On 13.02.2017 19:20, Tom Lane wrote:
Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> writes:
I wonder why SUM aggregate is calculated for real (float4) type using
floating point accumulator?
If you can't deal with the vagaries of floating-point arithmetic, you
shouldn't be storing you
hich can demonstrate advantages of using
VCI index?
On 06.02.2017 04:26, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 8:28 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru>> wrote:
On 30.12.2016 06:55, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
Hi All,
Fu
found here:
https://github.com/postgrespro/vops.git
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
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/mail
natual) way.
Are there are reasons of using float4pl function for SUM aggregate instead of
float4_accum?
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes t
#define USE_ANONYMOUS_SHMEM
#endif
I wonder why do we prohibit now configuration of Postgres without mmap?
On 06.02.2017 12:47, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
Last update on the problem.
Using kdb tool (thank's to Tony Reix for advice and help) we get the
following trace of Poastgres backend
settings for lgpg_size, lgpg_regions and v_pinshm already seem
correct.
On 24.01.2017 18:08, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
Hi hackers,
Yet another story about AIX. For some reasons AIX very slowly cleaning
zombie processes.
If we launch pgbench with -C parameter then very soon limit for
maximal
de slower than without it. So autonomous transaction can be used for
audits (its the
primary goal of using ATX in Oracle PL/SQL applications) but this mechanism is
not efficient for concurrent execution of multiple transaction in one backend.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http
he patches to the latest master,
and share them with community.
Any Comments on the approach?
Regards,
Hari Babu
Fujitsu Australia
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
Eyecatcher/version mismatch in RWA
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
0 Feb 2 09:09 826_vm
-rw---1 pgstbf staff 8192 Feb 2 09:09 827
-rw---1 pgstbf staff 8192 Feb 2 09:09 828
-rw---1 pgstbf staff 4 Feb 2 09:09 PG_VERSION
-rw---1 pgstbf staff 512 Feb 2 09:09 pg_filenode.map
-rw---
d to debug it.
Heikki, I will be pleased if you have a chance to login at the system
and look at it yourself.
May be you will have some idea what's happening...
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgs
On 02/01/2017 08:28 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> But if there's no pressing reason to change it, let's leave it alone. It's
> not related to the problem at hand, right?
>
Yes, I agree with you: we should better leave it as it is.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Profes
ver, that should be
> invisible with the "check-world" tests I guess.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tony
>
>
> Le 01/02/2017 à 16:59, Konstantin Knizhnik a écrit :
>> Hi Tony,
>>
>> On 01.02.2017 18:42, REIX, Tony wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Konstanti
wing for a kind of
* distributed 2PC.
*/
For some scenarios it works well, but if we really need prepared state at
replica (as in case of multimaster), then it is not enough.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
S
of your patch.
I verified that it is correctly applied, build and postgres normally
works with it.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/src/include/port/atomics/arch-ppc.h b/src/include/port/atomics/arch-ppc.h
index
on AIX ?
We still have one open issue at AIX: see
https://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org/msg303094.html
It will be great if you can somehow help to fix this problem.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--with-libxml
--with-libxslt
--enable-nls
--enable-thread-safety
--sysconfdir=/etc/sysconfig/postgresql
Am I missing some option for more optimization on AIX ?
Thanks
Regards,
Tony
Le 01/02/2017 à 12:07, Konstantin Knizhnik a écrit :
Attached please f
On 01.02.2017 15:39, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 02/01/2017 01:07 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
Attached please find my patch for XLC/AIX.
The most critical fix is adding __sync to pg_atomic_fetch_add_u32_impl.
The comment in this file says that:
* __fetch_and_add() emits a leading
re_exchange_u32_impl.
I have fixed it by using __sync() built-in function instead.
Thanks to everybody who helped me to locate and fix this problem.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/src/include/port/atomics/arch
0,r6,0x
stwr0,0(r3)
mfcr r0
rlwinm r0,r0,3,31,31
rldicl r0,r0,0,56
stbr0,112(SP)
isync
lbzr3,112(SP)
addi SP,SP,128
bclr BO_ALWAYS,CR0_LT
sync is here!
