Re: conversion efforts (Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question)

2007-02-26 Thread Michael Paesold
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Warren Turkal wrote: On Saturday 24 February 2007 15:18, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Keep in mind that the repository as converted by Josh, above, is strangely corrupted in weird and unpredictable ways. Would you care to elaborate on that statement? I'd like to check my

[HACKERS] Resumable vacuum proposal and design overview

2007-02-26 Thread Galy Lee
Hi We are developing a new feature for vacuum, here is a brief overview about it. Introduction A) What is it? This feature enables vacuum has resumable capability. Vacuum can remembers the point it stops, then resumes interrupted vacuum operation from the point next time. The

Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Markus Schiltknecht
Hi, Andrew Dunstan wrote: O.k. everyone pay attention, I am about to agree with Greg! ;) Greg are their tools to migrate CVS to monotone or whatever your favorite is? The reason I ask is that I migrate the CVS to SVN every 4 hours I think it is and it isn't perfect. monotone ships it's own

Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Markus Schiltknecht
Hi, Matthew D. Fuller wrote: I would say that a far greater contributor in practice would simply be frequency. If you diverge on your significant feature for 6 months, then try to merge in upstream changes from the main dev, you will be in hell no matter what merge algorithm you use. Do you

Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Markus Schiltknecht
Hi, Tom Lane wrote: Yah know, the one bit of these pitches that always sounds like pure snake oil is the claim that they offer some kind of mechanical solution to merge conflicts. AFAICS that has nothing to do with the SCMS in use and everything to do with whether your diff command is

Re: [HACKERS] [Monotone-devel] Re: SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Markus Schiltknecht
Hi, Warren Turkal wrote: Cvs2svn seems to make as much sense of CVS data as possible. The only real problem I have seen is with regard to the malformed files I mentioned earlier. cvs2svn (1.x) still heavily relies on timestamps, which is certainly correct in most cases. But they are

Re: [HACKERS] Resumable vacuum proposal and design overview

2007-02-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 18:21 +0900, Galy Lee wrote: This implementation accepts stop request at *blocks level* in step 1-4. D) How to stop and resume - stop: When vacuum stop in step 1-4, vacuum perform following things: vacuum saves dead tuple list, the heap block number on

Re: [HACKERS] Resumable vacuum proposal and design overview

2007-02-26 Thread tomas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 06:21:50PM +0900, Galy Lee wrote: Hi We are developing a new feature for vacuum, here is a brief overview about it. [...] Concurrent vacuum mainly has the following steps to vacuum a table: 1. scan heap to collect

[HACKERS] Bitmap index stuff

2007-02-26 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Hi, How are you doing with the bitmap indexes? I've been trying to get my head around the patch a couple of times to add the vacuum support, but no matter how simple I try to keep it, I just always seem to get stuck. It looks like vacuum support would need: - something similar to

Re: [HACKERS] Acclerating INSERT/UPDATE using UPS

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Joshua D. Drake wrote: Christopher Browne wrote: A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hideyuki Kawashima) wrote: I appreciate your great suggestion! It is great honor for me if Sigres will be merged to PostgreSQL. Since the changes of Sigres from

Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread mark
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 11:07:01AM +0100, Markus Schiltknecht wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Yah know, the one bit of these pitches that always sounds like pure snake oil is the claim that they offer some kind of mechanical solution to merge conflicts. AFAICS that has nothing to do with the SCMS in

Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Markus Schiltknecht
Hi, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll have to try kdiff3 - but the merge command, although it often works, I strongly dislike when it marks up the lines as there was a conflict here and gives you three files in the directory to choose to start from. This is far too manual, which invites mistakes.

