Gavin == Gavin Flower gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz writes:
Gavin What are the standard deviations?
Gavin Do the arithmetic means change much if you exclude the 2 fastest
Gavin 2 slowest?
Gavin How do the arithmetic means compare to their respective medians?
Gavin Essentially, how
2015-02-22 3:00 GMT+01:00 Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com:
On 28/01/15 08:15, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-01-28 0:01 GMT+01:00 Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com
mailto:jim.na...@bluetreble.com:
On 1/27/15 4:36 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
It is only partially identical - I
On 2015-02-22 01:27:54 +0100, Emil Lenngren wrote:
I honestly wonder why postgres uses renegotiation at all. The motivation
that cryptoanalysis is easier as more data is sent seems quite
far-fetched.
I don't think so. There's a fair number of algorithms that can/could be
much easier be
On 22/02/15 09:57, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-02-19 00:49:50 +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 16/02/15 10:46, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-02-16 11:34:10 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
At a quick glance, this basic design seems workable. I would suggest
expanding the replication IDs to
I am wondering a bit about interaction with wal_keep_segments.
One thing is that wal_keep_segments is still specified in number of
segments and not size units, maybe it would be worth to change it also?
And the other thing is that, if set, the wal_keep_segments is the real
max_wal_size from
Pavel == Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
Pavel why we read all columns from t1?
[...]
Pavel so it looks so hashagg doesn't eliminate source columns well
I don't think it's supposed to eliminate them.
This is, if I'm understanding the planner logic right, physical-tlist
On 2015-02-22 10:33:16 +, Andrew Gierth wrote:
This is, if I'm understanding the planner logic right, physical-tlist
optimization; it's faster for a table scan to simply return the whole
row (copying nothing, just pointing to the on-disk tuple) and let
hashagg pick out the columns it
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 6:51 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 2/20/15 1:56 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
We'd still need the .gitignore files somewhere. Do you want to move
them one directory up?
I am not sure I am getting what you are pointing to... For extensions
that already
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
I've wondered before if we shouldn't use the caching via
slot-tts_values so freely - if you only use a couple values from a wide
tuple the current implementation really sucks if those few aren't at the
beginning of the tuple.
Don't see how you
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com wrote:
What this discussion has made me reconsider is the metric for
considering a transaction too old. The number of transaction IDs
consumed seems inferior as the unit of measure for that to LSN or
time.
It looks to me to
On 2/15/15 7:24 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-02-16 01:21:55 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
Here's my next attept attempt at producing something we can agree
upon.
The major change that might achieve that is that I've now provided a
separate method to store the origin_id of a node. I've made
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems to me that SQL Server also uses similar mechanism to
avoid the bloat in version store (place to store previous
versions or record).
I think if other leading databases provide a way to control the
bloat, it indicates that most of the
On 22.2.2015 09:14, Jeff Davis wrote:
On Wed, 2015-01-07 at 20:07 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
So I started digging in the code and I noticed this:
hash_mem = MemoryContextMemAllocated(aggstate-hashcontext, true);
which is IMHO obviously wrong, because that accounts only for the
On 2015-02-22 09:58:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
I've wondered before if we shouldn't use the caching via
slot-tts_values so freely - if you only use a couple values from a wide
tuple the current implementation really sucks if those few aren't at
On 2015-02-22 10:03:59 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 2/15/15 7:24 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-02-16 01:21:55 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
Here's my next attept attempt at producing something we can agree
upon.
The major change that might achieve that is that I've now provided a
2015-02-22 13:22 GMT+01:00 Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com:
On 2015-02-22 10:33:16 +, Andrew Gierth wrote:
This is, if I'm understanding the planner logic right, physical-tlist
optimization; it's faster for a table scan to simply return the whole
row (copying nothing, just
I wrote:
Attached is a draft patch to bring the precedence of comparison operators
and IS tests into line with the SQL standard. I have not yet looked into
producing warnings for changes in parsing decisions ...