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
On 30.01.2017 19:21, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 01/24/2017 04:47 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
Interesting.. What should happen here is that for the backend's own
insertion slot, the "insertingat" value should be greater than the
requested flush point ('upto' variable). That
PRECOMMIT+COMMIT_PREPARED either just COMMIT_PREPARED.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
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/mailp
is different
for GCC and XLC.
But ... if I rebuild Postgres without spinlocks, then the problem is
still reproduced.
On 24.01.2017 17:47, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
Hi Hackers,
We are running Postgres at AIX and encoountered two strqange problems:
active zombies process and deadlock in XLOG
On 24.01.2017 18:26, Tom Lane wrote:
Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> writes:
But ps shows that status of process is
[14:46:02]root@postgres:~ # ps -elk | grep 25691556
* A - 25691556 - - - - -
As far as I could find by googling, this means that the p
to defunct process, it
is not clear how to understand what's going on.
I wonder if somebody has encountered similar problems at AIX and may be
can suggest some solution to solve this problem.
Thanks in advance
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian
ust call this function
* *before* acquiring WALWriteLock, to avoid deadlocks. This function might
* need to wait for an insertion to finish (or at least advance to next
* uninitialized page), and the inserter might need to evict an old WAL
buffer
* to make room for a new one, which in turn requires WALWriteLock.
Which contradicts to the observed stack trace.
I wonder if it is really synchronization bug in xlog.c or there is
something wrong in this stack trace and it can not happen in case of
normal work?
Thanks in advance,
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
database and tablespace to reproduce
this issue.
So actually the whole sequence is
mkdir fs
initdb -D pgsql
pg_ctl -D pgsql -l logfile start
psql postgres
# create tablespace fs location '/home/knizhnik/dtm-data/fs';
# set default_tablespace=fs;
# create unlogged table foo(x integer);
# insert into f
Hi, hackers
I wonder if such behavior can be considered as a bug:
knizhnik@knizhnik:~/dtm-data$ psql postgres
psql (10devel)
Type "help" for help.
postgres=# create tablespace fs location '/home/knizhnik/dtm-data/fs';
CREATE TABLESPACE
postgres=# set default_tablespace=fs;
SE
LockBuffer(buffer, BUFFER_LOCK_UNLOCK);
+
/*
* Make tuple and any needed join variables available to ExecQual and
* ExecProject. The EXCLUDED tuple is installed in
ecxt_innertuple, while
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Post
On 30.09.2016 19:37, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
Later we try to check tuple visibility:
ExecCheckHeapTupleVisible(estate, , buffer);
and inside HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC try to set hint bit.
So,
re or exclusive lock is OK */
Assert(LWLockHeldByMe(BufferDescriptorGetContentLock(bufHdr)));
So the question is whether it is correct that ExecOnConflictUpdate tries
to access and update tuple without holding lock on the buffer?
Thank in advance,
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional
t->atttypid == InvalidOid) {
+ continue;
+ }
+ kind = pq_getmsgbyte(in);
+
switch (kind)
{
case 'n': /* null */
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
what is the best workaround
for the problem if we really need to have to separate indexes and want to
enforce unique constraint for both keys?
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hacker
Thank you for answers.
> No, you don't need to recreate them. Just advance your replication identifier
> downstream and request a replay position in the future. Let the existing slot
> skip over unwanted data and resume where you want to start replay.
>
> You can advance the replication
started
investigation of logical decoding code and found several things which I
do not understand.
Never seen this happen. Do you have more details about what exactly is
happening?
This is transaction at primary node:
root@knizhnik:/home/knizhnik/postgres_cluster/contrib/mmts# docker exec
-ti
ism in xlog which can enforce consistent decoding of
transaction (so that no transaction records are missed)?
May be I missed something but I didn't find any "record_number" or something
else which can identify first record of transaction.
