On Saturday 19 June 2010 18:05:34 Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Sat, 2010-06-19 at 09:43 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
4. Streaming Replication needs to detect death of master. We need
some sort of keep-alive, here. Whether it's at the TCP level (as
advocated by Tom Lane and others) or at the
On Jun 20, 2010, at 7:18 , Tom Lane wrote:
Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org writes:
On Jun 19, 2010, at 21:13 , Tom Lane wrote:
This is nonsense --- the slave's kernel *will* eventually notice that
the TCP connection is dead, and tell walreceiver so. I don't doubt
that the standard TCP timeout is
I notice that if I vacuum a 1 row table I get a FSM that is 24576 bytes
in size, or 3 database blocks.
Why is it not 1 block, or better still 0 blocks for such a small table?
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
Greg: Thank you very much for your insightful comments on the performance of
direct io applied to postgres! That inspired me a lot.
Tom: thank you for the reference to man page!
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 2:02 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Daniel Ng wrote:
I am trying to enable
Florian Pflug wrote:
On Jun 20, 2010, at 7:18 , Tom Lane wrote:
I was thinking that keepalive was on by default with a very
long interval, but I see this isn't so. However, if we enable
keepalive, then it's irrelevant to the point anyway. Nobody's
produced any evidence that keepalive is an
Ahem. That is what a natural key is for :)
Well, they have their own drawbacks that don't make them particularly
appealing to use with lookup tables to ape enums. How many lookup
tables have you seen in the wild with a natural key?
People sometimes represent things like US states as enums. This
Peter Geoghegan wrote:
How many lookup tables have you seen in the wild with a natural
key?
Me? Personally? A few hundred.
People sometimes represent things like US states as enums. This is
probably a mistake, because you cannot control or predict if
there'll be a new US state,
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Florian Pflug wrote:
Yeah, I agree. Just enabling keepalive should suffice for 9.0.
+1, with configurable timeout;
Right, of course. That's already in the pending patch isn't it?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via
On Sun, 2010-06-20 at 11:36 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Florian Pflug wrote:
Yeah, I agree. Just enabling keepalive should suffice for 9.0.
+1, with configurable timeout;
Right, of course. That's already in the pending patch isn't it?
On one of my machines I get
LOG: could not receive test message on socket for statistics collector:
Connection refused
on startup. I noticed this testing 9.0 but when I went back to check I'm
now getting it on 8.3 as well, disabling all of my iptables rules doesn't
help.
I've done some
People sometimes represent things like US states as enums. This is
probably a mistake, because you cannot control or predict if
there'll be a new US state, unlikely though that me be.
More importantly, you're likely to need to associate properties with
the state. Sales tax info, maybe a
Steve Singer ssinger...@sympatico.ca writes:
Is using a single UDP socket structure instance for sending a message to
yourself 'proper'? (it looks like we've been doing this in pgstat.c for
many years without issues reported).
Why wouldn't it be?
This machine is a 32bit powerpc running
On 20/06/10 13:56, Simon Riggs wrote:
I notice that if I vacuum a 1 row table I get a FSM that is 24576 bytes
in size, or 3 database blocks.
Why is it not 1 block, or better still 0 blocks for such a small table?
It was just less code to write and test that way. The FSM tree is always
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Can someone tell me what we are going to do about firewalls that
impose their own rules outside of the control of the DBA?
Has anyone actually seen a firewall configured for something so
stupid as to allow *almost* all the various packets involved in using
a TCP
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 03:01:04PM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Can someone tell me what we are going to do about firewalls that
impose their own rules outside of the control of the DBA?
Has anyone actually seen a firewall configured for something so
stupid as
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Florian Pflug wrote:
Yeah, I agree. Just enabling keepalive should suffice for 9.0.
+1, with configurable timeout;
Right, of course. That's already in the pending patch
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 4:57 AM, mac_man2...@hotmail.it
mac_man2...@hotmail.it wrote:
Tom, Robert,
thank you.
Now it is clearer how space on tapes is recycled.
I tried to follow Robert's example but storing one tape per separate file.
Read in the first block of each run (hosted by separate
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Right, of course. That's already in the pending patch isn't it?
Is this sarcasm, or is there a pending patch I'm not aware of?
On Jun 20, 2010, at 22:01 , Kevin Grittner wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Can someone tell me what we are going to do about firewalls that
impose their own rules outside of the control of the DBA?
Has anyone actually seen a firewall configured for something so
stupid as to allow *almost*
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Right, of course. That's already in the pending patch isn't it?
Is this sarcasm, or is there a pending patch I'm
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=281
+1 for applying something along these lines, but we'll also need to
update walreceiver to actually use one or more of these
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
Yeah, especially since there is no such thing as a special keepalive packet
in TCP. Keepalive simply sends packets with zero bytes of payload every once
in a while if the connection is otherwise inactive. If those aren't
Greg Stark wrote:
Keepalives introduce spurious disconnections in working TCP
connections that have transient outages
It's been a while since I read up on this, so perhaps my memory has
distorted the facts over time, but I thought that under TCP, if one
side sends a packet which isn't ack'd
On Jun 21, 2010, at 0:13 , Greg Stark wrote:
Keepalive is therefore extremely unlikely to break things - in the very
worst case, a (really, really stupid) firewall might decide to drop packets
with zero bytes of payload, causing inactive connections to abort after a
while. AFAIK walreceiver
Robert, so in my example:
- tapes are stored in different files (one tape per file)
- you confirm those first blocks are garbage
- you confirm they could be rewritten with new data
This means that we can do recycle space using one tape per file. Correct?
So, in this case, why do we need to use
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:42 AM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
I'd buy that if all timeouts and retry counts would default to +infinity. But
they don't, and hence sufficiently long network outages *will* cause
connection aborts anyway. That a particular connection might survive due to
mac_man2...@hotmail.it mac_man2...@hotmail.it writes:
Robert, so in my example:
- tapes are stored in different files (one tape per file)
- you confirm those first blocks are garbage
- you confirm they could be rewritten with new data
This means that we can do recycle space using one tape
This is a review for the \whoami patch (changed to \conninfo).
This review was done on the Feb 2 2010 version of the patch (rebased to
head) that reflects some of the feedback from -hackers on the initial
submission. The commitfest entry should be updated to reflect the most
recent version
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Greg Stark gsst...@mit.edu wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:42 AM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
I'd buy that if all timeouts and retry counts would default to +infinity.
But they don't, and hence sufficiently long network outages *will* cause
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Steve Singer ssinger...@sympatico.ca wrote:
One comment I have on the output format is that values (ie the database
name) are enclosed in double quotes but the values being quoted can contain
double quotes that are not being escaped. For example
Connected
Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Sorry, I've been a bit distracted by other responsibilities (libtiff
security issues for Red Hat, if you must know). I'll get on it shortly.
What? You have other things to do besides hack on PostgreSQL?
(2010/06/11 21:11), Stephen Frost wrote:
* Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote:
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 14:07, Stephen Frostsfr...@snowman.net wrote:
I definitely like the idea but I dislike requiring the user to do
something to implement it. Thinking about how packagers might want
32 matches
Mail list logo