[HACKERS] NPGSQL/ODBC performance

2007-02-26 Thread RPK
I installed NPGSQL for connectivity with VB.NET but noticed it's performance slow as compared with ODBC driver. Why? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/NPGSQL-ODBC-performance-tf3293489.html#a9160834 Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [HACKERS] NPGSQL/ODBC performance

2007-02-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
RPK wrote: I installed NPGSQL for connectivity with VB.NET but noticed it's performance slow as compared with ODBC driver. Why? As I told you two days ago, this is the wrong list for these questions. You need to ask NPGSQL questions on its mailing lists, not here. The core postgresql

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007)

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Jonah H. Harris wrote: On 2/23/07, Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A good example of the wrong way to do it is the Full Disjunctions project. Great idea, Great project, not bitrot and hard space because it hasn't been touched or maintained sense release. Don't get me started

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
I realized this proposal has been withdrawn, but the fact the proposal even illicited comments exploring it requires me to comment. Folks, how can we entertain ideas that would break SELECT * and no-column-list INSERTs for a small performance boost? If there was no other way to get the

Re: [HACKERS] urgent: upgraded to 8.2, getting kernel panics

2007-02-26 Thread Merlin Moncure
On 2/23/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Merlin Moncure [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On friday we upgraded a critical backend server to postgresql 8.2 running on fedora core 4. Umm ... why that particular choice of OS? Red Hat dropped update support for FC4 some time ago, and AFAIK the

Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] urgent: upgraded to 8.2, getting kernel panics

2007-02-26 Thread Devrim GUNDUZ
Hi, On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 08:24 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote: we tried update to the latest via yum update with no help. As Tom stated, FC4 is no more supported; therefore you won't be able to get newer kernel via yum. as promised, here is the best photo of the panic we could get:

Re: [HACKERS] [Monotone-devel] Re: SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Tom Lane wrote: Warren Turkal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Saturday 24 February 2007 23:11, Tom Lane wrote: I also tend to think that a conversion will be easier in a year or two than it is today --- the problems noted upthread are certainly a heads-up that cvs2svn is not yet as robust as one

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Bruce Momjian wrote: Folks, how can we entertain ideas that would break SELECT * and no-column-list INSERTs for a small performance boost? If there was no other way to get the performance boost, and the features was rarely used, we might consider such a change, but neither is true in this

[HACKERS] Sottoscrizione

2007-02-26 Thread Enrico
Ci vogliono solo 30 secondi del vostro tempo...per fare qualcosa di buono. Un cittadino italiano ha finalmente deciso che gli fa troppo male respirare le polveri sottili e vedere persone a cui vuole bene morire di cancro intorno a sé per il benessere delle multinazionali petrolifere e ha

Re: conversion efforts (Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question)

2007-02-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
I imagine the problems are caused by manual mangling of the files in the early days, like the perl5 dir stuff you found. Hmm, if you only checked using the Trac interface, maybe this is an issue with re-creating the SVN repo. Joshua, do you run trac-admin /path/to/trac/env resync after

Re: [HACKERS] NPGSQL/ODBC performance

2007-02-26 Thread RPK
SORRY. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/NPGSQL-ODBC-performance-tf3293489.html#a9162156 Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Folks, how can we entertain ideas that would break SELECT * and no-column-list INSERTs for a small performance boost? If there was no other way to get the performance boost, and the features was rarely used, we might consider such a change,

Re: conversion efforts (Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question)

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Warren Turkal wrote: On Saturday 24 February 2007 16:47, Chad Wagner wrote: head pgsql/src/interfaces/perl5/Attic/test.pl.oldstyle,v head ? ?1.3; access; symbols ? ? ? ? Release-1-6-0:1.1.1.1 ? ? ? ? creation:1.1.1.1 ? ? ? ? creation:1.1.1; ? ? What the heck happened here? locks;

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
In Simon's defense, I think we need to feel free to brainstorm a bit, and propose things that might seem odd. There are plenty of cool heads around to shoot down bad ideas, but we'll only make progress by cherry-picking the good ideas. If one out of ten of my ideas is useful I think I'm

Re: [HACKERS] [Monotone-devel] Re: SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Warren Turkal wrote: On Sunday 25 February 2007 23:23, Tom Lane wrote: It was mentioned upthread that Josh has seen repeated problems with his conversions. I am manually inspecting the diff between CVS tag REL_8_1_0 and SVN tag tags/REL_8_1_0/pgsql, and I am not finding any differences