Thanks in advance,
Konstantin Knizhnik,
Postgres P
ATABASE_CONNECTION,
BgWorkerStart_ConsistentState,
BGW_NEVER_RESTART,
PongLatch
};
static void PingPong()
{
RegisterBackgroundWorker();
RegisterBackgroundWorker();
}
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
S
Hi Thomas,
Barriers are really very simple and convenient mechanism for process
synchronization.
But it is actually a special case of semaphores: having semaphore primitive it
is trivial to implement a barrier.
We have semaphores in Postgres, but ... them can not be used by extensions:
there
t possible just to locate "-" or "+ operator for this type?
I do not see any difference here with locating comparison operator
needed for sorting.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers ma
nt row is less or
equal than specified range value. Looks like not something too complex
to implement, doesn't it? Are there some caveats?
Certainly it assumes that window is ordered by key and the key type
supports subtraction, so "text" can not be used here.
Something else?
--
Konstantin Kn
On 03.06.2016 02:02, Rod Taylor wrote:
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru>> wrote:
On 02.06.2016 17:22, Tom Lane wrote:
konstantin knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru
On 03.06.2016 16:05, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 1:34 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru>> wrote:
We have to add three more functions to eXtensible Transaction
Manager API (XTM):
/*
ext.
I wonder if not only DTM will be interested in sharing some common state
between workers and should we provide some way of replicating user defined
context between workers? From my point of view XTM seems to be good place for
it...
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional
On 02.06.2016 17:22, Tom Lane wrote:
konstantin knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> writes:
Attached please find patch for DefineDomain function.
You didn't attach the patch,
Sorry, but I did attached the patch - I see the attachment in my mail
received from the group.
Multidimen
On Jun 2, 2016, at 12:29 PM, Thom Brown wrote:On 2 June 2016 at 10:13, konstantin knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:Yes, it doesn't work:# CREATE DOMAIN teenager AS int CHECK (VALUE BETWEEN 13 AND 19);CREATE DOMAIN# SELECT 14::teenager; teenager -- 14(1 row)# SEL
On Jun 1, 2016, at 4:37 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 1 June 2016 at 14:20, Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru>
> wrote:
> I wonder why domain types can not be used for specification of array element:
>
> create domain objref as bigint;
> create table foo(x o
mplemented?
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
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
quiredXmin), I want to understand if it is real
problem of logical replication or we are doing something wrong? BDR
should be faced with the same problem if all updates are performed from
one node...
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Com
f this. Feature-wise, we need to be doing *more* of this kind of
work, not less. Lack of support for OO paradigms was one of the
drivers for NoSQL.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 05/14/2016 12:10 PM, Andreas Seltenreich wrote:
Konstantin Knizhnik writes:
Latest information from ISP RAS guys: them have made good progress
since February: them have rewritten most of methods of Scan, Aggregate
and Join to LLVM API.
Is their work available somewhere? I'm experimenting
On May 12, 2016, at 6:16 AM, Rajeev rastogi wrote:
> On 11 May 2016 19:50, Bruce Momjian Wrote:
>
>
>> I am giving a keynote at an IEEE database conference in Helsinki next
>> week (http://icde2016.fi/). (Yes, I am not attending PGCon Ottawa
>> because I accepted the Helsinki conference
On 11.05.2016 17:32, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 05:31:10PM +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
On 11.05.2016 17:20, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I am giving a keynote at an IEEE database conference in Helsinki next
week (http://icde2016.fi/). (Yes, I am not attending PGCon Ottawa
Sharding
Any others?
Incremental materialized views?
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
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
made good progress since
February: them have rewritten most of methods of Scan, Aggregate and
Join to LLVM API. Also then implemented automatic translation of
PostgreSQL backend functions to LLVM API.
As a result time of TPC-H Q1 query is reduced four times.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Pr
On 11.05.2016 17:00, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
Doesn't this actually mean that we need to have normal job scheduler which
is given queue of jobs and having some pool of threads will be able to
orginize eff
On 05/10/2016 08:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:00 AM, konstantin knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
What's wrong with it that worker is blocked? You can just have more workers
(more than CPU cores) to let other of them continue to do useful work.
