Hello, Tom.
You wrote:
TL> Tatsuo Ishii writes:
>> I would like to add a variant of regclass, which is exactly same as
>> current regclass except it does not raise an error when the target
>> table is not found. Instead it returns InvalidOid (0).
TL> I've sometimes thought we should just make a
On 5 December 2013 01:33, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Can someone in this thread clarify the commit fest situation? I see two
> entries that appear to be the same:
>
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1174
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1175
>
> I thi
And my patch affects the row view only.
postgres=# \x 1
postgres=# create table wide_table (value text);
postgres=# insert into wide_table values ('afadsafasd fasdf asdfasd fsad
fas df sadf sad f sadf sadf sa df sadfsadfasd fsad fsa df sadf asd fa sfd
sadfsadf asdf sad f sadf sad fadsf');
postgre
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 15:28 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> My experience with software upgrades is that
> cases like this, and even weirder things, happen pretty routinely, so
> I think more control is good.
There would still be control: just use full SQL scripts appropriately.
I'm sure there's stil
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 20:27 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Lazy people? I'm not in a hurry to drop it; it's not costing us much to
>> just sit there, other than in this connection which we see how to fix.
> Actually, I think it probably costs a fair portion of extension aut
On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 09:02 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> This is certainly not a stupid idea, rather something on similar lines
> has been discussed previously in this thread.
> Tom has suggested something similar, but I am not sure if there was a
> conclusion on that point. Please see the
> relavan
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 20:27 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Lazy people? I'm not in a hurry to drop it; it's not costing us much to
> just sit there, other than in this connection which we see how to fix.
Actually, I think it probably costs a fair portion of extension authors
when their initial code cra
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:57 PM, MauMau wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've found a bug and would like to fix it, but I cannot figure out how to do
> that well. Could you give me any advice? I encountered this on PG 9.2, but
> it will probably exist in later versions.
>
> [Problem]
> On Windows, a user with
During development of the dynamic shared memory facility, Noah and I
spent a lot of time arguing about whether it was practical to ensure
that a dynamic shared memory segment got mapped at the same address in
every backend that used it. The argument went something like this:
Me: We'll never be ab
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Metin Doslu wrote:
> Here are some extra information:
>
> - When we increased NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS to 1024, this problem is
> disappeared for 8 core machines and come back with 16 core machines on
> Amazon EC2. Would it be related with PostgreSQL locking mechanism
2013/12/5 Albe Laurenz :
> Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
>> 2013/11/8 Tom Lane :
>>> [ thinks for awhile... ] Hm. In principle you can put any expression
>>> you want into the tlist during AddForeignUpdateTargets. However, if it's
>>> not a Var then the planner won't understand that it's something
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Claudio Freire wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> As a quick side, we also repeated the same experiment on an EC2 instance
>>> with 16 CPU cores, and found that the scale out behavior became worse there.
>>> (We also tried increasing
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-11-14 at 12:11 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>If an application wants to allow these connection parameters to be
>> used, it would need to do PQenableStartServer() first. If it doesn't,
>> those connection parameters will be r
* Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote:
> On 12/3/13, 9:20 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Another option, which I generally like better, is to have a new package
> > format for PGXN that contains the results of "make install",
> > more-or-less, synonymous to Debian source vs. .deb packages.
> >
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I'm also curious about the impact on insertion into primary key
> indexes. Presently, we hold an exclusive buffer lock for the duration
> of a couple of operations when checkUnique != UNIQUE_CHECK_NO.
> _bt_binsrch() is one such operation. T
On Thu, 2013-11-14 at 12:11 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>If an application wants to allow these connection parameters to be
> used, it would need to do PQenableStartServer() first. If it doesn't,
> those connection parameters will be rejected.
Stupid idea: Would it work that we require an enviro
Can someone in this thread clarify the commit fest situation? I see two
entries that appear to be the same:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1174
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1175
I think the first one is a duplicate or obsolete.
