Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Hmm, do say, doesn't it seem like the lack of feedback and the failed
> bitmap patch played against final development of this patch?
Yes :(. That's a one reason why I tried to help with the review of that
patch.
> At this
> point I feel like the patch still needs some wo
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Hmm, do say, doesn't it seem like the lack of feedback and the failed
> > bitmap patch played against final development of this patch?
>
> Yes :(. That's a one reason why I tried to help with the review of that
> patch.
>
> > At this
> > poi
Ühel kenal päeval, N, 2007-08-02 kell 11:24, kirjutas Rohit Khare:
> I used NPGSQL .NET driver to connect PGSQL 8.2.4 database to VB.NET.
> As stated on NPGSQL page, it doesn't seem to provide seamless
> integration and performance with .NET. Instead when I used ODBC, the
> performance was comparat
On 8/2/07, Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ühel kenal päeval, N, 2007-08-02 kell 11:24, kirjutas Rohit Khare:
> > I used NPGSQL .NET driver to connect PGSQL 8.2.4 database to VB.NET.
> > As stated on NPGSQL page, it doesn't seem to provide seamless
> > integration and performance with .N
Merlin Moncure wrote:
On 8/2/07, Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ühel kenal päeval, N, 2007-08-02 kell 11:24, kirjutas Rohit Khare:
I used NPGSQL .NET driver to connect PGSQL 8.2.4 database to VB.NET.
As stated on NPGSQL page, it doesn't seem to provide seamless
integration and
On Thursday 02 August 2007 08:57, Andrei Kovalevski wrote:
> Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > On 8/2/07, Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Ühel kenal päeval, N, 2007-08-02 kell 11:24, kirjutas Rohit Khare:
> >>> I used NPGSQL .NET driver to connect PGSQL 8.2.4 database to VB.NET.
> >>> As stat
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Through the User Concurrency Thread on -performance [1], Tom and
> Jignesh found that our proximate bottleneck on SMP multi-user scaling
> is clog_buffers.
I don't actually think that what Jignesh is testing is a particularly
realistic scenario, and so I o
All,
Through the User Concurrency Thread on -performance [1], Tom and Jignesh found
that our proximate bottleneck on SMP multi-user scaling is clog_buffers.
Increasing clog_buffers to 64 improved this scaling by 30% per Jignesh:
===
8.3+ HOT = did not defer more from 8.2 Numbe
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom,
>> I don't actually think that what Jignesh is testing is a particularly
>> realistic scenario, and so I object to making performance decisions on
>> the strength of that one measurement.
> What do you mean by "not realistic"? What would be a realist
Tom,
> I don't actually think that what Jignesh is testing is a particularly
> realistic scenario, and so I object to making performance decisions on
> the strength of that one measurement.
What do you mean by "not realistic"? What would be a realistic scenario?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > I've started reading the GIT patch to see if I can help with the review.
>
> > As the patch stands, I tried to keep it as non-invasive as possible,
> > with minimum changes to existing APIs. That's because in the win
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
I find it entirely likely that simply changing the [NUM_CLOG_BUFFERS]
constant would be a net loss on many workloads.
Would it be reasonable to consider changing it to a compile-time option
before the 8.3 beta? From how you describe the potential downsides
Alexey Klyukin wrote:
> Well, then should we return to the review of your 'bitmapscan changes'
> patch ? I've posted a version which applies (or applied to the cvs head
> at the time of post) cleanly there:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-06/msg00204.php
Yes, that's probably a
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> At this
>> point I feel like the patch still needs some work and reshuffling before
>> it is in an acceptable state. The fact that there are some API changes
>> for which the patch needs to be adjusted makes me feel like we
Andrei Kovalevski schrieb:
I have an experience with writing ODBC driver for PostgreSQL
(https://projects.commandprompt.com/public/odbcng/). I would be happy
to help community to improve .NET data provider.
Please join the Npgsql Project at http://pgfoundry.org/projects/npgsql
Francisco
Robert Treat schrieb:
That would be nice. Of course none of this seems relevant to hackers, so I'd
Your'e right - of course.
But sometimes I wish 'hackers' would care a little more about their
interfaces as the best backend can't be good without good interfaces and
some of the PostgreSQL-i
Brar Piening wrote:
Robert Treat schrieb:
That would be nice. Of course none of this seems relevant to hackers,
so I'd
Your'e right - of course.
But sometimes I wish 'hackers' would care a little more about their
interfaces as the best backend can't be good without good interfaces
and s
Hi
Since my attempts to find a simple solution for the read-only query
locking problems (Once that doesn't need full wal logging of lock
requests) haven't been successfully yet, I've decided to turn to the
problems of tracking a snapshot on the slaves for now. (Because first
such a snapshot is ne
18 matches
Mail list logo
