Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Amit Kapila
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Amit Langote langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote: From: Amit Kapila [mailto:amit.kapil...@gmail.com] On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Amit Langote langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote: The more SQL way would be records (composite types). That would make

Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Amit Langote
From: Amit Kapila [mailto:amit.kapil...@gmail.com] On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Amit Langote langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote: From: Amit Kapila [mailto:amit.kapil...@gmail.com] On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Amit Langote langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote: The more SQL way

Re: [HACKERS] INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}

2014-12-05 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen anssi.kaariai...@thl.fi wrote: For Django's use case this is a requirement. We must inform the user if the save() action created a new row or if it modified an existing one. Can you explain that in more detail, please? Another way to do this

Re: [HACKERS] SSL regression test suite

2014-12-05 Thread Noah Misch
On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 02:42:41PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: On 10/06/2014 04:21 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: This probably needs some further cleanup before it's ready for committing. One issues is that it creates a temporary cluster that listens for TCP connections on localhost,

Re: [HACKERS] INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}

2014-12-05 Thread Anssi Kääriäinen
On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 00:21 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen anssi.kaariai...@thl.fi wrote: For Django's use case this is a requirement. We must inform the user if the save() action created a new row or if it modified an existing one. Can you

Re: [HACKERS] New wal format distorts pg_xlogdump --stats

2014-12-05 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 12/05/2014 02:31 AM, Andres Freund wrote: On 2014-12-05 08:58:33 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2014-12-04 16:26:02 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Yeah, that's broken. I propose the attached. Or does anyone

Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Amit Langote
From: Amit Kapila [mailto:amit.kapil...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 5:10 PM To: Amit Langote Cc: Jim Nasby; Robert Haas; Andres Freund; Alvaro Herrera; Bruce Momjian; Pg Hackers Subject: Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Amit Langote

Re: [HACKERS] XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE (WAL record) missing two params in its desc routine

2014-12-05 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 12/05/2014 04:54 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: Hi all, While reading the code in this area this morning, I noticed that wal_log_hints and track_commit_timestamp are not mentioned in the desc routine of XLOG_CHANGE_PARAMETER. Also, it is not mentioned in postgresql.conf.sample that a value

Re: [HACKERS] check-world failure: dummy_seclabel

2014-12-05 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 12/05/2014 07:29 AM, Adam Brightwell wrote: All, I've noticed that 'check-world' fails for dummy_seclabel after a 'clean'. I believe that in commit da34731, the EXTRA_CLEAN statement should have been removed from 'src/test/modules/dummy_seclabel/Makefile' as well. Ah, that's why those

Re: [HACKERS] libpq pipelining

2014-12-05 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 12/05/2014 02:30 AM, Matt Newell wrote: The explanation of PQgetFirstQuery makes it sound pretty hard to match up the result with the query. You have to pay attention to PQisBusy. PQgetFirstQuery should also be valid after calling PQgetResult and then you don't have to worry about

Re: [HACKERS] [Windows,PATCH] Use faster, higher precision timer API

2014-12-05 Thread David Rowley
On 2 December 2014 at 15:36, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 12/01/2014 09:51 PM, Marco Nenciarini wrote: I think this is a leftover, as you don't use elog afterwards. Good catch, fixed. I've looked over this again and tested it on a windows 8.1 machine. I cannot find any

Re: [HACKERS] Testing DDL deparsing support

2014-12-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:43:36PM +0900, Ian Barwick wrote: Standard regression tests are helpful because patch authors include new test cases in the patches that stress their new options or commands. This new test framework needs to be something that internally runs the regression tests and

Re: [HACKERS] Testing DDL deparsing support

2014-12-05 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote: On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:43:36PM +0900, Ian Barwick wrote: Standard regression tests are helpful because patch authors include new test cases in the patches that stress their new options or commands. This new test framework needs to be something that internally

Re: [HACKERS] initdb: Improve error recovery.