I've made some progress on getting parse_expr.c to produce warnings by
On 22/02/15 22:59, Andrew Gierth wrote:
Gavin == Gavin Flower gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz writes:
Gavin What are the standard deviations?
Gavin Do the arithmetic means change much if you exclude the 2 fastest
Gavin 2 slowest?
Gavin How do the arithmetic means compare to their
On 2015-02-21 17:30:24 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
/*
+ * deparse_CreateFunctionStmt
+ * Deparse a CreateFunctionStmt (CREATE FUNCTION)
+ *
+ * Given a function OID and the parsetree that created it, return the JSON
+ * blob representing the creation command.
+ *
+ * XXX
On 22.2.2015 10:59, Andrew Gierth wrote:
Gavin == Gavin Flower gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz writes:
Gavin Essentially, how consistent are the results, or how great is the
Gavin noise? There may be better indicators than the ones I've
Gavin suggested above.
This is all rather missing
On 2/22/15 5:41 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
You could argue that these .gitignore files don't actually belong there,
but your patch doesn't change or move those files, and even modules that
have non-empty sql/ or expected/ directories have .gitignore files
there, so it is considered the
On 2015-02-22 04:59:30 +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote:
Now that the issue with padding seems to no longer exists since the patch
works both with and without padding, I went through the code and here are
some comments I have (in no particular order).
In CheckPointReplicationIdentifier:
+ * FIXME:
Hi
I did some benchmarks and I found some strange numbers.
do $$
begin
drop table if exists t1;
execute 'create table t1(' ||
array_to_string(array(select 'a' || i || ' smallint' from
generate_series(1,30) g(i)), ',') || ')';
-- special column a2, a11
insert into t1
select 2008,
On 2015-02-19 00:49:50 +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 16/02/15 10:46, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-02-16 11:34:10 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
At a quick glance, this basic design seems workable. I would suggest
expanding the replication IDs to regular 4 byte oids. Two extra bytes is a
On Wed, 2015-01-07 at 20:07 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
So I started digging in the code and I noticed this:
hash_mem = MemoryContextMemAllocated(aggstate-hashcontext, true);
which is IMHO obviously wrong, because that accounts only for the
hashtable itself. It might be correct for
2015-02-22 9:28 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com:
Hi
I did some benchmarks and I found some strange numbers.
do $$
begin
drop table if exists t1;
execute 'create table t1(' ||
array_to_string(array(select 'a' || i || ' smallint' from
generate_series(1,30) g(i)),
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
You should try it with the data fully sorted like this, but with one
tiny difference: The very last tuple is out of order. How does that
look?
Another thing that may be of particular interest to you as a Czech
person is
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
also think that it's a waste of screen space to show who within the
annotation view. Granted, the old app supported this, but I tend to
think that if I actually cared who added a
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
In short, this fixes all the cases except for the ASC sorted data. I
haven't done any code review, but I think we want this.
I'll use data from the i5-2500k, but it applies to the Xeon too, except
that the Xeon
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 7:59 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 2/14/15 7:30 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
Can we make it smarter, so that the kinds of things people produce
intending for them to be patches
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
I think the old system where the patch submitter declared, this message
contains my patch, is the only one that will work.
I tend to agree. That
On 23.2.2015 00:16, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
You should try it with the data fully sorted like this, but with one
tiny difference: The very last tuple is out of order. How does that
look?
I'm running that test now, I'll
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 4:43 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com
wrote:
On 02/04/2015 11:41 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 02/04/2015 12:06 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Let me push max_wal_size and min_wal_size again as
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 2/22/15 5:41 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
You could argue that these .gitignore files don't actually belong there,
but your patch doesn't change or move those files, and even modules that
have non-empty sql/ or
On 02/13/2015 06:27 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Two different CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS critters recently reported exactly
the same failure pattern on HEAD:
http://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=markhordt=2015-02-06%2011%3A59%3A59
Changes in this patch:
- added polymorphic versions of dblink_fetch()
- upped dblink version # to 1.2 because of new functions
- migration 1.1 - 1.2
- DocBook changes for dblink(), dblink_get_result(), dblink_fetch()
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:38 PM, Corey Huinker corey.huin...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
After some more hacking, the only remaining uses of foo[1] in struct
declarations are:
1. A couple of places where the array is actually the only struct member;
for some unexplainable reason gcc won't let you use flexible
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 03:48:33PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Marco Nenciarini
marco.nenciar...@2ndquadrant.it wrote:
I've attached a new version of the patch fixing the missing closedir on
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 03:48:33PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
If readir() fails and closedir() succeeds, the return will be -1 but
errno will be 0.