--
Sent via p
> Tatsuo Ishii writes:
>> I would like to add a variant of regclass, which is exactly same as
>> current regclass except it does not raise an error when the target
>> table is not found. Instead it returns InvalidOid (0).
>
> I've sometimes thought we should just make all the reg* input converter
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I'm kind of
> curious as to what this benchmark would like like on a server with
> many more cores.
I'm also curious about the impact on insertion into primary key
indexes. Presently, we hold an exclusive buffer lock for the duration
of a
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 19:45 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Yeah, that's another thing we could simplify if we fixed this problem
>>> at the source. I think these decisions date from a time when we still
>>> cared about
Tatsuo Ishii writes:
> I would like to add a variant of regclass, which is exactly same as
> current regclass except it does not raise an error when the target
> table is not found. Instead it returns InvalidOid (0).
I've sometimes thought we should just make all the reg* input converters
act tha
On 12/4/13, 2:02 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
> So optional fields are either purely optional (i.e., only for tools
> that want to use them; everyone else may ignore, but preserve, them) and
> some other are just NULLABLEs, depending on the parameter).
But my point stands: If it's optio
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 19:45 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Yeah, that's another thing we could simplify if we fixed this problem
> > at the source. I think these decisions date from a time when we still
> > cared about the speed of fmgr_oldstyle.
>
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:16 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Sameer Kumar wrote:
> I think you need better tools to guide you in exploring the source code.
> For example, you can use cscope to tell you where is CreateTrigStmt
> used, and you would find gram.y; and use it to tell you where
> CreateTrig
David Fetter writes:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 03:04:31PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If that's the argument, why not just use dblink or dbilink, and be
>> happy? This discussion sounds a whole lot like it's trending to a
>> conclusion of wanting one of those in core, which is not where I'd
>> like
Hi,
On 2013-12-03 10:44:15 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> I don't know where we'll get the resources to implement our own storage,
> but it's looking like we don't have a choice.
As long as our storage layer is a s suboptimal as it is today, I think
it's a purely detractory to primarily blame the ke
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> Hmm. And yet, there's this:
>
>> * When a type narrower than Datum is stored in a Datum, we place it in the
>> * low-order bits and are careful that the DatumGetXXX macro for it discards
>> * the unused high-order bits (
On 3 December 2013 18:46, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Christian Kruse
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Fabrizio,
>>>
>>> looks good to me. I did some testing on 9.2.4, 9.2.5 and HEAD. It
>>> applies and compiles w/
I would like to propose to add a variant of regclass.
Background:
Pgpool-II (http://www.pgpool.net) needs to get information of tables
by querying PostgreSQL's system catalog. For efficiency and
correctness of the info (search path consideration), pgpool-II issues
such queries piggy packing the us
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 03:04:31PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter writes:
> > The idea here is that such a happy situation will not obtain until
> > much later, if ever, and meanwhile, we need a way to get things
> > accomplished even if it's inelegant, inefficient, etc. The
> > alternativ
Hi,
Short recap:
>From the perspective of the user interface the changeset extraction
feature consists out of two abstract interfaces that the "user" has to
do with:
1) The "slot" or "changestream" management interface which manages
individual streams of changes. The user can create and destroy
I wrote:
> Yeah, that's another thing we could simplify if we fixed this problem
> at the source. I think these decisions date from a time when we still
> cared about the speed of fmgr_oldstyle.
BTW, the text you're quoting is from 2007, but it's just documenting
behavior that's mostly a lot olde
Robert Haas writes:
> Hmm. And yet, there's this:
> * When a type narrower than Datum is stored in a Datum, we place it in the
> * low-order bits and are careful that the DatumGetXXX macro for it discards
> * the unused high-order bits (as opposed to, say, assuming they are zero).