Not
Hi,
> 1. asynchronous execution,
It seems to me that asynchronous execution can be considered as alternative to
multithreading model (in case of PostgreSQL the roles of threads are played by
workers).
Async. operations are used to have smaller overhead but have scalability
problems (because
On 04/02/2016 09:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> writes:
Attached please find patch for "ALTER INDEX ... WHERE ..." clause.
It is now able to handle all three possible situations:
1. Making index partial (add WHERE condition to the o
i;
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
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
g user-defined aggregate function which uses array_appendand so
materialize all values in memory:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Aggregate_Median
3. Using percentile aggregate:
http://blog.jooq.org/2015/01/06/how-to-emulate-the-median-aggregate-function-using-inverse-distribution-functions/
Th
On Mar 22, 2016, at 11:14 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>
> And each slot means connection with logical decoding attached to it so you
> don't really want to have thousands of those anyway. I think you'll hit other
> problems faster than loop over slots becomes problem if you plan to keep all
> of
On Mar 22, 2016, at 10:10 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 22 March 2016 at 14:32, konstantin knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru>
> wrote:
>
>> Ah you mean because with wal_log=true the origin advance is in different WAL
>> record than commit? OK yeah you migh
On Mar 21, 2016, at 4:30 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 21/03/16 14:25, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2016-03-21 14:18:27 +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>>> On 21/03/16 14:15, Andres Freund wrote:
> Only when the origin is actually setup for the current session. You
> need
> to call the
On 21.03.2016 15:10, Petr Jelinek wrote:
Hi,
On 19/03/16 11:46, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
Hi,
I am trying to use logical replication mechanism in implementation of
PostgreSQL multimaster and faced with one conceptual problem.
Originally logical replication was intended to support
done using current logical replication mechanism when changes of each slot are applied by
more than one process? Or the only alternative is to write/read origin LSNs in WAL myself, for example using custom WAL records?
Thanks in advance!
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://
Hi David,
Rebased patch is attached.
On 14.03.2016 15:09, David Steele wrote:
Hi Konstantin,
On 2/3/16 11:47 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
Attached please find patch for "ALTER INDEX ... WHERE ..." clause.
It is now able to handle all three possible situations:
1. Making index pa
g this 'fest. I think we'd be well
advised to boot it to the 2016-09 CF and focus our efforts on other stuff
that has a better chance of getting finished this month.
regards, tom lane
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian P
On Mar 10, 2016, at 1:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> writes:
>> I think that the best approach is to generate two different paths:
>> original one, when projection is always done before sort and another one
>> with postpone
f the path instead of comparing costs of
full paths.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
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/mail
On 03/08/2016 07:01 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> writes:
Attached please find improved version of the optimizer patch for LIMIT clause.
This patch isn't anywhere close to working after 3fc6e2d7f5b652b4.
(TBH, the reason I was negative about this up
is area to be part of core.
None of that means I would support any particular hook proposal, of
course.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes
and simple OLAP.
For OLTP we definitely need transaction manager to provide global
consistency.
And we have actually prototype of integration postgres_fdw with out
pg_dtm and pg_tsdtm transaction managers.
The results are quite IMHO promising (see attached diagram).
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres
.
Actually translating that into relcache and everything else would be a serious
amount of work.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
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
es mapping between local XIDs and
global CSNs. Visibility checking rules looks on CSNs, not on XIDs.
In both cases if system is for some reasons restarted and DTM plugin failed to
be loaded, you can still access database locally. No data can be lost.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professi
uspect that
a transaction manager API would end up similarly situated.
IMHO non-stable API is better than lack of API.
Just because it makes it possible to implement features in modular way.
And refactoring of API is not so difficult thing...
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgresp
Thank you very much for you comments.
On 01.03.2016 18:19, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 2:29 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
How do you prevent clock skew from causing serialization anomalies?
If node receives message from "feature&quo
have not (yet)
reviewed the literature for it.
The reference to the article is at our WiKi pages explaining our DTM:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/DTM
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/samehe/clocksi.srds2013.pdf
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
visibility check.
