2014-02-16 18:37, Sergey Muraviov :
> New code doesn't work with empty strings but I've done minor optimization
> for this case.
It seems better now. I added some new lines and spaces, removed unnecessary
parentheses and marked it as "Ready for Committer".
fix_psql_print_aligned_vertical_v5.pat
Thank you for committing.
> On 02/14/2014 10:38 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> > Finally, the patch you will find attached is fixed only in
> > styling mentioned above from your last patch. This patch applies
> > current HEAD and I confirmed that it fixes this issue but I have
> > not checked the
(2014/02/16 7:38), Fabien COELHO wrote:
I have updated the patch (v7) based on Mitsumasa latest v6:
- some code simplifications & formula changes.
- I've added explicit looping probability computations in comments
to show the (low) looping probability of the iterative search.
- I
On 2014-02-16 20:27:09 -0800, David Fetter wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 03:14:03PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2014-01-31 18:16:18 +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
> > > On 01/25/2014 06:25 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> > > > Please find attached the next rev :)
> > >
> > > This version looks comm
On 14/02 14.57, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> We have had a case where a production cluster was accidentally shut
> down by a customer who used Ctrl+C in the same sh session in which
> they had (long before) run pg_ctl start. We have only seen this in
> sh on Solaris. Other shells on Solaris don't beha
Hi Robert,
Am 15.02.14 05:03, schrieb Robert Haas:
> Well, this version of the patch reveals a mighty interesting point: a
> lot of the people who are calling pgstat_fetch_stat_beentry() don't
> need this additional information and might prefer not to pay the cost
> of fetching it.
Well, the cost
Thanks.
2014-02-17 12:22 GMT+04:00 Emre Hasegeli :
> 2014-02-16 18:37, Sergey Muraviov :
>
> > New code doesn't work with empty strings but I've done minor optimization
> > for this case.
>
> It seems better now. I added some new lines and spaces, removed unnecessary
> parentheses and marked it
(2014/02/15 23:04), Andres Freund wrote:
Hi Simon,
On 2014-01-14 17:12:35 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
/*
- * MarkCurrentTransactionIdLoggedIfAny
+ * ReportTransactionInsertedWAL
*
- * Remember that the current xid - if it is assigned - now has been wal logged.
+ * Remember that the curre
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Hiroshi Inoue writes:
>>> One thing I'm wondering about is that plperl is linking perlxx.lib
>>> not libperlxx.a. I made a patch following plpython and it also
>>> works here.
>>> Is it worth trying?
>
>> I hadn't noticed that part of
From: "Tom Lane"
I just noticed this CF entry pertaining to the same problem that Stephen
Frost reported a couple days ago:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20140211205336.gu2...@tamriel.snowman.net
I believe it's been adequately fixed as of commits fa4440f516 and
b8f00a46bc, but if you'd t
On 02/16/2014 07:03 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-02-15 17:48:00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Marco Atzeri writes:
>>> 32 $ grep -rH in6addr_any *
>>> cygwin/in6.h:extern const struct in6_addr in6addr_any;
>>> cygwin/version.h: in6addr_any, in6addr_loopback.
>>
>> So how come there's
On 02/14/2014 10:57 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 12:33:33PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Further update on this issue:
>>
>> Microsoft has suggested a workaround for stat API. Their suggestion
>> is to use 'GetFileAttributesEx' instead of stat, when I tried their
>> suggestio
On 12 February 2014 12:16, KONDO Mitsumasa Wrote:
> Hi Rajeev,
>
> > (2014/01/29 17:31), Rajeev rastogi wrote:
> >> No Issue, you can share me the test cases, I will take the
> performance report.
> Attached patch is supported to latest pg_stat_statements. It includes
> min, max, and stdev stati
On 2014-02-17 14:40:07 +0200, Emre Hasegeli wrote:
> 2014-02-07 22:41, Robert Haas :
>
> > Generally, modifying already-release .sql files for extensions is a no-no...
>
> I prepared separate patches for btree_gist extension with more options.
> First one (btree-gist-drop-default-inet-v1.patch) r
Hi,
I just wanted to mention that it should probably not be too hard to
emulate the current windows behaviour in gcc/clang elf targets. Somebody
(won't be me) could add a --emulate-windows-linkage configure flag or
such.