Re: conversion efforts (Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question)

2007-02-26 Thread Warren Turkal
On Monday 26 February 2007 10:13, Bruce Momjian wrote: Done. Any other problems? I don't see the fix in the rsync archive. When will it show up there? For reference, the changes were needed in the following files in cvsroot/pgsql/src/interfaces/perl5/Attic: * ApachePg.pl,v *

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 11:20 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: I realized this proposal has been withdrawn, but the fact the proposal even illicited comments exploring it requires me to comment. Folks, how can we entertain ideas that would break SELECT * and no-column-list INSERTs for a small

Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Warren Turkal
On Monday 26 February 2007 08:04, Markus Schiltknecht wrote: Others you might want to try:   - meld (in python, IMO worse than kdiff3)   - xxdiff (I've never really used that one, but other monotone hackers seem to like it as well) A couple more options: * kompare (this one is pretty) *

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Simon Riggs wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 11:20 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: I realized this proposal has been withdrawn, but the fact the proposal even illicited comments exploring it requires me to comment. Folks, how can we entertain ideas that would break SELECT * and

Re: conversion efforts (Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question)

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Warren Turkal wrote: On Monday 26 February 2007 10:13, Bruce Momjian wrote: Done. Any other problems? I don't see the fix in the rsync archive. When will it show up there? For About an hour. reference, the changes were needed in the following files in

Re: [HACKERS] Load distributed checkpoint

2007-02-26 Thread Inaam Rana
On 12/19/06, ITAGAKI Takahiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Takayuki Tsunakawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I performed some simple tests, and I'll show the results below. (1) The default case 235 80 226 77 240 (2) No write case 242 250 244 253 280 (3) No checkpoint case 229 252 256

Re: conversion efforts (Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question)

2007-02-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Joshua D. Drake wrote: I imagine the problems are caused by manual mangling of the files in the early days, like the perl5 dir stuff you found. Hmm, if you only checked using the Trac interface, maybe this is an issue with re-creating the SVN repo. Joshua, do you run trac-admin

Re: [HACKERS] Resumable vacuum proposal and design overview

2007-02-26 Thread Tom Lane
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: WARNING: I don't really know what I'm talking about -- but considering that vaccuming a large table across several maintainance windows is one of the envisioned scenarios, it might make sense to try to update the statistics (i.e. to do partially step 7) on each

Re: conversion efforts (Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question)

2007-02-26 Thread Warren Turkal
On Monday 26 February 2007 10:13, Bruce Momjian wrote: Done. Any other problems? Only figuring out the encoding issues with cvs. Thanks, wt -- Warren Turkal (w00t) ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 13:02 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 11:20 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: I realized this proposal has been withdrawn, but the fact the proposal even illicited comments exploring it requires me to comment. Folks, how can

Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Robert Treat
On Monday 26 February 2007 10:04, Markus Schiltknecht wrote: Hi, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll have to try kdiff3 - but the merge command, although it often works, I strongly dislike when it marks up the lines as there was a conflict here and gives you three files in the directory to

[HACKERS] Compile libpq for pg8.2.3 with vc7

2007-02-26 Thread Jeff McKenna
Trying to compile 8.2.3 with VC 7.10.3077 (2003) on Win32, I get the following error: mypath\postgresql-8.2.3\src\include\c.h(88) : fatal error C1083: Cannot open include file: 'pg_config_os.h': No such file or directory Is this a known issue? (is there a patch available?) thanks. jeff

Re: conversion efforts (Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question)

2007-02-26 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Joshua D. Drake wrote: Joshua D. Drake wrote: I imagine the problems are caused by manual mangling of the files in the early days, like the perl5 dir stuff you found. Hmm, if you only checked using the Trac interface, maybe this is an issue with re-creating the SVN repo. Joshua, do

