On 06/22/2015 07:21 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com mailto:tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Hi,
On 06/20/2015 03:01 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
I don't think we need to really assume the density to be
When a PostgreSQL system wedges, or when it becomes dreadfully slow
for some reason, I often find myself relying on tools like strace,
gdb, or perf to figure out what is happening. This doesn't tend to
instill customers with confidence; they would like (quite
understandably) a process that
Hi Tom/Alvaro,
Kindly let us know if the correction provided in previous mail is fine or
not! Current code any way handle scenario-1 whereas it is still vulnerable
to scenario-2.
From previous mail:
*Scenario-1:* current_time (2015) - changed_to_past (1995) -
stays-here-for-half-day - corrected
I've noted that upgrading from PostgreSQL 9.3 to 9.5 I'm suddenly
unable to specify a check rule in the Makefile that includes the
PGXS one. The error is:
$ make check
rm -rf ''/tmp_install
make -C '/home/postgresql-9.5/lib/pgxs/src/makefiles/../..'
DESTDIR=''/tmp_install install
make[1]:
On 06/22/2015 10:37 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
I'm less sure about this next part, but I think we
might also want to report ourselves as waiting when we are doing an OS
read or an OS write, because it's pretty common for people to think
that a PostgreSQL bug is to blame when in fact it's the
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Marti Raudsepp ma...@juffo.org wrote:
One of my databases failed to upgrade successfully and produced this error
in the copying phase:
error while copying relation pg_catalog.pg_largeobject
(/srv/ssd/PG_9.3_201306121/1/12023 to /PG_9.4_201409291/1/12130): No
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
When a PostgreSQL system wedges, or when it becomes dreadfully slow
for some reason, I often find myself relying on tools like strace,
gdb, or perf to figure out what is happening. This doesn't tend to
instill
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Piotr Stefaniak postg...@piotr-stefaniak.me writes:
There are two places in parse_func.c where memcmp() conditionally gets a
NULL as its first argument, which invokes undefined behavior. I guess
gcc -O2 will make some
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
Instead of changing the column, can't we add a new one? Adjusting
columns in PSA requires the innumerable queries written against it to
be adjusted along with all the wiki instructions to dev ops for
emergency stuck
On 11 June 2015 09:45, Bruce Momjian Wrote:
I have committed the first draft of the 9.5 release notes. You can
view the output here:
http://momjian.us/pgsql_docs/release-9-5.html
and it will eventually appear here:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/release.html
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
If I recall that code correctly, the assumption was that if the third
argument is zero then memcmp() must not fetch any bytes (not should not,
but MUST not) and therefore it doesn't
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 1:59 PM, David G. Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
In addition to the codes themselves I think it would aid less-experienced
operators if we would provide a meta-data categorization
On 6/22/15 12:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
It's
not my goal here to create some kind of a performance counter system,
even though that would be valuable and could possibly be based on the
same infrastructure, but rather just to create a very simple system
that lets people know, without any
On 6/22/15 2:46 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
FOREACH key, val IN RECORD myrow
LOOP
IF pg_typeof(val) IN ('int4', 'double precision', 'numeric') THEN
val := val + 1; -- these variables can be mutable
-- or maybe in futore
myrow[key] := val + 1;
END IF;
END LOOP;
What is
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Please submit a patch to adjust the treatment of negative integers in the
old functions to be consistent with their treatment in the new functions.
i.e. in the range [-n,-1] they should refer to the corresponding
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
On 6/12/15 5:00 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
On 18 October 2014 at 15:36, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:36:55PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:56:52PM -0400, Tom
On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-06-21 12:40:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes:
We could also just mmap() the stats file into memory in various
processes. With a bit care it should be quite possible to only mmap
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
Anything ever happen with this? I agree that LOG is to high for reporting
most (if not all) of these things.
I think we should consider having a flag for this behavior rather than
changing
On 6/12/15 5:00 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
On 18 October 2014 at 15:36, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:36:55PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:56:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
David G Johnston david.g.johns...@gmail.com writes:
The question
On 6/21/15 9:45 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
And, I also understood your concern about CREATE INDEX, but we have no way to get
progress information of CREATE INDEX.
At present, I think it may be good to refer to the same time as estimated time to
execute COPY TO.
You could probably get a
On 6/14/15 12:25 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hi
I am working on scheduler extension for 9.5. It use bgworkers
intensively for any task. This is reason, why I need to decrease a log
level - and I am thinking so parallel computing needs it due high number
of created and finished workers.
It should
On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 11:55 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
But if the structure
got too big to map (on a 32-bit system), then you'd
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
On 6/14/15 12:25 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I am working on scheduler extension for 9.5. It use bgworkers
intensively for any task. This is reason, why I need to decrease a log
level - and I am thinking so parallel
Hi
I often need a function for identification if current user is database
owner or is superuser.
It can be pretty simply implemented in C level.
Do you think it should be available in core?
Regards
Pavel
sorry, resent stalled post, wrong from
It'd be interesting to see numbers for tiny, without the overly small
checkpoint timeout value. 30s is below the OS's writeback time.
Here are some tests with longer timeout:
tiny2: scale=10 shared_buffers=1GB checkpoint_timeout=5min
Hello Jim,
The small problem I see is that for a very large setting there could be
several seconds or even minutes of sorting, which may or may not be
desirable, so having some control on that seems a good idea.
