On 01/21/2012 11:40 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Andrew Dunstanand...@dunslane.net wrote:
On 01/14/2012 03:06 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
OK, here's a patch that does both query_to_json and array_to_json, along
with docs and regression tests. It include Robert's
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
I guess you concerned about that expected/select_views_1.out is
patched, not expected/select_views.out.
I'm not sure the reason why regression test
2012/1/21 Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
I guess you concerned about that expected/select_views_1.out is
patched, not expected/select_views.out.
Hi,
I tried to implement a fdw module that is designed to utilize GPU
devices to execute
qualifiers of sequential-scan on foreign tables managed by this module.
It was named PG-Strom, and the following wikipage gives a brief
overview of this module.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGStrom
On 01/22/2012 04:28 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 01/21/2012 11:40 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Andrew Dunstanand...@dunslane.net
wrote:
On 01/14/2012 03:06 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
OK, here's a patch that does both query_to_json and array_to_json,
along
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
Attached patch adds a counter for number of deadlocks in a database to
pg_stat_database.
A little review:
- it applies with a few hunks
- the oid you have chosen for the function pg_stat_get_db_deadlocks()
is already
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
The problem is that this one doesn't have the
Content-Disposition: attachment
line in the MIME header. I don't know what we can do about it.
It's sent with an inline attachment AFAICT, some MA will make it easy
to process the attachment and
Alex Shulgin a...@commandprompt.com writes:
Another idea: introduce some simple tag system in mails sent to -hackers
to be treated specially, e.g:
[...]
How does that sound?
Very much like what debbugs does already.
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL :
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Daniel Farina dan...@heroku.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Even if you give the version number in the CREATE EXTENSION command, it's by
convention that people actually maintain a sane
OK, here's an updated version of the patch. I changed the error message
texts as per discussion (except I decided to use one message string for
all the cases rather than saddle translators with several variants).
Also, I put in an error in GetTupleForTrigger, which fixes the
self-reference case I
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
You currently forbid multi-column EACH FKs. I agree that we should allow only
one array column per FK; with more, the set of required PK rows would be
something like the Cartesian product of the elements of array columns.
Hi!
Updated patch is attached. I've updated comment
of mcelem_array_contained_selec with more detailed description of
probability distribution assumption. Also, I found that rest behavious
should be better described by Poisson distribution, relevant changes were
made.
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at
Previous title was: Add minor version to v3 protocol to allow changes without
breaking backwards compatibility
On 01/20/2012 04:45 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 02:00:20PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Noah Mischn...@leadboat.com wrote:
I agree
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 6:44 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
OT: It would save lots of time if we had 2 things for the CF app:
..
2. Something that automatically tests patches. If you submit a patch
we run up a blank VM and run patch applies on all patches. As soon as
we get a
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
So, having received feedback from Tom and others in relation to this
patch, I would like to state how I think I should go about addressing
various concerns to ensure that a revision of the patch gets into the
9.2
Jeff Janes wrote:
I'm finding the backend_writes column pretty unfortunate. The only
use I know of for it is to determine if the bgwriter is lagging
behind. Yet it doesn't serve even this purpose because it lumps
together the backend writes due to lagging background writes, and the
backend
On Jan 20, 2012, at 11:54 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 04.01.2012 13:14, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Jim Nasbyj...@nasby.net writes:
On Jan 3, 2012, at 12:11 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
This could well be related to the fact that
On Jan 19, 2012, at 4:23 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
On 1/18/12 4:18 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
What about doing away with all the arbitrary numbers completely, and just
state data rate limits for hit/miss/dirty?
Since many workloads will have a mix of all three, it still seems like
there's some need
On Jan 4, 2012, at 5:59 PM, Gianni Ciolli wrote:
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 04:58:08PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
Except AFAIR Oracle uses the term to indicate something that is
happening *outside* of your current transaction, which is definitely
not what the proposal is talking about.
That
On Jan 10, 2012, at 3:07 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
I think we could add an option to check the checksum immediately after
we pin a block for the first time but it would be very expensive and
sounds like we're re-inventing hardware or OS features again. Work on
50% performance drain, as an
Jim Nasby wrote:
Your two comments together made me realize something... at the end of the day
people don't care about MB/s. They care about impact to other read and write
activity in the database.
What would be interesting is if we could monitor how long all *foreground* IO
requests took.
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Jim Nasby j...@nasby.net wrote:
We should also look at having the freelist do something useful, instead of
just dropping it completely. Unfortunately that's probably more work...
That's kinda my feeling as well. The free list in its current form is
pretty much
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm finding the backend_writes column pretty unfortunate. The only
use I know of for it is to determine if the bgwriter is lagging
behind. Yet it doesn't serve even this purpose because it lumps
together the backend
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
So, having received feedback from Tom and others in relation to this
patch, I would like to state how I think I should go about addressing
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
I tried to implement a fdw module that is designed to utilize GPU
devices to execute
qualifiers of sequential-scan on foreign tables managed by this module.
It was named PG-Strom, and the following wikipage gives a
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 09:06:49PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
You currently forbid multi-column EACH FKs. ?I agree that we should allow
only
one array column per FK; with more, the set of required PK rows would be
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 11:47:06PM +0200, Mikko Tiihonen wrote:
On 01/20/2012 04:45 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 02:00:20PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
Having said that, if we're to follow the precedent set by
bytea_format, maybe we ought to just add
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Daniel Farina dan...@heroku.com wrote:
A few anecdotes does not constitute evidence, but it does look like
some people pay attention to any additional versioning foothold they
can get.
Sure, but just because some people do it doesn't make it a good idea.
I can
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Jim Nasby j...@nasby.net wrote:
We should also look at having the freelist do something useful, instead of
just dropping it completely. Unfortunately that's probably more work...
That's kinda my feeling as well. The
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Jim Nasby j...@nasby.net wrote:
What would be interesting is if we could monitor how long all *foreground* IO
requests took. If they start exceeding some number, that means the system is
at or near full capacity, and we'd like background stuff to slow down.
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
... If people
are doing management via pure FEBE, good for them: but that doesn't
explain why it shoudn't be done all in userspace, with all of the
flexibility that gives.
On reflection it seems like this patch is simply offering the wrong
solution
2012/1/23 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
I tried to implement a fdw module that is designed to utilize GPU
devices to execute
qualifiers of sequential-scan on foreign tables managed by this module.
It was named
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
Please add the Apply mode.
OK, will do.
Done. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
I notice that the Apply mode isn't fully implemented. I had in mind
that you would add the latch required to respond more
33 matches
Mail list logo