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The order of the columns is *arbitrary* in relational theory; SQL is very far from being relational theory... regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the

Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Robert Treat wrote: FWIW ClearCase also offers a command line version of its merge tool, where it shows three columns (a la diff --side-by-side) and allows you to pick which column you want to merge in (repo, change1, or change2 for example). It's a nice attempt at doing it on the command

Re: conversion efforts (Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question)

2007-02-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Joshua D. Drake wrote: Joshua D. Drake wrote: I imagine the problems are caused by manual mangling of the files in the early days, like the perl5 dir stuff you found. Hmm, if you only checked using the Trac interface, maybe this is an issue with re-creating the SVN

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Simon Riggs wrote: wondered why that proposal had been overlooked, so I started a separate thread to ensure that the idea was discussed. That seems very similar to many of your own posts. True, but usually I don't see the breakage. Sorry, I just meant you summarise ideas that

Re: [HACKERS] Compile libpq for pg8.2.3 with vc7

2007-02-26 Thread Jeff McKenna
Please ignore this question. I was compiling with the /src/interfaces/libpq/win32.mak file. I later noticed that the proper way to compile libpq is to use the /src/win32.mak file. thanks. jeff Jeff McKenna wrote: Trying to compile 8.2.3 with VC 7.10.3077 (2003) on Win32, I get the

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Josh Berkus
Bruce, True, but usually I don't see the breakage. What concerned me is you saw some of the breakage, but still went ahead with the proposal. That's completely unfair, Bruce. This is a *discussion list*, and hackers are free to propose and discuss even far-out improbable ideas in the hopes

Re: [HACKERS] Developer TODO List as a PostgreSQL DB

2007-02-26 Thread Josh Berkus
Gottfried, Just wondering after reading so many mails from Hackers List.(its 2.15 AM now!!) Is there anybody working on something to create a DB from a) The TODO list http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.TODO.html b) The sourcecode of PostgreSQL c) The relevant Mailings from the developers

Re: [HACKERS] Simple Column reordering

2007-02-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Josh Berkus wrote: For my part, I continue to the interested in this proposal and would like to see some performance benchmarks on it. If there is enough performance gain, I think it would be possible to implement a logical order which was different from the physical order. Such a feature

Re: [HACKERS] help required regarding queryin postgis database from google maps

2007-02-26 Thread Andrew Hammond
On Feb 25, 9:34 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Dunstan) wrote: Phani Kishore wrote: hi ! i think u people could probably help me i how to query the pgsql/postgis from google maps api to display the markers on the google maps which are stored in the postgis database. Phani Kishore

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum next steps, take 2

2007-02-26 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Jim C. Nasby wrote: That's why I'm thinking it would be best to keep the maximum size of stuff for the second worker small. It probably also makes sense to tie it to time and not size, since the key factor is that you want it to hit the high-update tables every X number of seconds. If we

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007)

2007-02-26 Thread Jonah H. Harris
On 2/26/07, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jonah, I have no idea what fault you are trying to blame on the community in the above statement. The author didn't discuss the idea with the community before spending months on it so we have no obligation to accept it in the core. You're

[HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread Josh Berkus
The next Summer of Code is just around the corner. Last year, we had 46 submissions and seven we accepted. Out of the SoC we got two ongoing contributors, several good patches, two code refactors and even an employee for a PostgreSQL company. I'd like to see us do the same this year!