By mapping PGDLLIMPORT to__attribute__((section(...))) it should be
relativel
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > On 2/15/14, 10:22 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Yes it does; people who fail to remove their manual externs will get
> >> Windows-only build failures (or at least warnings; it's not very clear
> >> which declaration will win).
>
> > The manual externs and
Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 02/16/2014 03:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Draft release notes for 9.3.3 are committed and can be read at
> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/release-9-3-3.html
> > Any comments before I start transposing them into the back branches?
>
> Major:
>
> Do we have an
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> I don't think this really has gone above Needs Review yet.
I am not sure that this remark makes the review of this patch much
progressing :(
By the way, I spent some time looking at it and here are some comments:
- Regression tests added are
Jeevan Chalke escribió:
> If yes, then in my latest attached patch, these lines are NOT AT ALL there.
> I have informed on my comment that I have fixed these in my version of
> patch,
> but still you got unstable build. NOT sure how. Seems like you are applying
> wrong patch.
>
> Will you please
Pavel Stehule escribió:
> 2014-02-09 4:16 GMT+01:00 Peter Eisentraut :
> > > a) Configure doesn't check a required IRC::Run module
> >
> > Clearly, we will need to figure out something about how to require this
> > module, and possibly others in the future, as we expand the tests.
> > Having confi
On 2014-02-17 23:07:45 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I don't think this really has gone above Needs Review yet.
> I am not sure that this remark makes the review of this patch much
> progressing :(
Uh. What should I then say if a patch i
Gavin Flower writes:
> On 17/02/14 15:26, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I don't really know about cpu_tuple_cost. Kevin's often advocated
>> raising it, but I haven't heard anyone else advocate for that. I
>> think we need data points from more people to know whether or not
>> that's a good idea in gene
Dave Page writes:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (BTW, narwhal is evidently not trying to build plpython. I wonder
>> why not?)
> Not sure - it's certainly installed on the box. I've enabled it for
> now, and will see what happens.
Sigh ... stop the presses.
In 9.3, nar
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page writes:
>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> (BTW, narwhal is evidently not trying to build plpython. I wonder
>>> why not?)
>
>> Not sure - it's certainly installed on the box. I've enabled it for
>> now, and will
On 2014-02-17 15:02:15 +, Dave Page wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Not sure - it's certainly installed on the box. I've enabled it for
> >> now, and will see what happens.
> >
> > Sigh ... stop the presses.
> >
> > In 9.3, narwhal is *still* showing a PGDLLIMPOR
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2014-02-17 15:02:15 +, Dave Page wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> In 9.3, narwhal is *still* showing a PGDLLIMPORT-type failure that no
>>> other Windows critter is unhappy about:
>> Well, as we know, Narwhal is really quite old now. I
Dear Dev-List,
inside execProcnode.c's ExecProcNode method we want to extract the value of
a tuple for a specific attribute. This works great for integers and
strings, but we are not able to figure out how to do this for floating
point numbers. Below is some example code snippet to show our proble
On 2014-02-17 10:21:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2014-02-17 15:02:15 +, Dave Page wrote:
> >> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> In 9.3, narwhal is *still* showing a PGDLLIMPORT-type failure that no
> >>> other Windows critter is unhappy about:
Hello Heikki san,
I'm excited about your great work, xlog scaling. I'm looking forward to the
release of 9.4.
Please let me ask you about your performance data on the page:
http://hlinnaka.iki.fi/xloginsert-scaling/padding/
I'm worried about the big increase in max latency. Do you know the
Masterprojekt Naumann1 escribió:
> Dear Dev-List,
>
> inside execProcnode.c's ExecProcNode method we want to extract the value of
> a tuple for a specific attribute. This works great for integers and
> strings, but we are not able to figure out how to do this for floating
> point numbers. Below is
Hi,
On 2014-02-18 00:43:54 +0900, MauMau wrote:
> Please let me ask you about your performance data on the page:
>
> http://hlinnaka.iki.fi/xloginsert-scaling/padding/
>
> I'm worried about the big increase in max latency. Do you know the cause?