On 02/27/2016 01:48 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
pg_tsdtm is based on another approach: it is using system time
as CSN
Which brings up an interesting point, if we want logical
replic
On 02/27/2016 06:54 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
We do not have formal prove that proposed XTM is "general enough" to handle
all possible transaction manager implementations.
But there are
016-02-26 18:05:55 +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> The reason of the problem is that invalidation messages are not
delivered to
> replica after the end of concurrent create index.
> Invalidation messages are included in xlog as part of transaction
commit
>
On 02/27/2016 06:57 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
pg_tsdtm is based on another approach: it is using system time as CSN and
doesn't require arbiter. In theory there is no limit for scalability. But
diffe
On 02/26/2016 09:30 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
Yes, it is certainly possible to develop cluster by cloning PostgreSQL.
But it cause big problems both for developers, which have to permanently
synchronize their branch with master,
and, what is more important
people", who has different ideas on postgres future. That's why we propose
this patch, let's play the game !
I don't like to play games with the architecture of PostgreSQL.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via
ev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Russian Postgres Company
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
ostgres XC/XL will probably remain a separate fork of
Postgres. I don't think anyone knows the answer to this question, and I
don't know how to find the answer except to keep going with our current
FDW sharding approach.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
T
.
On 17.02.2016 12:16, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 17 February 2016 at 16:24, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru>> wrote:
Thanks for your explanation. I have to agree with your arguments
that in general case replication of DDL statement u
astics done by ALTER
TABLE, etc.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
address
this problem because there are not counters - justs single bit per page.
On 12.02.2016 18:55, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
What do you think about improving cache replacement clock-sweep alg
ARC (CAR is
inspired by ARC, but it is different algorithm).
As far as I know there are several problems with current clock-sweep algorithm
in PostgreSQL, especially for very large caches.
May be CAR can address some of them?
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http
its usage.
The complete PostgreSQL branch with all our changes can be found here:
https://github.com/postgrespro/postgres_cluster
-- Konstantin Knizhnik Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
diff --git a/contrib/pg_tsdtm/Makefile b/contrib/pg_tsdtm/Makefil
h together with "index-only scans
with partial indexes" patch:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/560c7213.3010...@2ndquadrant.com
only in this case regression test will produce expected output.
On 27.01.2016 23:15, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Konstant
On Feb 4, 2016, at 2:00 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
>
> My suspicion is that it would be useful to pre-order the new data before
> trying to apply it to the indexes.
Sorry, but ALTER INDEX is expected to work for all indexes, not only B-Tree,
and for them sorting may not be possible...
But for
.2016 01:11, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
I am very interested in this patch because it allows to use partial indexes to
... speed up inserts.
I have implemented "ALTER INDEX ... WHERE ..." construction which allows to
change predicate of partial index without necessity
re if either Kyotaro or Tomas should be
considered the patch author ... maybe both?)
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to you
34 rows=1 width=8)
(actual time=0.007..0.007 rows=1 loops=10)
Index Cond: (t1.k = k)
Planning time: 0.537 ms
Execution time: 0.241 ms
(7 rows)
On 01/30/2016 01:01 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru
<
ed to be interesting by community, I will
try to address these issues.
On 20.01.2016 12:28, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
Hi hackers,
I want to know opinion of community about possible ways of solving
quite common problem: increasing insert speed while still providing
indexes for efficient executi
On 21.01.2016 10:14, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 21 January 2016 at 06:41, konstantin knizhnik
<k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru>> wrote:
Certainly for B-Tree we can organize insert buffer (or pending
list) as sorted array or also as a tree.
But
proper recovery of main index in case of failure (assuming
that pending list is maintained in memory and is lost after the fault).
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresq
On Jan 21, 2016, at 5:14 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 20 January 2016 at 14:55, Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru>
> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Hi, I glad to see that you interested in that too.
> I think this is a good feature and I think it will be very useful t
.
So small patch...
Why it was not accepted?
I do no see any problems with it...
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional:http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
101 - 200 of 259 matches
Mail list logo