Re: [HACKERS] Allowing join removals for more join types

2014-06-06 Thread David Rowley
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Noah Misch writes: > > On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 02:12:33AM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > >> A bit more crazy, but how about trying trying to plan joins with a added > >> one-time qual that checks the size of the deferred trigger queue? Then > >>

[HACKERS] "cancelling statement due to user request error" occurs but the transaction has committed.

2014-06-06 Thread Naoya Anzai
Hi All, When log_duration is true ( or log_min_duration_statement>=0 ), If a transaction has internally been commited receives a SIGINT signal then a query cancellation error is output. For example, 1. A query like a TRUNCATE is removing bigger table files. 2. The session receives SIGINT signal.

Re: [HACKERS] Proposing pg_hibernate

2014-06-06 Thread Gurjeet Singh
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > Another thing is don't you want to handle SIGQUIT signal in bg saver? I think bgworker_quickdie registered in StartBackgroundWorker() serves the purpose just fine. Best regards, -- Gurjeet Singh http://gurjeet.singh.im/ EDB www.EnterpriseD

Re: [HACKERS] pg_receivexlog add synchronous mode

2014-06-06 Thread furuyao
> -Original Message- > > > Flush is not performed every time write, it is performed > > > collectively like walrecever. > > > > I only glanced at this, but afaics you're only flushing at the end > > every WAL segment. That will result in absolutely horrible performance, > right? > > Walrece

Re: [HACKERS] wrapping in extended mode doesn't work well with default pager

2014-06-06 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello where we are with this feature? Is there some barriers to commit bugfix? Regards Pavel 2014-05-18 19:46 GMT+02:00 Sergey Muraviov : > I found some new bugs and fix them. > And I had to make many changes. > > > 2014-05-17 21:31 GMT+04:00 Greg Stark : > > Sorry, a couple things still loo

Re: [HACKERS] Proposing pg_hibernate

2014-06-06 Thread Gurjeet Singh
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote: >> >> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gurjeet Singh wrote: >> Case 2 also won't cause any buffer restores because the save-files are >> created only on clean shutdowons; not on a crash or

Re: [HACKERS] Why is it "JSQuery"?

2014-06-06 Thread Oleg Bartunov
Jsquery - is QUERY language, JsonPath - is language to EXTRACT json parts. On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 4:34 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > On Jun 5, 2014, at 5:25 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >> My understanding is that it's meant to be analogous to tsquery. >> >> At first glance, JsonPath doesn't seem

Re: [HACKERS] Why is it "JSQuery"?

2014-06-06 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Jun 6, 2014, at 6:54 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: > Jsquery - is QUERY language, JsonPath - is language to EXTRACT json parts. Sure, but could we not potentially build on its syntax, instead of building a new one? I’m not saying we *should*, but if we don’t, I think there should be a discussio

Re: [HACKERS] pg_receivexlog add synchronous mode

2014-06-06 Thread Fujii Masao
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 8:05 PM, wrote: >> -Original Message- >> > > Flush is not performed every time write, it is performed >> > > collectively like walrecever. >> > >> > I only glanced at this, but afaics you're only flushing at the end >> > every WAL segment. That will result in absolu

Re: [HACKERS] Re: popen and pclose redefinitions causing many warning in Windows build

2014-06-06 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:29:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > I think this is caused because the variable is not defined as SOCKET. > > > The attached patch fixes this. This should prevent the warning. > > > > Surely that's just going to move t

Re: [HACKERS] Proposing pg_hibernate

2014-06-06 Thread Jim Nasby
On 6/4/14, 8:56 AM, Andres Freund wrote: On 2014-06-04 09:51:36 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > >On 2014-06-04 10:24:13 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > >>Incase of recovery, the shared buffers saved by this utility are > >>from previous shutdown w

[HACKERS] Inaccuracy in VACUUM's tuple count estimates

2014-06-06 Thread Tom Lane
I've been looking at the complaint Tim Wilson posted in pgsql-performance about badly inaccurate reltuples updates coming from VACUUM. There seem to be a number of problems leading to that. The key point is that when VACUUM has scanned only part of the relation, it assumes that the live-tuple den

Re: [HACKERS] Why is it "JSQuery"?

2014-06-06 Thread Josh Berkus
On 06/06/2014 09:12 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > On Jun 6, 2014, at 6:54 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: > >> Jsquery - is QUERY language, JsonPath - is language to EXTRACT json parts. > > Sure, but could we not potentially build on its syntax, instead of building a > new one? I’m not saying we *sho

Re: [HACKERS] Inaccuracy in VACUUM's tuple count estimates

2014-06-06 Thread Andres Freund
On 2014-06-06 15:44:25 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I figured it'd be easy enough to get a better estimate by adding another > counter to count just LIVE and INSERT_IN_PROGRESS tuples (thus effectively > assuming that in-progress inserts and deletes will both commit). I did > that, and found that it h

Re: [HACKERS] Suppressing unused subquery output columns

2014-06-06 Thread Jim Nasby
On 6/5/14, 9:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Rod Taylor writes: On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I'm not entirely convinced that it's worth the extra planning cycles, though. Given the small number of complaints to date, it might not be worth doing this. Thoughts? Would this avoid

Re: [HACKERS] Why is it "JSQuery"?

2014-06-06 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Jun 6, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >> * [JAQL](https://code.google.com/p/jaql/): Too different from SQL >> * [JSONPath](http://goessner.net/articles/JsonPath/): Too verbose > > I don't agree with the too verbose, but lacking AND|OR is pretty crippling. I had enough people complain

Re: [HACKERS] Why is it "JSQuery"?

2014-06-06 Thread Josh Berkus
On 06/06/2014 03:23 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > On Jun 6, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >> Well, I'd also say that we don't care about syntaxes which are not >> already popular. There's no point in being compatible with something >> nobody uses. How many of the above have any uptake? >

Re: [HACKERS] B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)

2014-06-06 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > One thing that isn't all that obvious about this worst case is that > it's in general very qsort() friendly, and therefore the startup costs > (copying) totally dominates. Actually, you're not even sorting - > you're verifying that the tuple