On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 09:04:28AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Michael Nolan htf...@gmail.com wrote:
To cross-pollinate with another thread, if temporary tables (and
insert/delete/update transactions to them) are to be supported on a slave,
will the
I would like to propose to improve parsing efficiency of contrib/file_fdw by
selective parsing proposed by Alagiannis et al.[1], which means that for a
CSV/TEXT file foreign table, file_fdw performs binary conversion only for
the columns needed for query processing. Attached is a WIP patch
The last portion of my original post got edited out by mistake.
The tests I ran were on version 9.1.3, running Fedora 14, kernel
2.6.35.14-106.fc14-i686.
It seems to me that DROP TABLESPACE should check to see if there are
references in the system catalog to the tablespace before dropping it,
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'm
On mån, 2012-05-07 at 10:50 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
- (Side point, the definition of endof() in the same place isn't used
anywhere, and doesn't look safe to me, because it can go one past the
end of memory.)
That I think we could remove.
I decided to keep it because it was used not so
On ons, 2012-01-18 at 14:55 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
BTW, it strikes me that maybe the coding should work about like this:
if (!TransactionIdIsValid(age_reference_xid))
{
age_reference_xid = GetTopTransactionIdIfAny();
if
Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Attached patch removes the questionable SetLatch() call, under the
assumption that it's okay if the WALWriter, having entered hibernation
due to sustained inactivity (10 seconds) subsequently takes up to 5
seconds (2.5 on average) to notice that it
On 8 May 2012 22:35, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Now that I've actually read the patch, rather than just responding to
your description of it, I find myself entirely unhappy with the proposed
changes in the walwriter's sleep logic. You have introduced race
conditions (it is NOT okay to
Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 8 May 2012 22:35, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Now that I've actually read the patch, rather than just responding to
your description of it, I find myself entirely unhappy with the proposed
changes in the walwriter's sleep logic. You have
On 9 May 2012 00:21, Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Yes, there is some checking of flags before the potential ResetLatch()
call, which may be acted on. The code there is almost identical to
that of the extant bgwriter code. I was under the impression that this
did not amount to a
On 8 May 2012 20:01, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On ons, 2012-01-18 at 14:55 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
BTW, it strikes me that maybe the coding should work about like this:
if (!TransactionIdIsValid(age_reference_xid))
{
age_reference_xid =
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 08:26:02PM +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I would like to propose to improve parsing efficiency of contrib/file_fdw by
selective parsing proposed by Alagiannis et al.[1],
Is the patch they used against 9.0 published somewhere?
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter
It seems pretty confusing that synchronous_commit = 'remote_write' means
write confirmed to the remote socket, not write to the file system. Is
there no better term we could some up with? remote_pipe?
remote_transfer?
--
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.ushttp://momjian.us
I've applied the walwriter/checkpointer patch, with the mentioned
re-simplification of the logic. While measuring that, I noticed that
the stats collector was now the biggest repeated-wakeup culprit, so
I took the time to latch-ify it as well. AFAICS we no longer have
anything that wakes up
While going through Readme in backend\storage\buffer, I found some point
misleading.
Normal Buffer Replacement Strategy
-- --
..
..
Each buffer header contains a usage counter, which is incremented (up to a
small limit value) whenever the buffer
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
It seems pretty confusing that synchronous_commit = 'remote_write' means
write confirmed to the remote socket, not write to the file system. Is
there no better term we could some up with? remote_pipe?
remote_transfer?
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 10:04:46PM -0400, Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
It seems pretty confusing that synchronous_commit = 'remote_write' means
write confirmed to the remote socket, not write to the file system. Is
there no
-Original Message-
From: David Fetter [mailto:da...@fetter.org]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 9:25 AM
To: Etsuro Fujita
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Selective binary conversion of CSV file
foreign tables
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 08:26:02PM
On further reflection I've realized that there's a really unpleasant
consequence of the walwriter change as-committed: it breaks the former
guarantee that async commits would reach disk within at most 3 times
the WalWriterDelay setting. They will still get written within at most
3 walwriter
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
And then, I could envision (if it continues down this road):
off
local
remote_accept
remote_write
remote_sync
remote_apply (implies visible to new connections on the standby)
Not saying all off these are
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 10:29:31PM -0400, Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
And then, I could envision (if it continues down this road):
off
local
remote_accept
remote_write
remote_sync
remote_apply (implies
Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 9 May 2012 00:21, Peter Geoghegan pe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Yes, there is some checking of flags before the potential ResetLatch()
call, which may be acted on. The code there is almost identical to
that of the extant bgwriter code. I was
22 matches
Mail list logo