> * This i
On 04/12/13 20:44, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 12/4/13, 2:02 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
So optional fields are either purely optional (i.e., only for tools
that want to use them; everyone else may ignore, but preserve, them) and
some other are just NULLABLEs, depending on the para
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Yeah, I think if we can make something like this work, it would be
>> neat-o. Getting this working for int4 would be a good win, as Peter
>> says, but getting it working for both int4 a
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Yeah, I think if we can make something like this work, it would be
>> neat-o. Getting this working for int4 would be a good win, as Peter
>> says, but getting it working for both int4 and int8 with the same code
>> w
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Yeah, I think if we can make something like this work, it would be
> neat-o. Getting this working for int4 would be a good win, as Peter
> says, but getting it working for both int4 and int8 with the same code
> would be a significantly better
On 5 Dec 2013, at 03:48, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> Well I guess we could say something like:
>>>
>>>FOREIGN KEY (a-col) WHERE (a-condition) REFERENCES b(b-col) WHERE
>>>(b-condition)
>>>
>
> OK, those make sense. I wonder whether this should be done via a USING clause
> on the constra
On 5 Dec 2013, at 06:10, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
Well I guess we could say something like:
FOREIGN KEY (a-col) WHERE (a-condition) REFERENCES b(b-col) WHERE
(b-condition)
>
> I like what you have above.
Yeah. Given both the apparent ambiguity of the
On 12/3/13, 9:20 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Another option, which I generally like better, is to have a new package
> format for PGXN that contains the results of "make install",
> more-or-less, synonymous to Debian source vs. .deb packages.
>
> Perhaps we could even have psql understand that form
On 12/2/13, 2:33 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> Just tossing an idea out there. What if you could install an extension
> by specifying not a local file name but a URL. Obviously there's a
> security issue but for example we could allow only https URLs with
> verified domain names that are in a list of app
On 12/2/13, 9:14 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> What I want to build is an “extension distribution” software that knows
> how to prepare anything from PGXN (and other places) so that it's fully
> ready for being used in the database. Then the main client would run as
> a CREATE EXTENSION "ddl_comman
Andrew Gierth writes:
> "Tom" == Tom Lane writes:
> Tom> But anyway, what I'm thinking right now is that these questions
> Tom> would all go away if the aggregate transfunction were receiving
> Tom> the rows and sticking them into the tuplestore. It could add
> Tom> whatever columns it felt
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan writes:
>> I guess I could write a proper patch to have code setting up a scankey
>> also set a flag that indicated that it was acceptable to assume that
>> the special built-in comparator would do fine. ...
>> I'd be happy with a
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> I guess I could write a proper patch to have code setting up a scankey
> also set a flag that indicated that it was acceptable to assume that
> the special built-in comparator would do fine. ...
> I'd be happy with a scheme with only one built-in comparator, and
> allowed
On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 13:01:37 -0800
Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Perhaps even better: the next filesystem, storage, and memory management
> > summit is March 24-25.
>
> Link? I can't find anything Googling by that name. I'm pretty sure we
> can get at least one person there.
It looks like the page
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> For those interested in the details... (1) It's not quite 50/50, that's one
> bound for how the balance is allowed to go. (2) Anybody trying to add
> tunables to the kernel tends to run into resistance. Exposing thousands of
> knobs tends
Jonathan,
> For those interested in the details... (1) It's not quite 50/50, that's one
> bound for how the balance is allowed to go. (2) Anybody trying to add
> tunables to the kernel tends to run into resistance. Exposing thousands of
> knobs tends to lead to a situation where you *have* to be
> "Tom" == Tom Lane writes:
Tom> Well, sure, but I was only suggesting adding it when the
Tom> aggregate asks for it, probably via a new flag column in
Tom> pg_aggregate.
Sure, I was only pointing out the necessity.