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum next steps, take 2

2007-02-26 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Jim C. Nasby wrote: That's why I'm thinking it would be best to keep the maximum size of stuff for the second worker small. It probably also makes sense to tie it to time and not size, since the key factor is that you want it to hit the high-update tables every X number

Re: [HACKERS] SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Robert Treat
On Monday 26 February 2007 14:57, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Robert Treat wrote: FWIW ClearCase also offers a command line version of its merge tool, where it shows three columns (a la diff --side-by-side) and allows you to pick which column you want to merge in (repo, change1, or change2 for

Re: [HACKERS] [Monotone-devel] Re: SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Robert Treat
On Sunday 25 February 2007 01:11, Tom Lane wrote: Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lastly, who really cares? Does it really matter? No. I would much rather Warren (if he has the skills) put some effort into Patch Review. That's pretty much the bottom line. CVS is not so broken

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Josh Berkus wrote: The next Summer of Code is just around the corner. Last year, we had 46 submissions and seven we accepted. Out of the SoC we got two ongoing contributors, several good patches, two code refactors and even an employee for a PostgreSQL company. I'd like to see us do the

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007)

2007-02-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Jonah H. Harris wrote: On 2/26/07, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jonah, I have no idea what fault you are trying to blame on the community in the above statement. The author didn't discuss the idea with the community before spending months on it so we have no obligation to accept it

Re: [HACKERS] Acclerating INSERT/UPDATE using UPS

2007-02-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 09:44 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: Joshua D. Drake wrote: Christopher Browne wrote: A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hideyuki Kawashima) wrote: I appreciate your great suggestion! It is great honor for me if Sigres will be merged

Re: [HACKERS] [Monotone-devel] Re: SCMS question

2007-02-26 Thread Warren Turkal
On Monday 26 February 2007 13:50, Robert Treat wrote: It's worth keeping in mind that one of the primary reasons we don't have a different usage pattern is because CVS makes such a thing painful.  Given how much of development is done now, I have a feeling that the community might well adopt a

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
I am a little concerned about a log_* setting that is INFO. I understand why you used INFO (for log_min_error_messages), but INFO is inconsistent with the log* prefix, and by default INFO doesn't appear in the log file. So, by default, the INFO is going to go to the user terminal, and not to the

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?

2007-02-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 13:34 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: I am a little concerned about a log_* setting that is INFO. I understand why you used INFO (for log_min_error_messages), but INFO is inconsistent with the log* prefix, and by default INFO doesn't appear in the log file. Yeh, LOG would

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?

2007-02-26 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yeh, LOG would be most appropriate, but thats not possible. You have not given any good reason for that. log_min_messages allows only DEBUG5, DEBUG4, DEBUG3, DEBUG2, DEBUG1, INFO, NOTICE and WARNING for non-error states. I don't think you understand

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?

2007-02-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 14:11 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yeh, LOG would be most appropriate, but thats not possible. You have not given any good reason for that. The idea of the patch is that it generates a log message which then invokes

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?

2007-02-26 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The idea of the patch is that it generates a log message which then invokes log_min_error_statement so that the SQL statement is displayed. LOG is not on the list of options there, otherwise I would use it. As I said, you don't understand how the logging

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?

2007-02-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 14:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The idea of the patch is that it generates a log message which then invokes log_min_error_statement so that the SQL statement is displayed. LOG is not on the list of options there, otherwise I would use

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?

2007-02-26 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 14:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The idea of the patch is that it generates a log message which then invokes log_min_error_statement so that the SQL statement is displayed. LOG is not on the list of

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?

2007-02-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 14:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 14:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The idea of the patch is that it generates a log message which then invokes log_min_error_statement so that the

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?

2007-02-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Simon Riggs wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 13:34 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: I am a little concerned about a log_* setting that is INFO. I understand why you used INFO (for log_min_error_messages), but INFO is inconsistent with the log* prefix, and by default INFO doesn't appear in the log

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump?

2007-02-26 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is not the first GUC that has needed this. Exactly. I think that we simply made a mistake in the initial implementation of log_min_error_statement: we failed to think about whether it should use client or server priority ordering, and the

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread Josh Berkus
Andrew, Is there a list of projects? Or can we suggest some? Suggest away, please! I'm going to update the website soon, would appreciate new content. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread markwkm
On 2/26/07, Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Josh Berkus wrote: The next Summer of Code is just around the corner. Last year, we had 46 submissions and seven we accepted. Out of the SoC we got two ongoing contributors, several good patches, two code refactors and even an employee