> More frequent checkpoints caused by increased W
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2014-02-17 10:21:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Although on second thought, the lack of complaints from other Windows
>> animals can probably be blamed on the fact that we didn't back-port
>> any of the recent hacking on the Windows build processes. Maybe we
>> should thi
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 09:26:47PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > So, would anyone like me to create patches for any of these items before
> > we hit 9.4 beta? We have added autovacuum_work_mem, and increasing
> > work_mem and maintenance_work_mem by 4x is a simple operation. Not sure
> > about th
On 2014-02-16 21:26:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I don't think anyone objected to increasing the defaults for work_mem
> and maintenance_work_mem by 4x, and a number of people were in favor,
> so I think we should go ahead and do that. If you'd like to do the
> honors, by all means!
Actually, I
* Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 2014-02-16 21:26:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I don't think anyone objected to increasing the defaults for work_mem
> > and maintenance_work_mem by 4x, and a number of people were in favor,
> > so I think we should go ahead and do that. If y
On 2014-02-17 11:31:56 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> > On 2014-02-16 21:26:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > I don't think anyone objected to increasing the defaults for work_mem
> > > and maintenance_work_mem by 4x, and a number of people were in
From: "Andres Freund"
On 2014-02-18 00:43:54 +0900, MauMau wrote:
I'm worried about the big increase in max latency. Do you know the
cause?
More frequent checkpoints caused by increased WAL volume thanks to
enhanced
performance?
I don't see much evidence of increased latency there? You can
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Masterprojekt Naumann1 escribió:
>> inside execProcnode.c's ExecProcNode method we want to extract the value of
>> a tuple for a specific attribute. This works great for integers and
>> strings, but we are not able to figure out how to do this for floating
>> point numbers
On 2014-02-18 01:35:52 +0900, MauMau wrote:
> From: "Andres Freund"
> >On 2014-02-18 00:43:54 +0900, MauMau wrote:
> >>I'm worried about the big increase in max latency. Do you know the
> >>cause?
> >>More frequent checkpoints caused by increased WAL volume thanks to
> >>enhanced
> >>performance?
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:38:29AM +0100, Bjorn Munch wrote:
> On 14/02 14.57, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > We have had a case where a production cluster was accidentally shut
> > down by a customer who used Ctrl+C in the same sh session in which
> > they had (long before) run pg_ctl start. We have o
Hi,
On 2014-02-18 02:01:58 +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
> I found strange behavior of PostgreSQL of HEAD while using pg_basebackup.
> pg_basebackup skips pg_replslot directory since
> 858ec11858a914d4c380971985709b6d6b7dd6fc commit.
>
> But pg_repslot direcotry is needed to start replication. So
Hi all,
I found strange behavior of PostgreSQL of HEAD while using pg_basebackup.
pg_basebackup skips pg_replslot directory since
858ec11858a914d4c380971985709b6d6b7dd6fc commit.
But pg_repslot direcotry is needed to start replication. So the
standby server which is created by
pg_baseback can not
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:38:29AM +0100, Bjorn Munch wrote:
> On 14/02 14.57, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > We have had a case where a production cluster was accidentally shut
> > down by a customer who used Ctrl+C in the same sh session in which
> > they had (long before) run pg_ctl start. We have o
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:07 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2014-02-18 02:01:58 +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
>> I found strange behavior of PostgreSQL of HEAD while using pg_basebackup.
>> pg_basebackup skips pg_replslot directory since
>> 858ec11858a914d4c380971985709b6d6b7dd6fc commit.
>
Josh Berkus writes:
> On 02/16/2014 03:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Draft release notes for 9.3.3 are committed and can be read at
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/release-9-3-3.html
>> Any comments before I start transposing them into the back branches?
> Major:
> Do we have an expla
On 2014-02-18 02:16:19 +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:07 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2014-02-18 02:01:58 +0900, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
> >> I found strange behavior of PostgreSQL of HEAD while using pg_basebackup.
> >> pg_basebackup skips pg_replslot dire
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-02-16 21:26:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I don't think anyone objected to increasing the defaults for work_mem
>> and maintenance_work_mem by 4x, and a number of people were in favor,
>> so I think we should go ahead and do that.
