On 02/05/2014 06:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
On 02/05/2014 11:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
switching to binary is the same as text may well be the most prudent
path here.
If we do that we're going to have to live with that forever, aren't we?
Yeah, but the
Hi,
On 2014-02-06 18:47:31 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
* switching to using text representation in jsonb send/recv
+/*
+ * jsonb type recv function
+ *
+ * the type is sent as text in binary mode, so this is almost the same
+ * as the input function.
+ */
+Datum
On 02/10/2014 11:05 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2014-02-06 18:47:31 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
* switching to using text representation in jsonb send/recv
+/*
+ * jsonb type recv function
+ *
+ * the type is sent as text in binary mode, so this is almost the same
+ * as the input
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 7:37 PM, Alexander Korotkov aekorot...@gmail.com wrote:
This is not only place that worry me about planning overhead. See
get_cheapest_fractional_path_for_pathkeys. I had to estimate number of
groups for each sorting column in order to get right fractional path.
AFAICT
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Christian Convey
christian.con...@gmail.com wrote:
This question is mostly just curiosity...
As someone very new to this code base, I think these cycles make it a
little
harder to
On 02/07/2014 01:27 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:35 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
I think you should consider breaking off the relcache parts of my
patch and committing them, because they're independently useful.
Makes sense. Can you extract
(2014/02/07 21:31), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
So, I've modified the patch so
that we continue to disallow SET STORAGE on a foreign table *in the same
manner as before*, but, as your patch does, allow it on an inheritance
hierarchy that contains foreign tables, with the semantics that we
On 02/10/2014 05:05 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2014-02-06 18:47:31 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
* switching to using text representation in jsonb send/recv
+/*
+ * jsonb type recv function
+ *
+ * the type is sent as text in binary mode, so this is almost the same
+ * as the input
On 2014-02-10 07:27:59 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:05 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
I'd suggest making the format discernible from possible different future
formats, to allow introducing a proper binary at some later time. Maybe
just send a int8 first, containing the format.
On 02/10/2014 07:39 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-02-10 07:27:59 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:05 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
I'd suggest making the format discernible from possible different future
formats, to allow introducing a proper binary at some later time. Maybe
just
On 01/31/2014 11:54 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2014-01-28 21:27:29 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
1) I've added an abstracted atomic ops implementation. Needs a fair
amount of work, also submitted as a
(2014/02/09 8:06), Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 02/08/2014 05:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue in...@tpf.co.jp writes:
Though I'm not a MINGW expert at all, I know dllwrap is a deprecated
tool and dlltool is almost a deprecated tool. Cygwin port is removing
the use of dllwrap and dlltool now.
Hi,
During the lwlock scalability work I noticed a longstanding issue with
the lwlock code. LWLockRelease() and the other mentioned locations do
the following to wake up any waiters, without holding the lock's
spinlock:
/*
* Awaken any waiters I removed from the queue.
*/
while
Hello,
What I would like to do is to get the record in the table that a leaf GISTENTRY
points to, if that is possible.
I notice that GISTENTRY contains these members: Relation rel, Page page, and
OffsetNumber offset, but are these referring to the table or the index?
Thank you,
Marios Vodas
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Considering above change as correct, I have tried to see the worst
case overhead for this patch by having new tuple such that after
25% or so of
Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 02/06/2014 01:48 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
switching to binary is the same as text may well be the most prudent
path here.
Can't we just reject attempts to transfer these via binary copy,
allowing only a text format? So rather than sending text when
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Christian Convey
christian.con...@gmail.com wrote:
As someone very new to this code base, I think these cycles make it a little
harder to figure out the runtime and compile-time dependencies between the
subsystems these
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I think if it had been a clear, enforced goal all along, it might've been
possible to build the system with such a restriction (for the most part at
least). At this point though, the amount of work and code churn involved
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
So what we need to do is to acquire a write barrier between the
assignments to lwWaitLink and lwWaiting, i.e.
proc-lwWaitLink = NULL;
pg_write_barrier();
proc-lwWaiting = false;
You didn't really explain why you think that
On 2014-02-10 11:11:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
So what we need to do is to acquire a write barrier between the
assignments to lwWaitLink and lwWaiting, i.e.
proc-lwWaitLink = NULL;
pg_write_barrier();
proc-lwWaiting =
On 2014-02-10 11:20:30 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
You didn't really explain why you think that ordering is necessary?
