Hello!
Here is the text of my proposal which I've applied to GSoC.
(and link
http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/public/google/gsoc2014/lubennikovaav/5629499534213120)
Any suggestions and comments are welcome.
*Project name*
Support for index-only scans for GIST index
*Brief review*
2014-03-18 18:47 GMT+04:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
If the fetch() is specified by the developer, then using it, algorithm
can
retrieve the data directly to output areas at this stage, without
reference
to the heap.
This seems to be the crux of your proposal, but it seems
Hi, hackers!
There are first results of my work on GSoC project Index-only scans for
GIST.
1. Version of my project code is in forked repository
https://github.com/lubennikovaav/postgres/tree/indexonlygist2
Patch is in attachments
- This version is only for one-column indexes
- fetch() method is
Changes in amcanreturn() interface to support multicolumn indexes.
Hi, hackers
I work on GSoC project Support_for_Index-only_scans_for_GIST_GSoC_2014
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Support_for_Index-only_scans_for_GIST_GSoC_2014
There is a question of support multicolumn index only scans for
Hi, hackers!
There are new results of my work on GSoC project Index-only scans for
GIST.
Previous post is here:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Index-only-scans-for-GIST-td5804892.html
Repository is
https://github.com/lubennikovaav/postgres/tree/indexonlygist2
Patch is in attachments.
It
Hi, hackers!
I work on a GSoC project Index-only scans for GIST
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Support_for_Index-only_scans_for_GIST_GSoC_2014
Repository is
https://github.com/lubennikovaav/postgres/tree/indexonlygist2
Patch is in attachments.
It includes index-only scans for multicolumn GIST
Thank you for comment
Patch is already added in Performance topic.
2014-08-01 20:25 GMT+04:00 Fabrízio de Royes Mello fabriziome...@gmail.com
:
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
lubennikov...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, hackers!
I work on a GSoC project Index-only scans
2014-08-07 0:30 GMT+04:00 Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com:
* I'm getting two regression failures with this (opr_sanity and join).
opr_sanity failure is corrected.
But there is remain question with join.
I check the latest version of my github repo and there's no fail in join
Updated patch
* Compiler, merge and regression fails checked
* Regression tests was impoved
* GiST and amcanreturn docs updated
--
Best regards,
Lubennikova Anastasia
indexonlyscan_gist2.patch
Description: Binary data
indexonlyscan_gist_docs.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via
Finally there is a new version of patch (in attachments).
It provides multicolumn index-only scan for GiST indexes.
- Memory leak is fixed.
- little code cleanup
- example of performance test in attachmens
- function OIDs have debugging values (*) just to avoid merge conflicts
while testing
Thanks for answer.
Now it seems to be applied correctly.
2015-02-12 3:12 GMT+04:00 Thom Brown t...@linux.com:
On 11 February 2015 at 22:50, Anastasia Lubennikova
lubennikov...@gmail.com wrote:
Finally there is a new version of patch (in attachments).
It provides multicolumn index-only scan
I'm interested to participate as student again.
--
Best regards,
Lubennikova Anastasia
Hi, hackers!
Here is the text of my proposal which I've applied to GSoC.
(and link
http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/public/google/gsoc2015/lubennikovaav/5657382461898752
)
Any suggestions and comments are welcome.
*Project name*
Bitmap Index-only Count
*Brief review*
There is a
2015-03-24 18:01 GMT+04:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Anastasia Lubennikova lubennikov...@gmail.com writes:
There is a problem of slow counting in PostgreSQL [1]. The reason why
this
is slow is related to the *MVCC* implementation in PostgreSQL. Index-only
scans (implemented since
I add MemoryContext listCxt to avoid memory leak. listCxt is created once
in gistrescan (only for index-only scan plan ) and reseted when scan of the
leaf page is finished.
I do not sure if the problem was completely solved, so I wait for feedback.
* What's the reason for turning
Hi, hackers!
I am trying to create new index access method.
And I found strange Assert in PageIndexMultiDelete
http://doxygen.postgresql.org/bufpage_8c_source.html#l00791 function.
Assert
http://doxygen.postgresql.org/c_8h.html#a706ac5b1a53bd04067f81924b92cb9f6(nitems
MaxIndexTuplesPerPage
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova
a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru mailto:a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru
wrote:
1) Test and results are in attachments. Everything seems to work
as expected.
