz.com writes:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:30:51AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
That is way too vague for my taste, as you have not shown the pg_dump
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
On 1/30/12 5:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Well, the current marking is clearly incorrect. What to do about that
is a bit less clear --- should we downgrade the marking, or change the
function's behavior so that it really is immutable?
AFAIK, the only case
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
But the immediate problem is that pg_dump.c is heavily reliant on
global variables, which isn't going to fly if we want this code to use
threads on Windows (or anywhere else). It's also bad style.
Technically, since
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 4:59 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
horiguchi.kyot...@oss.ntt.co.jp wrote:
This is fixed version of dblink.c for row processor.
i'll re-send the properly fixed patch for dblink.c later.
- malloc error in initStoreInfo throws ERRCODE_OUT_OF_MEMORY. (new error)
- storeHandler()
On 31.01.2012 01:35, Simon Riggs wrote:
The plan here is to allow WAL flush and clog updates to occur
concurrently. Which allows the clog contention and update time to be
completely hidden behind the wait for the WAL flush. That is only
possible if we have the WALwriter involved since we need
51 matches
Mail list logo
