On 25/01/12 18:37, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
I'm still not sure whether to just revise (almost) all the SQL function
examples to use parameter names, and declare them the right choice; as
it's currently written, named parameters still seem rather second-class.
Agreed.
I'll try a more
2012/1/28 Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp:
2012/1/26 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Kohei KaiGai kai...@kaigai.gr.jp wrote:
2012/1/26 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
I'm wondering if a function would be a better fit than a GUC. I don't
think you can
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
But even if you do know that subclassing
is intended, that doesn't prove that the particular Archive object is
always going to be an ArchiveHandle under the hood. If it is, why not
just pass it as an ArchiveHandle to
Joachim Wieland j...@mcknight.de writes:
I know that you took back some of your comments, but I'm with you
here. Archive is allocated as an ArchiveHandle and then casted back to
Archive*, so you always know that an Archive is an ArchiveHandle. I'm
all for getting rid of Archive and just using
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Also, I think the general approach is wrong. The only reason to have
these pages in shared memory is that we can control access to them to
prevent write/write and read/write corruption. Since these pages are
never
Hi Harada-san,
I checked the fdw_helper_funcs_v3.patch, pgsql_fdw_v5.patch and
pgsql_fdw_pushdown_v1.patch. My comments are below.
[BUG]
Even though pgsql_fdw tries to push-down qualifiers being executable
on the remove side at the deparseSql(), it does not remove qualifiers
being pushed down
On 2012-01-29 01:48, Jeff Janes wrote:
I ran three modes, head, head with commit_delay, and the group_commit patch
shared_buffers = 600MB
wal_sync_method=fsync
optionally with:
commit_delay=5
commit_siblings=1
pgbench -i -s40
for clients in 1 5 10 15 20 25 30
pgbench -T 30 -M prepared -c
We apologize that http://www.bsdcan.org/ was offline for 12 hours from early
Sunday morning.
The deadline for submissions has been extended to Tuesday 31 January.
PGCon 2012 will be held 17-18 May 2012, in Ottawa at the University of
Ottawa. It will be preceded by two days of tutorials on
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Yes, it was. Sorry about that. New version attached, retesting while
you read this.
In my hands I could never get this patch to do anything. The
On 01/28/2012 07:48 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
Others are going to test this out on high-end systems. I wanted to
try it out on the other end of the scale. I've used a Pentium 4,
3.2GHz,
with 2GB of RAM and with a single IDE drive running ext4. ext4 is
amazingly bad on IDE, giving about 25 fsync's
On Tue, 2012-01-24 at 16:07 +0400, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
Hi!
New version of patch is attached.
Thank you for the updates. I have a small patch attached.
The only code change I made was very minor: I changed the constants used
in the penalty function because your version used
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Yes, it was. Sorry about that. New version attached, retesting while
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 2:25 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Your caution is wise. All users of an index have already checked
whether the index is usable at plan time, so although there is much
code that
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
If I cast to a int, then I see advancement:
I'll initialise it as 0, rather than -1 and then we don't have a
problem in any circumstance.
I've specifically designed the pgbench changes required to simulate
conditions of
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If you then turn that equation around, making the maximum write rate the
input, for any given cost delay and dirty page cost you can solve for the
cost limit--the parameter in fictitious units everyone hates. It works
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of sáb ene 28 01:35:33 -0300 2012:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org writes:
I expected the FETCH to return one row, with the latest data, i.e.
(1, 3), but instead it's returning empty.
This is the same thing I was complaining about in the bug #6123
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of sáb ene 28 01:35:33 -0300 2012:
This is the same thing I was complaining about in the bug #6123 thread,
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/9698.1327266...@sss.pgh.pa.us
Hm. Okay, I hadn't read that.
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of dom ene 29 22:13:43 -0300 2012:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of sáb ene 28 01:35:33 -0300 2012:
This is the same thing I was complaining about in the bug #6123 thread,
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com wrote:
Thank you for the updates. I have a small patch attached.
The only code change I made was very minor: I changed the constants used
in the penalty function because your version used INFINITE_BOUND_PENALTY
when adding an
20 matches
Mail list logo