ISTM a more elegant way to handle that would be to start off with a very
small
Hi
2015-06-22 5:18 GMT+02:00 Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com:
On 2 April 2015 at 01:59, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
here is rebased patch.
It contains both
2015-06-22 11:20 GMT+02:00 Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi:
On 06/22/2015 09:51 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hi
I often need a function for identification if current user is database
owner or is superuser.
It can be pretty simply implemented in C level.
Do you think it should be
On 06/22/2015 09:51 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hi
I often need a function for identification if current user is database
owner or is superuser.
It can be pretty simply implemented in C level.
Do you think it should be available in core?
current_setting('is_superuser');
- Heikki
--
Sent
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
... The basic idea is that pg_stat_activity.waiting would be
replaced by a new column pg_stat_activity.wait_event, which would
display the reason why that backend is waiting.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Brendan Jurd dire...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 at 21:05 Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2015-06-19 09:08, Brendan Jurd wrote:
I
think it would be convenient and user-friendly to complete the opening
bracket -- it would make it
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
and doesn't require a developer to
interpret the results,
[...]
We could
also invent codes for things like I'm doing a pg_usleep because I've
exceeded max_spins_per_delay and I'm waiting for a cleanup lock on a
Piotr Stefaniak postg...@piotr-stefaniak.me writes:
There are two places in parse_func.c where memcmp() conditionally gets a
NULL as its first argument, which invokes undefined behavior. I guess
gcc -O2 will make some assumptions based on memcpy's __nonnull attribute.
If I recall that code
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Cédric Villemain
ced...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
+1 for it in 9.5
If we can do it soon, sure. But not in September.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 6/5/15 3:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Jim Nasby wrote:
On 6/5/15 2:08 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
That's a good point, and it won't get any better if/when we add the json
point support in 9.6 since the syntax would be something like select
jsonb '{a:1, b:2, c: {a: 2}}' - '/c/a'; and we will
Piotr Stefaniak postg...@piotr-stefaniak.me writes:
On 06/22/2015 08:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
If I recall that code correctly, the assumption was that if the third
argument is zero then memcmp() must not fetch any bytes (not should not,
but MUST not) and therefore it doesn't matter if we pass a
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Robert Haas
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 10:39 AM
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Tom Lane
Subject: [HACKERS] upper planner path-ification
Hi,
I've been
Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
Anything ever happen with this? I agree that LOG is to high for reporting
most (if not all) of these things.
I think we should consider
Hi,
On 06/22/2015 07:47 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com mailto:tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Hi Tomas,
I've lobotomized the sampling a bit to really produce a random set
of blocks first, and that produces way
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote:
sorry, resent stalled post, wrong from
It'd be interesting to see numbers for tiny, without the overly small
checkpoint timeout value. 30s is below the OS's writeback time.
Here are some tests with longer timeout:
Hi all,
Some grepping is showing up that a couple of newlines are missing in
pg_rewind, leading to unreadable log entries:
libpq_fetch.c:pg_log(PG_DEBUG, getting file chunks);
logging.c:pg_log(PG_PROGRESS, %*s/%s kB (%d%%) copied,
filemap.c:pg_fatal(could not stat file \%s\:
Hello Amit,
medium2: scale=300 shared_buffers=5GB checkpoint_timeout=30min
max_wal_size=4GB warmup=1200 time=7500
flsh | full speed tps | percent of late tx, 4 clients
/srt | 1 client | 4 clients | 100 | 200 | 400 |
N/N | 173 +- 289* | 198 +- 531* |
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Some grepping is showing up that a couple of newlines are missing in
pg_rewind, leading to unreadable log entries:
libpq_fetch.c:pg_log(PG_DEBUG, getting file chunks);
logging.c:
http://www.keithf4.com
On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 6/18/15 8:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Sure; the point is that libxml2 has suddenly been reclassified as a
documentation build tool, which is at least a surprising categorization.
libxml2 has
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:11 AM, Sandro Santilli s...@keybit.net wrote:
I've noted that upgrading from PostgreSQL 9.3 to 9.5 I'm suddenly
unable to specify a check rule in the Makefile that includes the
PGXS one. The error is:
$ make check
rm -rf ''/tmp_install
make -C
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 12:14 AM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Listing the directories with pg_ls_dir() has the same problem.
On 23 June 2015 at 13:55, Kouhei Kaigai kai...@ak.jp.nec.com wrote:
Once we support to add aggregation path during path consideration,
we need to pay attention morphing of the final target-list according
to the intermediate path combination, tentatively chosen.
For example, if
libxml2 has been a required documentation build tool since PostgreSQL
9.0. The only thing that's new is that xmllint is in a different
subpackage on some systems. So just install that and you're all set for
the foreseeable future.
Well, something is different in 9.5. On this same system
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
On 6/20/15 12:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Note that no matter what the details are, something like this is putting
the onus on the DBA to mark as transmittable only functions that actually
are safe to transmit, ie they exist*and have identical semantics*
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
On 6/19/15 10:35 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
On the other hand, you could argue that improving the string is going
to break clients that do the right thing (even if klugily) in order
to help clients that are doing the wrong thing (ie, failing without
50 matches
Mail list logo