Actually, after grepping to check my memory of what those fields are
being used for, I have a bigger question: WTF is xlog.c doing being
so friendly with the innards
Hello Marko
2014-01-16 23:54 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
Hi Pavel,
First of all, thanks for working on this!
On 1/12/14, 8:58 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I still not happy with plugin_info - it is only per plugin now and should
be per plugin and per function.
I'm not sure I
I wrote:
You didn't really explain why you think that ordering is necessary?
Actually, after grepping to check my memory of what those fields are
being used for, I have a bigger question: WTF is xlog.c doing being
so friendly with the innards of LWLocks? Surely this needs to get
refactored so
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Since this commit (17676c785a95b2598c573), pgbench no longer uses
.pgpass to
obtain passwords, but instead prompts for a password
This
On 02/10/2014 06:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-02-10 11:20:30 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
You didn't really explain why you think that ordering is necessary?
Actually, after grepping to check my memory of what those fields are
being used for, I have a bigger question: WTF is xlog.c
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-02-10 07:27:59 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:05 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
I'd suggest making the format discernible from possible different future
formats, to allow introducing a proper binary
Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
On 02/10/2014 06:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Well, it's not actually using any lwlock.c code, it's a special case
locking logic, just reusing the datastructures. That said, I am not
particularly happy about the amount of code it's duplicating
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
The relcache parts? I don't think a separate patch ever appeared that could
be reviewed.
I posted the patch on January 18th:
On 02/10/2014 03:46 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
During the lwlock scalability work I noticed a longstanding issue with
the lwlock code. LWLockRelease() and the other mentioned locations do
the following to wake up any waiters, without holding the lock's
spinlock:
/*
* Awaken any
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-02-10 07:27:59 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Teodor privately suggested something similar. I was thinking of just
sending a version byte, which for now would be
On 02/09/2014 02:17 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
If an error occurs in the foreground (backup) process of pg_basebackup, and
we exit in a controlled way, the background process (streaming xlog
process) would stay around and keep streaming.
This can happen for example if disk space runs out and
On 02/10/2014 08:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
On 02/10/2014 06:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Well, it's not actually using any lwlock.c code, it's a special case
locking logic, just reusing the datastructures. That said, I am not
particularly happy
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 2:17 AM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
I'm just throwing an error when locking the tuple returns
HeapTupleInvisible, and the xmin of the tuple is our xid.
I would like some feedback on this point. We need to consider how
exactly to avoid updating the same tuple
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com
wrote:
On 02/09/2014 02:17 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
If an error occurs in the foreground (backup) process of pg_basebackup,
and
we exit in a controlled way, the background process (streaming xlog
process) would
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Marti Raudsepp ma...@juffo.org wrote:
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 7:37 PM, Alexander Korotkov aekorot...@gmail.com
wrote:
This is not only place that worry me about planning overhead. See
get_cheapest_fractional_path_for_pathkeys. I had to estimate number of
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 2014-02-10 07:27:59 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Teodor privately suggested something similar. I was
Hi!
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:34 PM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote:
And I'd be fine with being admin again this year, unless there's
anyone else who would like to take up the mantle?
Thanks for your work. I would like to see you as admin this year again.
Who would be up for mentoring this
On 2014-02-10 19:48:47 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 02/10/2014 06:41 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-02-10 11:20:30 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
You didn't really explain why you think that ordering is necessary?