2014-12-05 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 11/27/2014 02:28 PM, Mats Erik Andersson wrote: Hello there, I would like to improve error recovery of initdb when the password file is empty. The present code declares Error 0 as the cause of failure. It suffices to use ferrer() since fgets() returns NULL also at a premature EOF. Thanks,

Re: [HACKERS] superuser() shortcuts

2014-12-05 Thread Stephen Frost
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: I have a hard time wrapping my head around what a *lot* of our users ask when they see a given error message, but if our error message is 'you must have a pear-shaped object

Re: [HACKERS] compress method for spgist - 2

2014-12-05 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 12/01/2014 02:44 PM, Teodor Sigaev wrote: Initial message: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5447b3ff.2080...@sigaev.ru Second version fixes a forgotten changes in pg_am. + /* Get the information we need about each relevant datatypes */ + + if

Re: [HACKERS] [REVIEW] Re: Compression of full-page-writes

2014-12-05 Thread Rahila Syed
I attempted quick review and could not come up with much except this + /* +* Calculate the amount of FPI data in the record. Each backup block +* takes up BLCKSZ bytes, minus the hole length. +* +* XXX: We peek into xlogreader's private decoded backup blocks for the +*

Re: [HACKERS] Review of GetUserId() Usage

2014-12-05 Thread Stephen Frost
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote: * Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote: 3. It messes around with pg_signal_backend(). There are currently no cases in which pg_signal_backend() throws an error, which is good, because it lets you write queries against pg_stat_activity()

Re: [HACKERS] Review of GetUserId() Usage

2014-12-05 Thread Andres Freund
On 2014-12-05 09:28:13 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: static int pg_signal_backend(int pid, int sig) { @@ -113,7 +117,12 @@ pg_signal_backend(int pid, int sig) return SIGNAL_BACKEND_ERROR; } - if (!(superuser() || proc-roleId == GetUserId())) + /* Only allow

Re: [HACKERS] Review of GetUserId() Usage

2014-12-05 Thread Stephen Frost
* Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: Is the 'Only allow superusers to signal superuser-owned backends' check actually safe that way? I personally try to never use a superuser role as the login user, but grant my account a superuser role that doesn't inherit. But IIRC PGPROC-roleId

Re: [HACKERS] XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE (WAL record) missing two params in its desc routine

2014-12-05 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: On 12/05/2014 04:54 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: Hi all, While reading the code in this area this morning, I noticed that wal_log_hints and track_commit_timestamp are not mentioned in the desc routine of

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

2014-12-05 Thread Stephen Frost
José, * José Luis Tallón (jltal...@adv-solutions.net) wrote: On 12/04/2014 07:35 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: The number of worker backends that can be used for parallel seq scan can be configured by using a new GUC parallel_seqscan_degree, the default value of which is zero and it means parallel

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

2014-12-05 Thread Stephen Frost
Amit, * Amit Kapila (amit.kapil...@gmail.com) wrote: postgres=# explain select c1 from t1; QUERY PLAN -- Seq Scan on t1 (cost=0.00..101.00 rows=100 width=4) (1 row) postgres=# set parallel_seqscan_degree=4; SET

Re: [HACKERS] [REVIEW] Re: Compression of full-page-writes

2014-12-05 Thread Andres Freund
On 2014-12-06 00:10:11 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 12:06 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Rahila Syed rahilasyed...@gmail.com wrote: I attempted quick review and could not come up with much except this

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw does not see enums

2014-12-05 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes: On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 05:52:03PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: What do you mean reconstruct the enum? Capture its state at the time when IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA is executed. Right now, if you

Re: [HACKERS] Add shutdown_at_recovery_target option to recovery.conf

2014-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: Here is patch which renames action_at_recovery_target to recovery_target_action everywhere. Thanks, Looks good to me. A couple of things that would be good to document as well in recovery-config.sgml: - the

Re: [HACKERS] INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}

2014-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:04 AM, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Yes, I think that's pretty important. With a negative attno so it's treated as a hidden col that must be explicitly named to be shown and won't be

Re: [HACKERS] Add shutdown_at_recovery_target option to recovery.conf

2014-12-05 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: Here is patch which renames action_at_recovery_target to recovery_target_action everywhere. Thanks, Looks good to me. A couple of

Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Amit Langote langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote: So, we're going to support exactly two levels of partitioning? partitions with partissub=false and subpartitions with partissub=true? Why not support only one level of partitioning here but then let the

Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote: Do we really need to support dml or pg_dump for individual partitions? I think we do. It's quite reasonable for a DBA (or developer or whatever) to want to dump all the data that's in a single partition; for example,

Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 3:11 AM, Amit Langote langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote: I think you are right. I think in this case we need something similar to column pg_index.indexprs which is of type pg_node_tree(which seems to be already suggested by Robert). So may be we can proceed with this

Re: [HACKERS] [REVIEW] Re: Compression of full-page-writes

2014-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Rahila Syed rahilasyed...@gmail.com wrote: If that's really true, we could consider having no configuration any time, and just compressing always. But I'm skeptical that it's actually true. I was referring to this for CPU utilization:

Re: [HACKERS] INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}

2014-12-05 Thread Josh Berkus
On 12/05/2014 07:59 AM, Robert Haas wrote: I think it's probably an important distinction, for the kinds of reasons Anssi mentions, but we should look for some method other than a system column of indicating it. Maybe there's a magic function that returns a Boolean which you can call, or

Re: [HACKERS] Role Attribute Bitmask Catalog Representation

2014-12-05 Thread Adam Brightwell
All, I have attached an updated patch that incorporates the feedback and recommendations provided. Thanks, Adam -- Adam Brightwell - adam.brightw...@crunchydatasolutions.com Database Engineer - www.crunchydatasolutions.com diff --git a/src/backend/access/transam/xlogfuncs.c

Re: [HACKERS] GSSAPI, SSPI - include_realm default

2014-12-05 Thread Stephen Frost
* Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote: On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: As such, I'd like to propose changing the default to be 'include_realm=1'. Per our previous discussions, but to make sure it's also on record for others, +1 for this

Re: [HACKERS] INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}

2014-12-05 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: I thought the point of INSERT ... ON CONFLICT update was so that you didn't have to care if it was a new row or not? If you do care, it seems like it makes more sense to do your own INSERTs and UPDATEs, as Django currently

Re: [HACKERS] INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}

2014-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote: Agreed. Importantly, we won't have painted ourselves into a corner where we cannot add it later, now that RETURNING projects updates tuples, too (V1.5 established that). Yeah, it seems fine to postpone that to a later

Re: [HACKERS] Role Attribute Bitmask Catalog Representation

2014-12-05 Thread Stephen Frost
Adam, * Adam Brightwell (adam.brightw...@crunchydatasolutions.com) wrote: I have attached an updated patch that incorporates the feedback and recommendations provided. Thanks. Comments below. diff --git a/src/backend/access/transam/xlogfuncs.c b/src/backend/access/transam/xlogfuncs.c ---

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

2014-12-05 Thread Jim Nasby
On 12/5/14, 9:08 AM, José Luis Tallón wrote: More over, when load goes up, the relative cost of parallel working should go up as well. Something like: p = number of cores l = 1min-load additional_cost = tuple estimate * cpu_tuple_cost * (l+1)/(c-1) (for c1, of course) ...

Re: [HACKERS] Testing DDL deparsing support

2014-12-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 09:29:59AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:43:36PM +0900, Ian Barwick wrote: Standard regression tests are helpful because patch authors include new test cases in the patches that stress their new options or

Re: [HACKERS] Testing DDL deparsing support

2014-12-05 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote: On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 09:29:59AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:43:36PM +0900, Ian Barwick wrote: Standard regression tests are helpful because patch authors include new test cases in the patches that stress

Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Jim Nasby
On 12/5/14, 3:42 AM, Amit Langote wrote: I think you are right. I think in this case we need something similar to column pg_index.indexprs which is of type pg_node_tree(which seems to be already suggested by Robert). So may be we can proceed with this type and see if any one else has better

Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Jim Nasby
On 12/5/14, 1:22 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: On 12/5/14, 3:42 AM, Amit Langote wrote: I think you are right. I think in this case we need something similar to column pg_index.indexprs which is of type pg_node_tree(which seems to be already suggested by Robert). So may be we can proceed with this

Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote: The other option would be to use some custom rowtype to store boundary values and have a method that can form a boundary tuple from a real one. Either way, I suspect this is better than frequently evaluating

Re: [HACKERS] INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}

2014-12-05 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Anssi Kääriäinen anssi.kaariai...@thl.fi wrote: If Django is going to use the INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE variant in Django for the existing save() method, then it needs to know if the result was an UPDATE or INSERT. If we are going to use this for other

Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Jim Nasby
On 12/5/14, 2:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote: The other option would be to use some custom rowtype to store boundary values and have a method that can form a boundary tuple from a real one. Either way, I suspect this is better

Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote: On what basis do you expect that? Every time you use a view, you're using a pg_node_tree. Nobody's ever complained that having to reload the pg_node_tree column was too slow, and I see no reason to suppose that things

Re: [HACKERS] Doing better at HINTing an appropriate column within errorMissingColumn()

2014-12-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Basically, the case in which I think it's helpful to issue a suggestion here is when the user has used the table name rather than the alias name. I

Re: [HACKERS] Doing better at HINTing an appropriate column within errorMissingColumn()

2014-12-05 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Well, if an alias is used, and you refer to an attribute using a non-alias name (i.e. the original table name), then you'll already get an error suggesting that the alias be used instead -- of course, that's nothing new.