Tom> The question you're evading is what additional functionality
Tom>
Having nothing better to do over the holiday weekend, I decided to
pursue a number of ideas for improving performance that I thought
about a long time ago. These include:
* Pre-fetching list node pointers. This looks to be moderately
promising, but I'm certainly not going to be the one to land it,
* Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote:
> I think that's an excellent idea. If one of our developers could find the
> time to attend that, I think that could be very productive. While I'm not
> on the funds team, I'd definitely vote for funding such participation out
> of community funds if
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I assume what would happen is the slave would PANIC upon seeing a WAL
> >> record code it didn't recognize.
>
> > I wonder if we should for the future have the STAR
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > I also wasn't exaggerating the reception I got when I tried to talk
> > about IO and PostgreSQL at LinuxCon and other events. The majority of
> > Linux hackers I've talked to simply don't want to be bothered with
> > PostgreSQL's perform
On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 11:07:04 -0800
Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 12/04/2013 07:33 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > Wow, Josh, I'm surprised to hear this from you.
>
> Well, I figured it was too angry to propose for an LWN article. ;-)
So you're going to make us write it for you :)
> > The active/inact
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 10:23 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> In more normal cases, however, the system can (and probably should)
>> figure out what was intended by choosing the *shortest* path to get to
>> the intended version. For example, if someo
Merlin Moncure writes:
> The downside of SQL-MED, particularly the way postgres implemented the
> driver API, is that each driver is responsible for for all
> optimization efforts and I think this is bad.
There was never any intention that that would be the final state of
things. All the FDW API
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:39 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 12:43:44PM -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:26 PM, David Fetter wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 11:15:36AM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
>> >> On 11/28/2013 03:24 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>> >>
Andrew Gierth writes:
> "Tom" == Tom Lane writes:
> Tom> Well, okay, but you've not said anything that wouldn't be
> Tom> handled just as well by some logic that adds a fixed
> Tom> integer-constant-zero flag column to the rows going into the
> Tom> tuplesort.
> Adding such a column uncondit
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
wrote:
>> We should also consider the possibility of a user trying to
>> deliberately install and older release. For example, if the user has
>> 1.0, 1.0--1.1, 1.1, 1.1--1.2, and 1.2--1.0 (a downgrade script) with
>> default_full_version = 1.2, an
On 12/04/2013 02:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
Well I guess we could say something like:
FOREIGN KEY (a-col) WHERE (a-condition) REFERENCES b(b-col) WHERE
(b-condition)
But it's somewhat ugly.
OK, those make sense. I wonder whether this should be done via a USING
clause on t
David Fetter writes:
> The idea here is that such a happy situation will not obtain until
> much later, if ever, and meanwhile, we need a way to get things
> accomplished even if it's inelegant, inefficient, etc. The
> alternative is that those things simply will not get accomplished at
> all.
I
Jeff Davis writes:
> On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 14:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Stephen Frost writes:
>>> When it comes to dump/reload, I'd much rather see a mechanism which uses
>>> our deep understanding of the extension's objects (as database objects)
>>> to implement the dump/reload than a text bl
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I assume what would happen is the slave would PANIC upon seeing a WAL
>> record code it didn't recognize.
> I wonder if we should for the future have the START_REPLICATION command (or
> the IDENTIFY_SYSTEM would probabl
On 12/04/2013 07:33 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
Wow, Josh, I'm surprised to hear this from you.
The active/inactive list mechanism works great for the vast majority of
users. The second-use algorithm prevents a lot of pathological behavior,
like wiping out your entire cache by copying a big f
Andrew Dunstan writes:
>>> Well I guess we could say something like:
>>>
>>> FOREIGN KEY (a-col) WHERE (a-condition) REFERENCES b(b-col) WHERE
>>> (b-condition)
>>>
>>> But it's somewhat ugly.
> OK, those make sense. I wonder whether this should be done via a USING
> clause on the constraint t
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 12:43:44PM -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:26 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 11:15:36AM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> >> On 11/28/2013 03:24 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> >> > WITH, or SRF, or whatever, the point is that we need to b
> "Tom" == Tom Lane writes:
Tom> Well, okay, but you've not said anything that wouldn't be
Tom> handled just as well by some logic that adds a fixed
Tom> integer-constant-zero flag column to the rows going into the
Tom> tuplesort.