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:38:29AM +0100, Bjorn Munch wrote:
>> What Solaris version, and what version of sh? sh on Solaris isn't
>> necessarily the "real" bourne shell. In Solaris 11 it's actually
>> ksh93.
> This was Solaris 9.
Isn't that out of support by Oracle?
On 2014-02-17 12:23:58 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Andres Freund
> wrote:
> > On 2014-02-16 21:26:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> I don't think anyone objected to increasing the defaults for work_mem
> >> and maintenance_work_mem by 4x, and a number of people w
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2014-02-17 12:23:58 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I think you may be out-voted.
> I realize that, but I didn't want to let the "I don't think anyone
> objected" stand :)
FWIW, I think we need to be pretty gradual about this sort of thing,
because push-back from the fiel
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:25:33PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:38:29AM +0100, Bjorn Munch wrote:
> >> What Solaris version, and what version of sh? sh on Solaris isn't
> >> necessarily the "real" bourne shell. In Solaris 11 it's actually
> >> ksh9
Jeevan Chalke escribió:
I don't understand this code. (Well, it's pg_dump.) Or maybe I do
understand it, and it's not doing what you think it's doing. I mean, in
this part:
> diff --git a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_backup_archiver.c
> b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_backup_archiver.c
> index 7fc0288..c08a0d3 10
MauMau escribió:
> pg_ctl timed out waiting for the zombie postgres.
>
> maumau 19621 18849 0 15:21 pts/900:00:00 [postgres]
> maumau 20253 18849 0 15:22 pts/900:00:00
> /maumau/postgresql-9.4/src/test/regress/./tmp_check/install//maumau/pgsql/bin/pg_ctl
> stop -D /maumau/postgresql-9
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> FYI, this email post has a header line that causes all replies to go
> _only_ to the group email address:
>
> Mail-Followup-To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
>
> I assume it is something related to the Oracle mail server or something
> configured by the email author.
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-02-17 11:31:56 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> * Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
>> > On 2014-02-16 21:26:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > > I don't think anyone objected to increasing the defaults for work_mem
>> > > a
On 2014-02-17 13:33:17 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Andres Freund
> wrote:
> >> And I still disagree with this- even in those cases. Those same untuned
> >> servers are running dirt-simple queries 90% of the time and they won't
> >> use any more memory from this,
Hi There,
Tried to upgrade from 8.2.21 to 8.4.19 this morning and ran into a
wall: It would appear the
hostssl all all 0.0.0.0/0 ldap "ldaps://..."
syntax is no longer supported?
Searched. Asked on the IRC channel. It would seem that in 8.4.x
there's no way to perform a "straight SSL"
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-02-15 16:18:00 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2014-02-15 10:06:41 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > Andres Freund writes:
>> > > My current conclusion is that backporting barriers.h is by far the most
>> > > reasonable way to go. The c
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 07:39:47PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-02-17 13:33:17 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Andres Freund
> > wrote:
> > >> And I still disagree with this- even in those cases. Those same untuned
> > >> servers are running dirt-simple q
On 2014-02-17 13:49:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Andres Freund
> wrote:
> > On 2014-02-15 16:18:00 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> On 2014-02-15 10:06:41 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> > Andres Freund writes:
> >> > > My current conclusion is that backporting ba
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Vik Fearing wrote:
> While reading through src/backend/storage/buffer/README and looking at
> the code that it describes, I noticed that the case is wrong for
> nextVictimBuffer.
>
> It's no big deal really, but the attached trivial patch makes the README
> match
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-02-17 13:49:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Andres Freund
>> wrote:
>> > On 2014-02-15 16:18:00 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
>> >> On 2014-02-15 10:06:41 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> >> > Andres Freund
On 2014-02-17 14:06:43 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2014-02-17 13:49:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > It's just a write barrier which evaluates to a pure compiler barrier on
> > x86 anyway?
> > And it's in a loop that's only entered when
Jim Seymour writes:
> Tried to upgrade from 8.2.21 to 8.4.19 this morning and ran into a
> wall: It would appear the
> hostssl all all 0.0.0.0/0 ldap "ldaps://..."
