[HACKERS] Multiple synchronous_standby_names rules

2017-01-11 Thread James Sewell
ion of the current rules? Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf, 26-32 Pirrama Road, Pyrmont NSW 2009 *P *(+61) 2 8099 9000 <(+61)%202%208099%209000> *W* www.jirotech.com *F * (+61) 2 8099 9099 <(+61)%202%2

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

2016-03-21 Thread James Sewell
http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ > PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > <javascript:;>) > To make changes to your subscription: > ht

Re: [HACKERS] Choosing parallel_degree

2016-03-20 Thread James Sewell
OK cool, thanks. Can we remove the minimum size limit when the per table degree setting is applied? This would help for tables with 2 - 1000 pages combined with a high CPU cost aggregate. Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect

Re: [HACKERS] Choosing parallel_degree

2016-03-19 Thread James Sewell
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:05 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > > attached v3 drops the GUC part. > This looks good good. I do think that some threshold control would be good in the long term - but you are right Robert it just feels strange. Maybe once the final formula is

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

2016-03-19 Thread James Sewell
QUERY PLAN --- GroupAggregate (cost=0.56..600085.92 rows=31 width=16) Group Key: view_time_day -> Index Only Scan using base_view_time_day_count_i_idx on base (cost=0.56..450085.61 rows=3000 width=12) (3 rows) Cheers, James Se

Re: [HACKERS] Choosing parallel_degree

2016-03-19 Thread James Sewell
though. If I run parallel agg on a table with 4 rows with 2 workers will it run on two workers (2 rows each) or will the first one grab all 4 rows? Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000

Re: [HACKERS] Choosing parallel_degree

2016-03-15 Thread James Sewell
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > > I'm not too familiar with parallel planning, but I tried to implement > both in attached patch. I didn't put much effort into the > parallel_threshold GUC documentation, because I didn't really see a good >

Re: [HACKERS] Choosing parallel_degree

2016-03-14 Thread James Sewell
to get a parallel plan for a tiny table. Any idea on why this would be David? Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3 8370 8000 *W* www.lisasoft.com *F *(+61) 3

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

2016-03-14 Thread James Sewell
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > I kind of doubt this would work well, but somebody could write a patch > for it and try it out. OK I'll give this a go today and report back. Would the eventual plan be to use pg_proc.procost for the functions from

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

2016-03-14 Thread James Sewell
On Tuesday, 15 March 2016, Robert Haas wrote: > > > Does the cost of the aggregate function come into this calculation at > > all? In PostGIS land, much smaller numbers of rows can generate loads > > that would be effective to parallelize (worker time much >> than > >

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

2016-03-13 Thread James Sewell
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 3:05 PM, David Rowley wrote: > > Things to try: > 1. alter table a add column ts_date date; update a set ts_date = > date_trunc('DAY',ts); vacuum full analyze ts; > 2. or, create index on a (date_trunc('DAY',ts)); analyze a; > 3. or for

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

2016-03-13 Thread James Sewell
, but it currently isn't. */ Does this mean that even though we are aggregating in parallel, we are only operating on one child table at a time currently? Cheers, James Sewell, Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

2016-03-13 Thread James Sewell
4 width=12) (5 rows) Unsure what's happening here. James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3 8370 8000 *W* www.lisasoft.com *F *(+61) 3 8370 8099 On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:31

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

2016-03-13 Thread James Sewell
up Key: date_trunc('DAY'::text, pageview_start_tstamp) -> Parallel Seq Scan on celebrus_fact_agg_1_p2015_12 (cost=0.00..743769.76 rows=4221741 width=12) (actual time=0.066..1631 .650 rows=3618887 loops=7) One question - how is the upper limit of workers chosen? James Sewell,

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

2016-03-13 Thread James Sewell
.449 ms 6 2000.599 ms I'm pretty happy! Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3 8370 8000 *W* www.lisasoft.com *F *(+61) 3 8370 8099 On Mo

Re: [HACKERS] Random note of encouragement

2016-02-24 Thread James Sewell
Argh seems like a false alarm for now. I installed 9.5 from RPM source (the other was one I had installed previously) and the performance matched 9.6 Sorry about that, I must have *something* screwed up on the other one. Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect

Re: [HACKERS] Random note of encouragement

2016-02-24 Thread James Sewell
I've actually just tested this on 9.3 - and I get roughly the same as 9.6devel. Now going back to make sure my 9.5 environment is sane. Hopefully this isn't me jumping the gun. Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2