2) I dropped these notices. It was done only for debug purposes
Hi,
I have written microvacuum support for gist access method.
Briefly microvacuum includes two steps:
1. When search tells us that the tuple is invisible to all transactions it
is marked LP_DEAD and page is marked as has dead tuples,
2. Then, when insert touches full page which has dead tuples
30.07.2015 16:33, Alexander Korotkov пишет:
Hi!
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova
lubennikov...@gmail.com mailto:lubennikov...@gmail.com wrote:
I have written microvacuum support for gist access method.
Briefly microvacuum includes two steps:
1. When search
Can someone tell me, how I can compare two datum fields, when I do not
know the data type in advance inside an executor function?
In a nutshell, there is no way to compare Datums.
Datum is an abstact data type. It's the backend internal representation of
a single value of any SQL data type.
Hi,
I'm working on microvacuum for gist access method.
Briefly microvacuum includes two steps:
1. When search tells us that the tuple is invisible to all transactions it
is marked LP_DEAD and page is marked as has dead tuples,
2. Then, when insert touches full page which has dead tuples it calls
2015-07-27 20:05 GMT+04:00 Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi:
On 07/27/2015 06:46 PM, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
I need an advice, what would be better:
- to add new flag like F_HAS_GARBAGE,
- or to delete all mentions of F_TUPLES_DELETED and use it in gist
microvacuum.
According to commit
ave it in covering index for queries like
SELECT c4 FROM tbl WHERE c1=1000;
SELECT * FROM tbl WHERE c1=1000;
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional:http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
test.sql
Description: application/sql
diff --git a/src/backend/access/common/
08.10.2015 19:31, Thom Brown пишет:
On 8 October 2015 at 16:18, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
Hi hackers,
I'm working on a patch that allows to combine covering and unique
functionality for btree indexes.
Previous discussion was here:
1) Proposal th
t/tree.
Which one is better?
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional:http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
e patch author.
Do you think such approach will work? Is there interest in having
this done?
--
Alex
I think that you're looking for Feature matrix
<http://www.postgresql.org/about/featurematrix/>.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
s.
As I understand, this phrase means ONLY those commands which starts with
'\d' (such as \dt, \di, \des etc.)
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To ma
01.09.2015 21:23, Peter Geoghegan:
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:41 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
Now new B-tree index tuple must be inserted for each table row that we
index.
It can possibly cause page split. Because of MVCC even unique index could
c
the index->indpred, so it is impossible to recheck qual without
referencing to table.
In example:
create index tidx_partial on t(a) where a > 1000 and a < 2000;
explain analyze select sum(a) from t where a > 1000 and a < 1999;
it can use IndexOnlyScan.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgr
han without
microvacuum.
Time: 368,780 ms
Time: 69,769 ms
Time: 9,545 ms
Time: 12,427 ms
Please, review the patch again. I could have missed something.
P.S. Do I need to write any documentation update?
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postg
: 354,097 ms
Time: 82,206 ms
Time: 11,714 ms
Time: 11,277 ms
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/src/backend/access/gist/gist.c b/src/backend/access/gist/gist.c
index 0e49959..bb48782 100644
--- a/src/backend/access/gist
Hi,
I don't know too much about gist, but did a quick read through. Mostly
spotting some stylistic issues. Please fix those making it easier for
the next reviewer.
Thank you for review! All mentioned issues are fixed.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional:http://www.postgrespro.com
in
gistvacuumpage(). Patch is attached.
But It seems to me that it would be better to rewrite all mentions of
TupleDelete to MultiDelete in gist code.
I'm working on it.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company()
diff --git a/src/backend/access
key columns in index. counted
from begin of index.*/
int16 ind_n_total_atts; /* number of columns in index.*/
In our case:
ind_n_unique_atts = 2; // f1, f2
ind_n_key_atts = 3; // f1, f2, f3
ind_n_total_atts = 4; // f1, f2, f3, f4
P.S. I use many ideas from discussion without quotations just becau
. It refers to CTE, so I expect to see after
that a kind of query expression. But maybe that's just matter of habit.
BTW, that's the first syntax change I'm working with.
