Tom Lane Wrote:
The trouble here is that CPU nice doesn't (on most platforms) change the
behavior of the I/O scheduler, so this would only be of use to the
extent that your queries are CPU bound and not I/O bound.
Assuming there is a major processor hit, and the backend has a UW-SCSI RAID
box
Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
Just another data point.
I downloaded a snapshot yesterday - Changelogs dated Feb 20 17:02
It's significantly slower than "7.0.3 with fsync off" for one of my webapps.
7.0.3 with fsync off gets me about 55 hits per sec max (however it's
interesting that the speed
I wrote:
I tried with -B 1024 10 times for commit_delay=0 and 1 respectively.
The average result of 'pgbench -c 10 -t 100' is as follows.
[commit_delay=0]
26.462817(including connections establishing)
26.788047(excluding connections establishing)
[commit_delay=1]
27.630405(including
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
What about adding a field where they paste the output of 'uname -a' on their
system...?
Got this and Justin's changes along with compiler version. Anyone think
of anything else?
Vince.
--
Here is an article about GPL and GPL version 3.0.
http://icd.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=ArticlesSubSection=DisplayARTICLE_ID=92350VERSION_NUM=1
The interesting thing is that Stallman says:
"Our position is that it makes no difference whether programs are linked
Vince Vielhaber writes:
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
What about adding a field where they paste the output of 'uname
-a' on their system...?
Got this and Justin's changes along with compiler version. Anyone
think of anything else?
Architecture. IRIX,
Vince Vielhaber writes:
http://hub.org/~vev/regress.php
What other info is needed to distinguish these systems?
The operating systems should be ordered by some key other than maybe
author's preference. ;-)
Linux needs to be split into one for each distribution.
'Sun' should probably be
Got this and Justin's changes along with compiler version. Anyone think
of anything else?
Hmm. Any suggestions on how we collate the test results for our release
docs? And how we solicit tests for remaining platforms?
In previous releases (and until now), I have kept track of results
posted
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Vince Vielhaber writes:
http://hub.org/~vev/regress.php
What other info is needed to distinguish these systems?
The operating systems should be ordered by some key other than maybe
author's preference. ;-)
Actually it's more random than by
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Here is an article about GPL and GPL version 3.0.
http://icd.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=ArticlesSubSection=DisplayARTICLE_ID=92350VERSION_NUM=1
The interesting thing is that Stallman says:
"Our position is that it makes
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Pete Forman wrote:
Vince Vielhaber writes:
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
What about adding a field where they paste the output of 'uname
-a' on their system...?
Got this and Justin's changes along with compiler version. Anyone
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
Got this and Justin's changes along with compiler version. Anyone think
of anything else?
Hmm. Any suggestions on how we collate the test results for our release
docs? And how we solicit tests for remaining platforms?
In previous releases
I think UP or SMP should be an option to check, perhaps just a box for the
number of processors. Also something to capture the compile flags. I have
a dual Ppro, and it compiles fine unless I use the -j3 or -j4 commands,
then I get an error.
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Vince
I believe it was straight from CVS, perhaps it was the beta4 tarball.
Don't know if that counts as a distribution tarball or not. I will test
the 7.0.3 release, and double check what the error I'm getting if you
would like.
-Original Message-
From: Peter Eisentraut [SMTP:[EMAIL
This was discussed extensively earlier. Linking dynamically or
statically doesn't make a difference in the case of a library, but as
long as readline is an optional feature for the user it's not a
problem.
I agree with Trond on this. It's like the problem that PHP had with bc until it
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:50:17AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Let me add I don't agree with this, and find the whole GPL
heavy-handedness very distasteful.
Please, not this again. Is there a piss-and-moan-about-the-GPL
schedule posted somewhere?
Either PG is in compliance, or it's not.
Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
Oops.
I rechecked the start up script, and the 7.0.3 doesn't have fsync off or
whatever. Dunno why I thought it was on (heh maybe because it was a lot
faster than 6.5.3!).
Hmm, this means 7.0.3 is quite fast...
Your app seems to have many rollbacks.
Yes rollback
Hi Vince,
Here's the next thing... how do you want to distinguish between Solaris
SPARC, Solaris INTEL (and maybe even Solaris MAC even though it isn't
sold any longer)? Each of these has a 32 and 64 bit mode also.
I thought that might be what "Platform" could be used for, but
"Architecture"
Can you provide me with a list of platforms it should be tested on?
The current list is at
http://www.postgresql.org/devel-corner/docs/admin/supported-platforms.html
No, I wouldn't do that to you. You tell me how you want the results
to look and I'll give you copy-n-paste. All of this
Hi all:
The attachement is the Chinese (GB) patch for PgAccess, don't know
if it's correct to post here.
It's simple to do the translation, And I've test in 7.0.2 current CVS,
seems pretty good.
If anyone want this little thing, I'll very happy.
use it is very simple, just
Hi all:
The attachement is the Chinese (GB) patch for PgAccess, don't know
if it's correct to post here.
It's simple to do the translation, And I've test in 7.0.2 current CVS,
seems pretty good.
If anyone want this little thing, I'll very happy.
use it is very simple,
Can someone explain why LockMethodCtl is in shared memory while
LockMethodTable is in postmaster memory context?
I realize LockMethodCtl has a spinlock, so it has to be in shared
memory, but couldn't it all be put in shared memory?
Also, the code:
LockShmemSize(int maxBackends)
{
int
Vadim Mikheev wrote:
It may be that WAL has changed the rollback
time-characteristics to worse than pre-wal ?
Nothing changed ... yet. And in future rollbacks
of read-only transactions will be as fast as now,
anyway.
What about rollbacks of a bunch uf inserts/updates/deletes?
I
Hi all:
The attachement is the Chinese (GB) patch for PgAccess, don't know
if it's correct to post here.
It's simple to do the translation, And I've test in 7.0.2 current CVS,
seems pretty good.
If anyone want this little thing, I'll very happy.
use it is very simple, just gunzip it and copy
appropriate. There are several encodings for Chinese including
GB(EUC-CN), Big5, EUC-TW. At least we should be able to distinguish
them. What about "chinese(GB)" or whatever?
Renamed to chinese-gb.
I think chinese-gb is ok, thanks!
I ended up using chinese_gb. The
appropriate. There are several encodings for Chinese including
GB(EUC-CN), Big5, EUC-TW. At least we should be able to distinguish
them. What about "chinese(GB)" or whatever?
Renamed to chinese-gb.
I think chinese-gb is ok, thanks!
Regards
Laser
Hi all:
The attachement is the Chinese (GB) patch for PgAccess, don't know
if it's correct to post here.
It's simple to do the translation, And I've test in 7.0.2 current CVS,
seems pretty good.
If anyone want this little thing, I'll very happy.
use it is very simple, just gunzip it
27 matches
Mail list logo