Adding such a column unconditionally even for non-hypothe
On 12/04/2013 07:33 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Wow, Josh, I'm surprised to hear this from you.
Well, I figured it was too angry to propose for an LWN article. ;-)
> The active/inactive list mechanism works great for the vast majority of
> users. The second-use algorithm prevents a lot of patho
On 04/12/13 19:49, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 12/4/13, 11:22 AM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
Would it be well-received a new file format that keeps it simple for
both hand editing and generation of the configuration, and at the same
time offers the features I have mentioned?
I don't see
On 12/4/13, 11:22 AM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
> Would it be well-received a new file format that keeps it simple for
> both hand editing and generation of the configuration, and at the same
> time offers the features I have mentioned?
I don't see how that would work exactly: You want to ad
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:26 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 11:15:36AM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
>> On 11/28/2013 03:24 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>> > WITH, or SRF, or whatever, the point is that we need to be able to
>> > specify what we're sending--probably single opaque string
On 12/04/2013 07:30 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 12/04/2013 07:32 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>>
>> On 12/04/2013 04:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> On 12/4/13, 2:14 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
running a
few kvm instances that get bootstrapped automatically is something t
On 12/04/2013 07:32 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
On 12/04/2013 04:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 12/4/13, 2:14 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
running a
few kvm instances that get bootstrapped automatically is something that
is a solved problem.
Is it sound to run performance tests on
> You could try my lwlock-scalability improvement patches - for some
> workloads here, the improvements have been rather noticeable. Which
> version are you testing?
I'm testing with PostgreSQL 9.3.1.
On 2013-12-04 20:19:55 +0200, Metin Doslu wrote:
> - When we increased NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS to 1024, this problem is
> disappeared for 8 core machines and come back with 16 core machines on
> Amazon EC2. Would it be related with PostgreSQL locking mechanism?
You could try my lwlock-scalability im
Here are some extra information:
- When we increased NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS to 1024, this problem is
disappeared for 8 core machines and come back with 16 core machines on
Amazon EC2. Would it be related with PostgreSQL locking mechanism?
- I tried this test with 4 core machines including my perso
> Didn't follow the thread from the start. So, this is EC2? Have you
> checked, with a recent enough version of top or whatever, how much time
> is reported as "stolen"?
Yes, this EC2. "stolen" is randomly reported as 1, mostly as 0.
On 2013-12-04 16:00:40 -0200, Claudio Freire wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > All that time is spent in your virtualization solution. One thing to try
> > is to look on the host system, sometimes profiles there can be more
> > meaningful.
>
> You cannot profile th
> You could try HVM. I've noticed it fare better under heavy CPU load,
> and it's not fully-HVM (it still uses paravirtualized network and
> I/O).
I already tried with HVM (cc2.8xlarge instance on Amazon EC2) and observed
same problem.
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-12-04 18:43:35 +0200, Metin Doslu wrote:
>> > I'd strongly suggest doing a "perf record -g -a ;
>> > perf report" run to check what's eating up the time.
>>
>> Here is one example:
>>
>> + 38.87% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] hyp
>
>
> >
> > CreateTrigStmt is passed to CreateTrigger function as an arguement. I am
> > struggling to understand how the values for various members of trigger
> are
> > set and where [which file] calls CreateTrigStmt.
> >
> >
> > Can someone provide some help on this?
