There was a stray s in classes implement*s*. I've also added a
the to make the sentence more readable (at least for me).
Christoph
--
c...@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/brin.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/brin.sgml
new file mode 100644
index e25f09c..894c269
***
On 07/04/2015 07:34 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
In summary, the X^1.5 correction seems to work pretty well. It doesn't
completely eliminate the problem, but it makes it a lot better.
I've looked at the maths.
I think that the load is distributed as the derivative of this function,
that is (1.5
On 07/05/2015 08:19 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
I am a bit skeptical about this. We need test scenarios that clearly
show the benefit of having and of not having this behavior. It might be
that doing this always is fine for everyone.
Do you mean I have to proove that there is an actual problem
You don't have to do anything if you don't want to.
Sure:-) What I mean is that I think that this patch is not ripe, and I
understood that some people were suggesting that it could be applied as is
right away. I'm really disagreeing with that.
I said myself that this needs performance
Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 6:27 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com writes:
... So attached is a patch that adds VERSION_NUM in
Makefile.global.
While there was not exactly universal consensus that we
Hello Heikki,
I think that the load is distributed as the derivative of this function,
that is (1.5 * x ** 0.5): It starts at 0 but very quicky reaches 0.5, it
pass the 1.0 (average load) around 40% progress, and ends up at 1.5, that
is the finishing load is 1.5 the average load, just before
On 12/06/2015 06:56, Noah Misch wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 04:05:13PM -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 6/11/15 4:55 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-06-11 09:41:17 +, Naoya Anzai wrote:
This is a so tiny patch but I think it is very useful for hackers and DBAs.
When we debug with psql, we
On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 1:19 AM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote:
Do you mean I have to proove that there is an actual problem induced from
this patch?
No, I'm not saying anyone *has* to do anything. What I'm saying is
that I'm not convinced by your analysis. I don't think we have
On 2015-07-05 10:51:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Any objections to doing that?
Nope.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
CharSyam chars...@gmail.com writes:
I just found simple typo error :)
statment - statement
excercise - exercise
They are all in just comments :)
Pushed, thanks.
(For future reference, a patch like this needs to update the
expected-output files too.)
regards, tom lane
No, I'm not saying anyone *has* to do anything. What I'm saying is
that I'm not convinced by your analysis.
Well, the gist of my analysis is really to say that there are potential
performance issues with the proposed change, and that it must be tested
thoroughly. The details may varry:-)
Christoph Berg c...@df7cb.de writes:
There was a stray s in classes implement*s*. I've also added a
the to make the sentence more readable (at least for me).
Pushed, thanks. (I also tweaked the second part of that sentence a
bit, though I'm not sure it's 100% perfect grammar even yet.)
I just found simple typo error :)
statment - statement
excercise - exercise
They are all in just comments :)
typos.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
2015-07-05 16:51 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 6:27 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com writes:
... So attached is a patch that adds VERSION_NUM in
+1 for Julien's patch.
On 2015-07-05 11:05:28 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
More broadly, I don't really know how to test this patch and show when
it helps and when it hurts. And I think we need that, rather than
just a theoretical analysis, to tune the behavior. Heikki, can you
describe what you think a good test
On 03/06/2015 15:00, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 3 June 2015 at 20:04, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de
mailto:and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-06-03 18:54:24 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
OK, here we go.
Hm. Wouldn't random sampling be better than what you do? If your queries
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-07-02 13:58:45 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Will look at 0003 next.
+appendStringInfo(buf, offsets [%u, %u), members [%u, %u),
I
(quick answer, off now)
On 2015-07-05 14:20:11 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-07-02 13:58:45 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I seriously, seriously doubt that it is a good idea to perform the
legacy truncation from
On July 5, 2015 8:50:57 PM GMT+02:00, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de
wrote:
(quick answer, off now)
On 2015-07-05 14:20:11 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/22/2015 10:26 PM, Corey Huinker wrote:
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(),
On Fri, 2015-07-03 at 17:35 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
Attached, find the rebased version of patch.
Comments:
* The heapam.c changes seem a little ad-hoc. Conceptually, which
portions should be affected by parallelism? How do we know we didn't
miss something?
* Why is initscan getting the
On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
(quick answer, off now)
On 2015-07-05 14:20:11 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-07-02 13:58:45 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I seriously, seriously
On 07/04/2015 11:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
I wondered how come we had not seen this problem in the buildfarm,
but the answer appears to be that our only working Cygwin critter
(brolga) doesn't build any of the optional PLs, so it skips these
modules altogether. Seems like we need to improve that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/18/2015 09:57 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-06-19 6:32 GMT+02:00 Thomas Munro
thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com
mailto:thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Pavel Stehule
pavel.steh...@gmail.com
Also, I don't want to stick on the assumption that relations involved in
remote join are all managed by same foreign-server no longer.
The following two ideas introduce possible enhancement of remote join
feature that involved local relations; replicated table or transformed
to VALUES()
I made a pass over pgbench's error messages to try to make them meet
project style guidelines. There was one rather large bit of inconsistency
that I didn't try to fix, though: something like half of the messages
prepend pgbench: to the front, but the other half don't. Worse yet,
some of the
On 07/05/2015 04:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I made a pass over pgbench's error messages to try to make them meet
project style guidelines. There was one rather large bit of inconsistency
that I didn't try to fix, though: something like half of the messages
prepend pgbench: to the front, but the
2015-07-02 17:02 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
Does the COPY line protocol even support binary data?
The protocol, per se, just transmits a byte stream. There is a field
in the CopyInResponse/CopyOutResponse messages that indicates
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/05/2015 12:25 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
On 02/22/2015 10:26 PM, Corey Huinker wrote:
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
This mail is probably appropriate for some C# mailing list.
I am not familiar with C#, but in the above code, I do not see where is
test_func() being called?
On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:44 PM, drunken manu...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi guys, I have a problem with a sipmle function in postgresql. The
Hello Tom,
Personally I think pgbench: adds very little and so I'd rather get
rid of it, but I'm sure others feel differently.
I think that one of the reason for this is that once pgbench started to
run it is desirable to differentiate error messages that come from libpq
and those that
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com wrote:
On Fri, 2015-07-03 at 17:35 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
Attached, find the rebased version of patch.
Comments:
* The heapam.c changes seem a little ad-hoc. Conceptually, which
portions should be affected by parallelism?
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
Barring any objection, I will remove the warning from the document.
Nuke it.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
On 07/04/2015 07:34 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
I have ran some tests with this patch and the detailed results of the
runs are attached with this mail.
I do not understand really the aggregated figures in the files
On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 3:57 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Hmm. Why is install.bat not like build.bat, i.e. just a thin wrapper that
just calls install.pl, passing all arguments?
I guess we just haven't noticed it. And indeed it makes everything
more simple, and fixes as well the error reported
36 matches
Mail list logo