Is there any convention in PostgreSQL about new keywords and so on?
Where can I find it?
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres
which
has unique constrains. */
I think, that numbers of all attributes themselves are not needed. Is it
right?
I'd like to see your suggestions about syntax changes.
And of course any other comments are welcome.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional:http://www.postgrespro.com
15.09.2015 12:18, David Rowley:
On 12 September 2015 at 00:45, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru>>
wrote:
I've started work on a patch that allows to combine covering and
unique functionality.
Great to hear someon
03.12.2015 04:03, Robert Haas пишет:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
If we don't need c4 as an index scankey, we don't need any btree opclass on
it.
But we still want to have it in covering index for queries like
SELECT c4 FR
important.
Attrs which have oplass and want to use it in ScanKey must be situated
before the others.
idx2 will use c2 in IndexCond, while idx3 will not. But I think that
it's the job for DBA.
If you see any related changes in planner, please mention them. I
haven't explored that part of code yet an
to reproduce it
performing test with and whithot the patch.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
at the EXPLAIN
code to see how those are determined yet.
Hmm... Do you use both patches?
And could you provide index definition, I can't reproduce the problem
assuming that index is created by the statement
CREATE INDEX idx ON ab (a) INCLUDING (b);
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres
04.01.2016 11:49, David Rowley:
On 2 December 2015 at 01:53, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru>>
wrote:
Finally, completed patch "covering_unique_3.0.patch" is here.
It includes the functionality discuss
x Only Scan using newidx on newt (cost=0.43..374.68 rows=1
width=8) (actual time=0.018..2.595 rows=6 loops=1)
Index Cond: (c1 < 1)
Filter: (c3 < 20)
Rows Removed by Filter: 9993
Heap Fetches: 0
Planning time: 0.078 ms
Execution time: 2.612 ms
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Pos
y related changes, please, let me know.
1.
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/56168952.4010...@postgrespro.ru#56168952.4010...@postgrespro.ru
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
28.01.2016 20:03, Thom Brown:
On 28 January 2016 at 16:12, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru>>
wrote:
28.01.2016 18:12, Thom Brown:
On 28 January 2016 at 14:06, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...
28.01.2016 18:12, Thom Brown:
On 28 January 2016 at 14:06, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru>>
wrote:
31.08.2015 10:41, Anastasia Lubennikova:
Hi, hackers!
I'm going to begin work on effective storage of du
roduce it, but I couldn't. Debug will be much easier now.
I hope I'll fix these issueswithin the next few days.
BTW, I found a dummy mistake, the previous patch contains some unrelated
changes. I fixed it in the new version (attached).
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www
29.01.2016 20:43, Thom Brown:
On 29 January 2016 at 16:50, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
29.01.2016 19:01, Thom Brown:
On 29 January 2016 at 15:47, Aleksander Alekseev
<a.aleks...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
I tested this patch on x64 and ARM serve
31.08.2015 10:41, Anastasia Lubennikova:
Hi, hackers!
I'm going to begin work on effective storage of duplicate keys in
B-tree index.
The main idea is to implement posting lists and posting trees for
B-tree index pages as it's already done for GIN.
In a nutshell, effective storing
does not handle included columns
now. I will fix it in the next version of the patch.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscrip
us at all.
Maybe you should explain this magic number 7 in the comment above?
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscript
in while flushing pending list into the index?
Why not read this data directly from the table? I feel that I've missed
something important here.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-h
25.01.2016 03:32, Jeff Janes:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 7:19 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
Done. I hope that my patch is close to the commit too.
Thanks for the update.
I've run into this problem:
create table foobar (x text, w text);
create unique
html
Since I haven't watched it closely, It seems to be open still. I think
it'll be interesting to you.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
ures refactoring" as a separate patch.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml
index 97ef618..d17a06c 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml
+++ b/do
ry to fix it and add expressions support a bit later.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
erform tests, where the patch is
supposed to make significant changes.
So I would rely on your and the other reviewers results.
Except mentioned notes, I suppose the patch is good enough to pass it to
a reviewer.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
18.02.2016 20:18, Anastasia Lubennikova:
04.02.2016 20:16, Peter Geoghegan:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
I fixed it in the new version (attached).
Thank you for the review.