> syntax is no longer supported?
The 8.4 release notes say that there were incompatible changes in the
format of pg_hba.conf e
On 18/02/14 03:48, Tom Lane wrote:
Gavin Flower writes:
On 17/02/14 15:26, Robert Haas wrote:
I don't really know about cpu_tuple_cost. Kevin's often advocated
raising it, but I haven't heard anyone else advocate for that. I
think we need data points from more people to know whether or not
t
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 14:18:40 -0500
Tom Lane wrote:
> Jim Seymour writes:
> > Tried to upgrade from 8.2.21 to 8.4.19 this morning and ran into a
> > wall: It would appear the
> > hostssl all all 0.0.0.0/0 ldap "ldaps://..."
> > syntax is no longer supported?
>
> The 8.4 release notes say
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> Actually, I object to increasing work_mem by default. In my experience
>> most of the untuned servers are backing some kind of web application and
>> often run with far too many connections. Increasing work_mem for those
>> is dangerous.
>
>
Emre Hasegeli writes:
> 2014-02-17 14:54, Andres Freund :
>> You need to add a file for going from 1.0 to 1.1.
> Thank you for the notice. I added them to the patches which touch only two
> of the operator classes. It drops and re-creates operator classes as there
> is not ALTER OPERATOR CLASS DR
On 02/10/2014 08:33 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 02/10/2014 08:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
On 02/10/2014 06:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Well, it's not actually using any lwlock.c code, it's a special case
locking logic, just reusing the datastructures. That said, I a
On 2014-02-17 22:30:54 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> This is what I came up with. I like it, I didn't have to contort lwlocks as
> much as I feared. I added one field to LWLock structure, which is used to
> store the position of how far a WAL inserter has progressed. The LWLock code
> calls it
2014-02-17 22:16, Tom Lane :
> More generally, it doesn't look to me like these upgrade scripts are
> complete; shouldn't they be creating some new objects, not just replacing
> old ones?
The actual patches are on the previous mail [1]. I was just trying
to solve the problem that btree_gist canno
Emre Hasegeli writes:
> How about only removing the inet and the cidr operator classes
> from btree_gist. btree-gist-drop-inet-v2.patch does that.
I'm not sure which part of "no" you didn't understand, but to be
clear: you don't get to break existing installations.
Assuming that this opclass is
Hello
2014-02-17 18:10 GMT+01:00 Alvaro Herrera :
> Jeevan Chalke escribió:
>
> I don't understand this code. (Well, it's pg_dump.) Or maybe I do
> understand it, and it's not doing what you think it's doing. I mean, in
> this part:
>
> > diff --git a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_backup_archiver.c
> b/
Pavel Stehule escribió:
> 2014-02-17 18:10 GMT+01:00 Alvaro Herrera :
> > Maybe I am mistaken and the te->dropStmt already contains the IF EXISTS
> > bit for some reason; but if so I don't know why that is. Care to
> > explain?
>
> pg_restore is available to read plain dump produced by pg_dump
On 17/02 12.25, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:38:29AM +0100, Bjorn Munch wrote:
> >> What Solaris version, and what version of sh? sh on Solaris isn't
> >> necessarily the "real" bourne shell. In Solaris 11 it's actually
> >> ksh93.
>
> > This was Solaris
On 17/02 14.54, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > FYI, this email post has a header line that causes all replies to go
> > _only_ to the group email address:
> >
> > Mail-Followup-To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> >
> > I assume it is something related to the Oracle mail se
On 2014-02-17 23:07:45 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I don't think this really has gone above Needs Review yet.
> I am not sure that this remark makes the review of this patch much
> progressing :(
>
> By the way, I spent some time looki
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 7:22 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-02-17 23:07:45 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Andres Freund
>> wrote:
>> > I don't think this really has gone above Needs Review yet.
>> I am not sure that this remark makes the review of this patc
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 3:55 AM, MauMau wrote:
> FYI, the following stack traces are the ones obtained during two instances
> of hang.
You mentioned a hang during a B-Tree insert operation - do you happen
to have a backtrace that relates to that?