[HACKERS] Random note of encouragement

2016-02-24 Thread James Sewell
..670590.95 rows=31 width=13) Group Key: view_time_day -> Seq Scan on base (cost=0.00..520590.04 rows=3104 width=13) Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3 8370 8

[HACKERS] Streaming Replication clusters and load balancing

2015-09-21 Thread James Sewell
(replica with no reads or writes - until it becomes a master) Keen to hear comments. Cheers, James Sewell, Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3 8370 8000 *W* www.lisasoft.com *F *(+61) 3 8370 8099

[HACKERS] Composite index and min()

2015-02-25 Thread James Sewell
so it really hurts when I do the min call on the parent table. Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3 8370 8000 *W* www.lisasoft.com *F *(+61) 3 8370 8099

[HACKERS] ADD FOREIGN KEY locking

2015-02-17 Thread James Sewell
edge case when this lock would be required in this circumstance? No real urgency on this question, I just found it a bit strange and thought someone might be able to shed some light. James Sewell, Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC

Re: [HACKERS] ADD FOREIGN KEY locking

2015-02-17 Thread James Sewell
Oh, I've just noticed something in the Commit fest post - Reducing lock strength of trigger and foreign key DDL Perhaps I just need to be more patient. Cheers, James Sewell, Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Failback without rebuild

2014-02-06 Thread James Sewell
a crash), can anyone see any potential problems with this approach? Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3 8370 8000 *W* www.lisasoft.com *F *(+61) 3 8370 8099 On Wed, Feb 5

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Failback without rebuild

2014-02-06 Thread James Sewell
Node A could get ahead even if it has been shut down cleanly BEFORE the promotion? I'd always assumed if I shut down the master the slave would be at the same point after shutdown - is this incorrect? Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect

[HACKERS] PostgreSQL Failback without rebuild

2014-02-04 Thread James Sewell
/message-id/519df910.4020...@vmware.com Cheers, James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3 8370 8000 *W* www.lisasoft.com *F *(+61) 3 8370 8099

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add an ldapoption to disable chasing LDAP referrals

2013-10-16 Thread James Sewell
, James Sewell wrote: New patch attached. I've moved from using a boolean to an enum trivalue. When ldapreferrals is set to something other than 0 or 1 exactly, it just ignores the option. That's not good, I think. It should probably be an error

Re: [HACKERS] PSQL return coder

2013-10-15 Thread James Sewell
I was avoiding ON_ERROR_STOP because I was using ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK, but have just realised that if I encase my SQL in a transaction then rollback will still happen. Perfect! James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St

[HACKERS] PSQL return coder

2013-10-09 Thread James Sewell
-- James Sewell, PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect __ Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 *P *(+61) 3 8370 8000 * **W* www.lisasoft.com *F *(+61) 3 8370 8099 -- -- The contents of this email are confidential and may

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and schema names

2013-08-08 Thread James Sewell
=# alter table test1 owner to postgres; ALTER TABLE Cheers, James Sewell Solutions Architect _ [image: http://www.lisasoft.com/sites/lisasoft/files/u1/2013hieghtslogan_0.png] Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne, VIC, 3000 P: 03 8370 8000 F: 03 8370 8099 W

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add an ldapoption to disable chasing LDAP referrals

2013-07-08 Thread James Sewell
Hey, New patch attached. I've moved from using a boolean to an enum trivalue. Let me know what you think. Cheers, James James Sewell PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect _ [image: http://www.lisasoft.com/sites/lisasoft/files/u1/2013hieghtslogan_0.png

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add an ldapoption to disable chasing LDAP referrals

2013-07-03 Thread James Sewell
would be to have the default value (of the parameter) be true and set the boolean to false to disable it. I can't find any other examples of this though - I assume having a one off like this in the code is a bad thing also? I'm happy to let you guys decide. Cheers, James James Sewell PostgreSQL

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add an ldapoption to disable chasing LDAP referrals

2013-07-02 Thread James Sewell
Sewell James Sewell PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect _ [image: http://www.lisasoft.com/sites/lisasoft/files/u1/2013hieghtslogan_0.png] Level 2, 50 Queen St, Melbourne, VIC, 3000 P: 03 8370 8000 F: 03 8370 8099 W: www.lisasoft.com On Tue, Jul 2

[HACKERS] [PATCH] Add an ldapoption to disable chasing LDAP referrals

2013-07-01 Thread James Sewell
to be the default for ldapsearch on Linux these days. Hopefully I found all the documentation that I was meant to update, let me know if not though. Cheers, James Sewell PostgreSQL Team Lead / Solutions Architect _ [image: http://www.lisasoft.com/sites/lisasoft/files/u1