Re: [HACKERS] Testing DDL deparsing support

2014-12-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 04:10:12PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Well, ALTER TABLE is special: you can give several subcommands, and each subcommand can be one of a rather long list of possible subcommands. Testing every combination would mean a combinatorial explosion, which would indeed be

[HACKERS] Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 query cancel

2014-12-05 Thread Josh Berkus
Hackers, This is not a complete enough report for a diagnosis. I'm posting it here just in case someone else sees something like it, and having an additional report will help figure out the underlying issue. * 700GB database with around 5,000 writes per second * 8 replicas handling around

Re: [HACKERS] Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 query cancel

2014-12-05 Thread Josh Berkus
On 12/05/2014 12:54 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: Hackers, This is not a complete enough report for a diagnosis. I'm posting it here just in case someone else sees something like it, and having an additional report will help figure out the underlying issue. * 700GB database with around 5,000

Re: [HACKERS] Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 query cancel

2014-12-05 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: We made some changes which decreased query cancel (optimizing queries, turning on hot_standby_feedback) and we haven't seen a segfault since then. As far as the user is concerned, this solves the problem, so I'm never going

Re: [HACKERS] Role Attribute Bitmask Catalog Representation

2014-12-05 Thread Adam Brightwell
Stephen, Thanks for the feedback. diff --git a/src/backend/access/transam/xlogfuncs.c b/src/backend/access/transam/xlogfuncs.c --- 56,62 backupidstr = text_to_cstring(backupid); ! if (!superuser() !check_role_attribute(GetUserId(), ROLE_ATTR_REPLICATION))

Re: [HACKERS] Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 query cancel

2014-12-05 Thread Jim Nasby
On 12/5/14, 4:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: We made some changes which decreased query cancel (optimizing queries, turning on hot_standby_feedback) and we haven't seen a segfault since then. As far as the user is concerned,

Re: [HACKERS] Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 query cancel

2014-12-05 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote: Perhaps we should also officially recommend production servers be setup to create core files. AFAIK the only downside is the time it would take to write a core that's huge because of shared buffers I don't think that's

Re: [HACKERS] Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 query cancel

2014-12-05 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com writes: On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote: Perhaps we should also officially recommend production servers be setup to create core files. AFAIK the only downside is the time it would take to write a core that's huge because

Re: [HACKERS] Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 query cancel

2014-12-05 Thread Josh Berkus
On 12/05/2014 02:41 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: Perhaps we should also officially recommend production servers be setup to create core files. AFAIK the only downside is the time it would take to write a core that's huge because of shared buffers, but perhaps there's some way to avoid writing those?

Re: [HACKERS] Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 query cancel

2014-12-05 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: to enable core dumps on the production replicas because writing out the 16GB of shared buffers they had took over 10 minutes in a test. No one ever thinks it'll happen to them anyway - recommending enabling core dumps seems

Re: [HACKERS] Elusive segfault with 9.3.5 query cancel

2014-12-05 Thread Jim Nasby
On 12/5/14, 5:49 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: On 12/05/2014 02:41 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: Perhaps we should also officially recommend production servers be setup to create core files. AFAIK the only downside is the time it would take to write a core that's huge because of shared buffers, but perhaps

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

2014-12-05 Thread Amit Kapila
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 8:38 PM, José Luis Tallón jltal...@adv-solutions.net wrote: On 12/04/2014 07:35 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: [snip] The number of worker backends that can be used for parallel seq scan can be configured by using a new GUC parallel_seqscan_degree, the default value of which

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

2014-12-05 Thread David Rowley
On 4 December 2014 at 19:35, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote: Attached patch is just to facilitate the discussion about the parallel seq scan and may be some other dependent tasks like sharing of various states like combocid, snapshot with parallel workers. It is by no means ready

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

2014-12-05 Thread Amit Kapila
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: Amit, * Amit Kapila (amit.kapil...@gmail.com) wrote: postgres=# explain select c1 from t1; QUERY PLAN -- Seq Scan on t1 (cost=0.00..101.00

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

2014-12-05 Thread Amit Kapila
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 8:43 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote: José, * José Luis Tallón (jltal...@adv-solutions.net) wrote: On 12/04/2014 07:35 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: The number of worker backends that can be used for parallel seq scan can be configured by using a new GUC

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

2014-12-05 Thread Amit Kapila
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote: On 12/5/14, 9:08 AM, José Luis Tallón wrote: More over, when load goes up, the relative cost of parallel working should go up as well. Something like: p = number of cores l = 1min-load

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

2014-12-05 Thread Amit Kapila
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 10:43 AM, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com wrote: On 4 December 2014 at 19:35, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote: Attached patch is just to facilitate the discussion about the parallel seq scan and may be some other dependent tasks like sharing of various