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Josh Berkus wrote: Andrew, Is there a list of projects? Or can we suggest some? Suggest away, please! I'm going to update the website soon, would appreciate new content. here are a few ideas to be going on with (none of these are new): buildfarm: 1. Buildfarm web app: is in

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread markwkm
On 2/26/07, Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com wrote: Andrew, Is there a list of projects? Or can we suggest some? Suggest away, please! I'm going to update the website soon, would appreciate new content. I can also volunteer to mentor continuing work on a TPC-E kit, for C stored procedures and

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread Warren Turkal
On Monday 26 February 2007 14:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Is there a list of projects? Or can we suggest some? Temporal database support * base data types - verify current for ISO compliance (timestamp, interval) - implement period datatype * operators for those datatypes * add support for

[HACKERS] COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option

2007-02-26 Thread Simon Riggs
Proposal: Implement a new option for COMMIT, for enhancing performance, providing a MySQL-like trade-off between performance and robustness for *only* those that want it. COMMIT NOWAIT This form of COMMIT will *not* perform XLogFlush(), but will rely on a special background process to

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Warren Turkal wrote: On Monday 26 February 2007 14:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Is there a list of projects? Or can we suggest some? Temporal database support * base data types - verify current for ISO compliance (timestamp, interval) - implement period datatype * operators for those

Re: [HACKERS] COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option

2007-02-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Why do we want this?? Because some apps have *lots* of data and many really don't care whether they lose a few records. Honestly, I've met people that want this, even after 2 hours of discussion and understanding. Plus probably lots of MySQLers also. Most users will take speed over data loss

Re: [HACKERS] Bitmap index stuff

2007-02-26 Thread Gavin Sherry
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Hi, How are you doing with the bitmap indexes? I need to send of a patch fixing the last bug you pointed out. The code needs a merge of HEAD. I've been trying to get my head around the patch a couple of times to add the vacuum support, but no

Re: [HACKERS] Acclerating INSERT/UPDATE using UPS

2007-02-26 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Reading through the design, I see the following - bgwriter performs XLogWrite, not each backend - WAL fsync is only performed when WAL file fills - no checkpoints are performed until shutdown Not checkpointing at all is not a good plan, since this will

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum next steps, take 2

2007-02-26 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: Alvaro Herrera wrote: The second mode is the hot table worker mode, enabled when the worker detects that there's already a worker in the database. In this mode, the worker is limited to those tables that can be vacuumed in less than autovacuum_naptime, so large

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread Demian Lessa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Could you also please share your thoughts on what would be a good student profile- for instance, how much theoretical background and practical experience, for working on a SoC project? Demian The next Summer of Code is just around the corner.

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum next steps, take 2

2007-02-26 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: How can you determine what tables can be vacuumed within autovacuum_naptime? My assumption is that pg_class.relpages * vacuum_cost_page_miss * vacuum_cost_delay = time to vacuum This is of course not the reality, because the delay is not how

Re: [HACKERS] COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option

2007-02-26 Thread Richard Huxton
Simon Riggs wrote: Proposal: Implement a new option for COMMIT, for enhancing performance, providing a MySQL-like trade-off between performance and robustness for *only* those that want it. COMMIT NOWAIT This form of COMMIT will *not* perform XLogFlush(), but will rely on a special

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread Josh Berkus
Demian, Could you also please share your thoughts on what would be a good student profile- for instance, how much theoretical background and practical experience, for working on a SoC project? Well, it shouldn't be the student's first year writing code. Basically, they're committing to

Re: [HACKERS] COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option

2007-02-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 23:25 +, Richard Huxton wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: Proposal: Implement a new option for COMMIT, for enhancing performance, providing a MySQL-like trade-off between performance and robustness for *only* those that want it. COMMIT NOWAIT This form of

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum next steps, take 2

2007-02-26 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: Alvaro Herrera wrote: Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: How can you determine what tables can be vacuumed within autovacuum_naptime? My assumption is that pg_class.relpages * vacuum_cost_page_miss * vacuum_cost_delay = time to vacuum This is of course not the