At last, there is a new patch version 3.0. Afte
02.02.2016 15:50, Anastasia Lubennikova:
31.01.2016 11:04, David Rowley:
On 27 January 2016 at 03:35, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
including_columns_3.0 is the latest version of patch.
And changes regarding the previous version are attached in a
separate
31.01.2016 11:04, David Rowley:
On 27 January 2016 at 03:35, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
including_columns_3.0 is the latest version of patch.
And changes regarding the previous version are attached in a separate patch.
Just to ease the review and debu
it as is?
But I suppose that behavior of undocumented dates is not essential.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http
15.03.2016 03:21, Vitaly Burovoy:
On 3/14/16, Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
14.03.2016 16:23, David Steele:
On 2/25/16 4:44 PM, Vitaly Burovoy wrote:
Added to the commitfest 2016-03.
[CF] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/540/
This looks like a
14.03.2016 16:02, David Steele:
Hi Anastasia,
On 2/18/16 12:29 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
18.02.2016 20:18, Anastasia Lubennikova:
04.02.2016 20:16, Peter Geoghegan:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
I fixed it in t
select bt_index_check('idx');
ERROR: cannot check index "idx"
DETAIL: index is not yet ready for insertions
But I'm sure that it's a problem of my patch. So I'll fix it and try again.
[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/433/
[2] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/494/
--
Anastasia L
, that allows to enable/disable compression
for each particular index.
4. Recheck locking considerations. I tried to write code as less
invasive as possible, but we need to make sure that algorithm is still
correct.
5. Change BTMaxItemSize
6. Bring back microvacuum functionality.
--
Anastasia
15.03.2016 22:28, David Steele:
On 3/4/16 2:56 PM, Vitaly Burovoy wrote:
On 3/4/16, Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
I think that you should update documentation. At least description of
epoch on this page:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/fun
02.03.2016 08:50, Michael Paquier:
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:10 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
01.03.2016 19:55, Anastasia Lubennikova:
It is not the final version, because it breaks pg_dump for previous
versions. I need some help from hackers here.
pgdump
05.04.2016 01:48, Peter Geoghegan :
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
It's a bit more complicated to add it into index creation algorithm.
There's a trick with a "high key".
/*
* We copy the last
our reply.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/contrib/dblink/dblink.c b/contrib/dblink/dblink.c
index 9c8e308..891325d 100644
--- a/contrib/dblink/dblink.c
+++ b/contrib/dblink/dblink.c
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ static r
But now they are definitely unnecessary. Updated patch is attached
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/contrib/dblink/dblink.c b/contrib/dblink/dblink.c
index 9c8e308..891325d 100644
--- a/contrib/dblink/dblink.c
+++ b/contr
ut it's compatibility with
covering indexes.
We already discussed it in the thread
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/433/
Tiny attached patch fixes this issue.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/contrib/amcheck/amch
08.04.2016 15:45, Anastasia Lubennikova:
08.04.2016 15:06, Teodor Sigaev:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote:
Personally, I like documenting assertions, and will sometimes write
assertions that the compiler could easily optimize away. Maybe going
*tha
orward
to see them.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/contrib/dblink/dblink.c b/contrib/dblink/dblink.c
index 9c8e308..891325d 100644
--- a/contrib/dblink/dblink.c
+++ b/contrib/dblink/dblink.c
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@
ndex->nkeycolumns replacement in
match_clause_to_index. Fixed.
I also updated couple of typos in documentation.
Thank you again for the detailed review.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional:http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/contrib/dblink/dblink.c
06.04.2016 16:15, Anastasia Lubennikova :
06.04.2016 03:05, Peter Geoghegan:
* There is some stray whitespace within RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap().
I think you should have updated it with code, though. I don't think
it's necessary for HOT updates to work, but I think it could be
necessary so
ture works on suffix
truncation or something like that, but IMHO for now it's enough.
Do you have any objections or comments?
[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/494/
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/contrib/
* interesting.
Maybe you can expand it?
- Is JULIAN_MAXYEAR4STAMPS helps to avoid overflow in all possible cases?
- Why do we need to hold both definitions? I suppose, it's a matter of
backward compatibility, isn't it?