Out of curiosity, have you seen a
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 4:40 AM, happy times guangzhouzh...@qq.com wrote:
The first choice Tom pointed makes sense to me: adding this as eqivalent to
setting all subsequent transactions as read only. It is useful enough in the
scenarios where disk limit for the instance is reached, we want to
Yes, that was it, I discovered it myself and should have posted a
nevermind.
Now I'm slogging through figuring out where to find elog() messages from
the temporary server. It's slow, but it's progress.
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:39 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon,
Attached is an improved patch that includes optional warnings for
constructs that changed parsing. It's not quite 100% but I think it's
about 90% correct; the difference in size between this and the previous
patch should be a pretty fair indication of what it's going to cost us
to have a warning
Hi!
On 28.1.2015 05:03, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
At 2015-01-27 17:00:27 -0600, jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
It would be best to get this into a commit fest so it's not lost.
It's there already.
-- Abhijit
I looked at this patch today, so a few comments from me:
1) I believe the
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I am wondering a bit about interaction with wal_keep_segments.
One thing is that wal_keep_segments is still specified in number of segments
and not size units, maybe it would be worth to change it also?
And the other
I seem to be getting tripped up in the regression test. This line was found
in regression.diff
+ ERROR: could not stat file
/home/ubuntu/src/postgres/contrib/dblink/tmp_check/install/usr/local/pgsql/share/extension/dblink--1.2.sql:
No such file or directory
The file dblink--1.2.sql does exist
nevermind. Found it.
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Corey Huinker corey.huin...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yes, that was it, I discovered it myself and should have posted a
nevermind.
Now I'm slogging through figuring out where to find elog() messages from
the temporary server. It's slow, but it's
On 02/22/2015 11:48 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
(2) Use a course enough granularity on time and a short enough
maximum for the GUC to just keep a circular buffer of the mappings
in memory. We might be able to make this dense enough that one
minute resolution for up to 60 days could fit in
Hi,
On 22.2.2015 18:57, Petr Jelinek wrote:
Tomas noticed that the patch is missing error check when TABLESAMPLE
is used on view, so here is a new version that checks it's only used
against table or matview.
No other changes.
Curious question - could/should this use page prefetch, similar
On 23.2.2015 03:20, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 2/22/15 5:41 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
Otherwise, the code looks OK to me. Now, there are a few features I'd
like to have for production use (to minimize the impact):
1) no index support:-(
I'd like to see support for more relation types (at least
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Oskari Saarenmaa o...@ohmu.fi wrote:
15.01.2015, 21:58, Robert Haas kirjoitti:
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
I think I'd for now simply not define pg_attribute_aligned() on
platforms where it's not supported,
On 23/02/15 03:24, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I am wondering a bit about interaction with wal_keep_segments.
One thing is that wal_keep_segments is still specified in number of segments
and not size units, maybe it would be
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Corey Huinker corey.huin...@gmail.com wrote:
+ ERROR: could not stat file
/home/ubuntu/src/postgres/contrib/dblink/tmp_check/install/usr/local/pgsql/share/extension/dblink--1.2.sql:
No such file or directory
Didn't you forget to add dblink--1.2.sql to DATA in
On 2/22/15 5:41 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
Otherwise, the code looks OK to me. Now, there are a few features I'd
like to have for production use (to minimize the impact):
1) no index support:-(
I'd like to see support for more relation types (at least btree
indexes). Are there any plans
53 matches
Mail list logo