Re: [HACKERS] COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option

2007-02-26 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Simon Riggs wrote: The interesting point is you can have a huge data grinding app, yet with other tables alongside that hold more important data. In that scenario, 90% of the data would be COMMIT NOWAIT, whilst the small important data is safe. Does this means that the regular COMMIT is

Re: [HACKERS] COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option

2007-02-26 Thread A.M.
On Feb 26, 2007, at 18:58 , Simon Riggs wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 23:25 +, Richard Huxton wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: Proposal: Implement a new option for COMMIT, for enhancing performance, providing a MySQL-like trade-off between performance and robustness for *only* those that

Re: [HACKERS] Load distributed checkpoint

2007-02-26 Thread ITAGAKI Takahiro
Inaam Rana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you had a chance to look into this any further? We, at EnterpriseDB, have done some testing on this patch (dbt2 runs) and it looks like we are getting the desired results, particularly so when we spread out both sync and write phases. Thank you for

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007)

2007-02-26 Thread Merlin Moncure
getting back on topic (ahem), florian: are you comfortable going ahead with this? is there anything you need help with? merlin ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Re: [HACKERS] Load distributed checkpoint

2007-02-26 Thread Josh Berkus
Itagaki, Thank you for testing! Yes, I'm cleaning the patch. I changed configuration parameters to delay each phase in checkpoints from setting absolute times (checkpoint_xxx_duration) to setting relative to checkpoint_timeout (checkpoint_xxx_percent). Delay factors strongly depend on total

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, here's a question. Given the recent discussion re full disjunction, I'd like to know what sort of commitment we are going to give people who work on proposed projects. Um, if you mean are we going to promise to accept a patch in advance of

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum next steps, take 2

2007-02-26 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: I'm not sure how pg_class.relpages is maintained but what happens to a bloated table? For example, a 100 row table that is constantly updated and hasn't been vacuumed in a while (say the admin disabled autovacuum for a while), now that small

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum next steps, take 2

2007-02-26 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: I'm not sure it's a good idea to tie this to the vacuum cost delay settings either, so let me as you this, how is this better than just allowing the admin to set a new GUC variable like autovacuum_hot_table_size_threshold

Re: [HACKERS] Seeking Google SoC Mentors

2007-02-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, here's a question. Given the recent discussion re full disjunction, I'd like to know what sort of commitment we are going to give people who work on proposed projects. Um, if you mean are we going to promise to accept a patch

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum next steps, take 2

2007-02-26 Thread Matthew T. O'Connor
Tom Lane wrote: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: I'm not sure it's a good idea to tie this to the vacuum cost delay settings either, so let me as you this, how is this better than just allowing the admin to set a new GUC variable like

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum next steps, take 2

2007-02-26 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 09:22:42PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: I'm not sure it's a good idea to tie this to the vacuum cost delay settings either, so let me as you this, how is this better than just allowing the admin to set

Re: [HACKERS] autovacuum next steps, take 2

2007-02-26 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 08:11:44PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: Alvaro Herrera wrote: The second mode is the hot table worker mode, enabled when the worker detects that there's already a worker in the database. In this mode, the worker is limited to those

Re: [HACKERS] COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option

2007-02-26 Thread Jeff Davis
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 22:56 +, Simon Riggs wrote: Proposal: Implement a new option for COMMIT, for enhancing performance, providing a MySQL-like trade-off between performance and robustness for *only* those that want it. COMMIT NOWAIT This form of COMMIT will *not* perform

Re: [HACKERS] Resumable vacuum proposal and design overview

2007-02-26 Thread Galy Lee
Simon Riggs wrote: old dead tuple list. If the system manages the dead tuple list we may need to keep such files around for long periods, which doesn't sound great either. The system manages such files. The files are kept in location like $PGDATA/pg_vacuum. They are removed when CLUSTER, DROP

  1   2   >