3. (nitpicking) I don't sure about "4STAMPS" suffix. "4&
29.02.2016 18:17, Anastasia Lubennikova:
25.02.2016 21:39, Jeff Janes:
As promised, here's the new version of the patch
"including_columns_4.0".
I fixed all issues except some points mentioned below.
Thanks for the update patch. I get a compiler warning:
genam.c: I
21.03.2016 19:53, Anastasia Lubennikova:
19.03.2016 08:00, Peter Geoghegan:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:15 AM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net>
wrote:
It looks like this patch should be marked "needs review" and I have
done so.
Uh, no it shouldn't. I've posted an
ession, I'll be glad to discuss them.
Same for any other ideas of B-tree optimization.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your sub
17.03.2016 06:27, Vitaly Burovoy:
On 2016-03-15, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote:
On 3/4/16 2:56 PM, Vitaly Burovoy wrote:
On 3/4/16, Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
I think that you should update documentation. At least description of
epoch
c, argv);/* does not return */
#endif
And the last, but not least. Do we have any
presentations/articles/READMEs/whatever
about caches (src/backend/utils/cache/*) in postgresql?
I found nothing, besides comments in the code.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.c
hould be memory safe.
That is not the project policy.
regards, tom lane
--
Dirk Rudolph | Senior Software Engineer
Netcentric AG
M: +41 79 642 37 11
D: +49 174 966 84 34
dirk.rudo...@netcentric.biz <mailto:dirk.rudo...@netcentric.biz> |
www.netc
t renaming and rearrangement of functions
between files, so, if nobody has conceptual objections, all I need from
reviewers
is an attentive look to find typos, grammar mistakes and overlooked areas.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional:http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres
duced significantly. 89MB against 289MB without patch.
Could you explain in details, why does it happen?
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes t
05.08.2016 16:30, Kevin Grittner:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
They can be logically separated into three categories:
"primary storage" - r, S, t, v. They store data and visibility information.
The only implementa
06.08.2016 19:51, Andrew Borodin:
Anastasia , thank you for your attentive code examine.
2016-08-05 21:19 GMT+05:00 Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru>:
First of all, shouldn't we use MAXALIGN(oldsize) instead of oldsize?
Although, I'm quite sure that it was already a
.
You can find it on commitfest:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/10/700/
I'll be glad to see your thoughts on the thread.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
05.08.2016 20:56, Alvaro Herrera:
Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
Working on page compression and some other issues related to
access methods, I found out that the code related to heap
looks too complicated. Much more complicated, than it should be.
Since I anyway got into this area, I want
08.08.2016 03:51, Michael Paquier:
On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
So there is a couple of patches. They do not cover all mentioned problems,
but I'd like to get a feedback before continuing.
I agree that we
ngs useful and important feature. Build shall be repaired; other
my suggestions are only suggestions.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin, Octonica & Ural Federal University.
The new status of this patch is: Waiting on Author
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.c
08.08.2016 12:43, Anastasia Lubennikova:
08.08.2016 03:51, Michael Paquier:
On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
So there is a couple of patches. They do not cover all mentioned
problems,
but I'd like to get a fe
robably because I haven't fully figured them out yet.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
haven't fully figured them out yet.
Thank you again for beginning the big project.
Looking forward to the prototype. I think it will make the discussion
more concrete and useful.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent v
add support of json and other types,
such as smallint and bigint.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/src/backend/utils/adt/jsonb.c b/src/backend/utils/adt/jsonb.c
index b9bf18f..4bbe81c 100644
--- a/src/backend
13.02.2017 19:34, Andrew Dunstan:
On 01/13/2017 08:36 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
I implemented IF NOT EXISTS option for CREATE SERVER and CREATE USER
MAPPING statements
for one of our customers.
I think other users can also find it useful for scripting and
automated tasks.
The patches
for the patch. Hope to see it in 10.0.
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
09.08.2016 19:45, Andrew Borodin:
Here is new version of the patch, now it includes recommendations from
Anastasia Lubennikova.
I've investigated anamalous index size decrease. Most probable version
appeared to be true.
Cube extension, as some others, use Guttman's polynomial time split
06.09.2016 07:44, Pavan Deolasee:
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova
<a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru>>
wrote:
Thank you for the review, I'll fix these problems in final version.
Posting the first message I inten
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