Actually, after grepping to check my memory of what those fields
On 2014-02-10 11:59:53 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-02-10 07:27:59 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:05 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
I'd suggest making the format discernible from possible different
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-02-10 11:59:53 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 2014-02-10 07:27:59 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 02/10/2014 05:05 AM, Andres
On 2014-02-10 17:35:12 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
Wrong. You still need to have code that checks the server version and
see if it's supported (particularly for sending) and as there is *no
protocol negotiation of the formats at present it's all going to boil
down to if version = X do Y*.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-02-10 17:35:12 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
Wrong. You still need to have code that checks the server version and
see if it's supported (particularly for sending) and as there is *no
protocol negotiation of
On 2014-02-10 17:48:32 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-02-10 17:35:12 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
Wrong. You still need to have code that checks the server version and
see if it's supported (particularly for
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
It works in enough cases atm that it's worthwile trying to keep it
working. Sure, it could be better, but it's what we have right now. Atm
it's e.g. the only realistic way to copy larger amounts of bytea between
2014-02-08 4:52 GMT+09:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
One idea I just had is to improve the dsm_toc module so that it can
optionally set up a tranche of lwlocks for you, and provide some
analogues of
On 2014-02-10 18:16:15 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
It works in enough cases atm that it's worthwile trying to keep it
working. Sure, it could be better, but it's what we have right now. Atm
it's e.g. the only
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
right, json could be made work, but any other format change introduced
to any other already existing type will break. That's not a real
solution unless we decree henceforth that no formats will change from
here on in, in which case I withdraw my
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
And if we add a new format version in 9.5 we need to make it discernible
from the 9.4 format. Without space for a format indicator we'd have to
resort to ugly tricks like defining the high bit in the first byte set
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
And if we add a new format version in 9.5 we need to make it discernible
from the 9.4 format. Without space for a format indicator we'd have to
resort to ugly tricks like
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
And if we add a new format version in 9.5 we need to make it discernible
from the 9.4 format. Without
On 2014-02-10 19:01:48 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
And if we add a new format version in 9.5 we need
On 10 February 2014 20:11, Hannu Krosing ha...@krosing.net wrote:
The fastest and lowest parsing cost format for JSON is tnetstrings
http://tnetstrings.org/ why not use it as the binary wire format ?
It would be as binary as it gets and still be generally parse-able by
lots of different
On Monday, February 10, 2014, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-02-10 19:01:48 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.usjavascript:;
wrote:
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com javascript:; writes:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at
Hi,
Is it just me or is jsonapi.h not very well documented?
On 2014-02-06 18:47:31 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
+/*
+ * for jsonb we always want the de-escaped value - that's what's in token
+ */
+static void
+jsonb_in_scalar(void *state, char *token, JsonTokenType tokentype)
+{
+
committed
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 02/10/2014 08:50 PM, Tom Dunstan wrote:
On 10 February 2014 20:11, Hannu Krosing ha...@krosing.net wrote:
The fastest and lowest parsing cost format for JSON is tnetstrings
http://tnetstrings.org/ why not use it as the binary wire format ?
It would be as binary as it gets and still be
On 02/10/2014 09:11 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
diff --git a/src/backend/utils/adt/jsonfuncs.c
b/src/backend/utils/adt/jsonfuncs.c
index e1d8aae..50ddf50 100644
--- a/src/backend/utils/adt/jsonfuncs.c
+++ b/src/backend/utils/adt/jsonfuncs.c
there's lots of whitespace/tab damage in this file.
On 2014-02-10 22:15:21 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 02/10/2014 09:11 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
diff --git a/src/backend/utils/adt/jsonfuncs.c
b/src/backend/utils/adt/jsonfuncs.c
index e1d8aae..50ddf50 100644
--- a/src/backend/utils/adt/jsonfuncs.c
+++ b/src/backend/utils/adt/jsonfuncs.c
(2014/02/10 22:42), Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
(2014/02/09 8:06), Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 02/08/2014 05:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Hiroshi Inoue in...@tpf.co.jp writes:
Though I'm not a MINGW expert at all, I know dllwrap is a deprecated
tool and dlltool is almost a deprecated tool. Cygwin port is
Inoue, Hiroshi in...@tpf.co.jp writes:
(2014/02/10 22:42), Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
I tried MINGW port with the attached change and successfully built
src and contrib and all pararell regression tests were OK.
I forgot to mention the environment. I tried the change in 2 machines
and both worked.
On 02/11/2014 01:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
If there are no objections, I'll push this patch into HEAD tomorrow,
along with the upthread patches from Craig Ringer and Marco Atzeri.
We might as well see if this stuff is going to work ...
I'd love to test my patch properly before pushing it, but my
61 matches
Mail list logo