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> The current bgwriter_lru_maxpages value limits the background writer
> to a maximum of 4MB/s. If one imagines shared_buffers = 8GB, that
> starts to seem rather low, but I don't have a good feeling for what a
> better value would be.
>
I
Bruce Momjian writes:
> It certainly might be --- I have no idea. What surprised me is that we
> are relying solely on system() to block signals to pg_ctl-spawned
> servers. The question is whether that is sufficient and whether we
> should be doing more. I don't think we have to make adjustmen
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 4:55 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> [ patches ]
Having now had a little bit of opportunity to reflect on the State Of
This Patch, I'd like to step back from the minutia upon which I've
been commenting in my previous emails and articulate three high-level
concerns about this pa
Robert Haas writes:
> Having now had a little bit of opportunity to reflect on the State Of
> This Patch, I'd like to step back from the minutia upon which I've
> been commenting in my previous emails and articulate three high-level
> concerns about this patch. In so doing, I would like to specif
Hi,
Should "background writer" in the following comment be "checkpointer" post-9.2?
src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
/*
* Statistics for current checkpoint are collected in this global struct.
* Because only the background writer or a stand-alone backend can perform
* checkpoints, this will
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 9:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> 3. As this feature is proposed, the only plugin we'll ship with 9.4 is
>> a test_decoding plugin which, as its own documentation says, "doesn't
>> do anything especially useful." What exactly do we gain by forcing
>> users who want to make use o
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> What I actually suspect is going to happen if we ship this as-is is
> that people are going to start building logical replication solutions
> on top of the test_decoding module even though it explicitly says that
> it's just test code. This is
Why does create_foreignscan_path() not set the rowcounts based on
ParamPathInfo when the path is a parameterized path? Please find
attached a patch.
Thanks,
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
*** a/src/backend/optimizer/util/pathnode.c
--- b/src/backend/optimizer/util/pathnode.c
***
*** 172
Etsuro Fujita writes:
> Why does create_foreignscan_path() not set the rowcounts based on
> ParamPathInfo when the path is a parameterized path?
The calling FDW is supposed to do that; note the header comment.
I'm not sure that it'd be an improvement to change the API spec
to be "create_foreignsc
(2014/02/18 12:03), Tom Lane wrote:
> Etsuro Fujita writes:
>> Why does create_foreignscan_path() not set the rowcounts based on
>> ParamPathInfo when the path is a parameterized path?
> The calling FDW is supposed to do that; note the header comment.
Understood. However, ISTM postgresGetForeig
Etsuro Fujita writes:
> (2014/02/18 12:03), Tom Lane wrote:
>> The calling FDW is supposed to do that; note the header comment.
> Understood. However, ISTM postgresGetForeignPaths() doesn't work like
> that. It uses the same rowcount for all paths of a same parameterization?
That's what we wan
Description for contents of PGDATA is mentioned at
following page in docs:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/storage-file-layout.html
Isn't it better to have description of pg_replslot in the same
place?
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Description for contents of PGDATA is mentioned at
> following page in docs:
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/storage-file-layout.html
>
> Isn't it better to have description of pg_replslot in the same
> place?
Definitely. +1.
--
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:29 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> MauMau escribió:
> The pg_regress part is ugly. However, pg_regress is doing something
> unusual when starting postmaster itself, so the ugly coding to stop it
> seems to match. If we wanted to avoid the ugliness here, the right fix
> woul
Hi Fujita-san,
Thanks for the reviewing.
2014-02-10 21:00 GMT+09:00 Etsuro Fujita :
> (2014/02/07 21:31), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> So, I've modified the patch so
>> that we continue to disallow SET STORAGE on a foreign table *in the same
>> manner as before*, but, as your patch does, allow it on a
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Jeevan Chalke escribió:
>
> > If yes, then in my latest attached patch, these lines are NOT AT ALL
> there.
> > I have informed on my comment that I have fixed these in my version of
> > patch,
> > but still you got unstable build. NOT sure
On 02/18/2014 04:30 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
Hi,
Should "background writer" in the following comment be "checkpointer" post-9.2?
src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
/*
* Statistics for current checkpoint are collected in this global struct.
* Because only the background writer or a stand-alon
96 matches
Mail list logo