>
> I think you need better t
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Interestingly, the variant for which you can't think of a use case is
>> the one I've missed most. Typical examples in my experience are
>> things like project.project_manager_id references person (id) where
>> person.is_project_manager, o
On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 14:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > When it comes to dump/reload, I'd much rather see a mechanism which uses
> > our deep understanding of the extension's objects (as database objects)
> > to implement the dump/reload than a text blob which is carried for
On 12/04/2013 04:33 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 10:44:15 -0800
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> It seems clear that Kernel.org, since 2.6, has been in the business of
>> pushing major, hackish, changes to the IO stack without testing them or
>> even thinking too hard about what the
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 09:50 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I still don't see that Extension Templates are all bad:
> > * They preserve the fact that two instances of the same extension
> > (e.g. in different databases) were created from the same template.
>
> This is only true if we change the
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Maybe we should just bite the bullet and change the WAL format for
> >> heap_freeze (inventing an all-new record type, not repurposing the old
> >> one, and allowin
On 12/04/2013 12:00 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Oh. I misinterpreted what this feature was about, then. I thought it
was about restricting the reference to a subset of the *referenced*
table, but it seems to be about restricting the constrain
src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c:5889: trailing whitespace.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Oh. I misinterpreted what this feature was about, then. I thought it
>> was about restricting the reference to a subset of the *referenced*
>> table, but it seems to be about restricting the constraint to a subset
>> of the *referencing*
On 2013-12-04 18:43:35 +0200, Metin Doslu wrote:
> > I'd strongly suggest doing a "perf record -g -a ;
> > perf report" run to check what's eating up the time.
>
> Here is one example:
>
> + 38.87% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] hypercall_page
> + 9.32% postgres [kernel.kallsyms] [k] h
On 12/04/2013 11:25 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Tom Dunstan wrote:
On 4 December 2013 01:24, Robert Haas wrote:
Yeah, more or less, but the key is ensuring that it wouldn't let you
create the constraint in the first place if the partial index
specified *didn't* mat
> I'd strongly suggest doing a "perf record -g -a ;
> perf report" run to check what's eating up the time.
Here is one example:
+ 38.87% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] hypercall_page
+ 9.32% postgres [kernel.kallsyms] [k] hypercall_page
+ 6.80% postgres [kernel.kallsyms] [k] xen_
>Notice the huge %sy
>What kind of VM are you using? HVM or paravirtual?
This instance is paravirtual.
On 2013-12-04 14:27:10 -0200, Claudio Freire wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Metin Doslu wrote:
> >
> > Here are the results of "vmstat 1" while running 8 parallel TPC-H Simple
> > (#6) queries: Although there is no need for I/O, "wa" fluctuates between 0
> > and 1.
> >
> > procs ---
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Metin Doslu wrote:
>
> Here are the results of "vmstat 1" while running 8 parallel TPC-H Simple
> (#6) queries: Although there is no need for I/O, "wa" fluctuates between 0
> and 1.
>
> procs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io --system--
> -cpu--
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Tom Dunstan wrote:
> On 4 December 2013 01:24, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Yeah, more or less, but the key is ensuring that it wouldn't let you
>> create the constraint in the first place if the partial index
>> specified *didn't* match the WHERE clause. For example, su
On 04/12/13 16:51, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 12/4/13, 1:42 AM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
IMHO, a data structure like the above would be completely
self-contained and allow any autoconfiguring tool or GUI tool to be
easily created, if the syntax is programmable. It would certainly m
Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
> 2013/11/8 Tom Lane :
>> [ thinks for awhile... ] Hm. In principle you can put any expression
>> you want into the tlist during AddForeignUpdateTargets. However, if it's
>> not a Var then the planner won't understand that it's something that needs
>> to be supplied b
On 11/23/13, 7:12 AM, Mario Weilguni wrote:
> Well, in that case and since this is a rarely used extension (I guess
> so), maybe it would be the best to simply rename that extension to
> uuidossp (or whatever) and don't make any special treatment for it?
Why? This is a solved problem, and renamin
On 12/4/13, 1:42 AM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
> IMHO, a data structure like the above would be completely
> self-contained and allow any autoconfiguring tool or GUI tool to be
> easily created, if the syntax is programmable. It would certainly make
> the config file more verbose, but at
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
