[HACKERS] standby, pg_basebackup and last xlog file

2013-01-20 Thread Миша Тюрин
  Hello!   I wrote to general (  [GENERAL] standby, pg_basebackup and last xlog file ) some times ago. but still hasn't got any feedback.   Hello!   Is there any reason why pg_basebackup has limitation in an online backup from the standby: The backup history file is not created in the

[HACKERS] Re[2]: [HACKERS] standby, pg_basebackup and last xlog file

2013-02-07 Thread Миша Тюрин
Hello all and Heikki personally Thank you for your answer I have some new points: Понедельник, 21 января 2013, 10:08 +02:00 от Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com: On 21.01.2013 09:14, Миша Тюрин wrote: Is there any reason why pg_basebackup has limitation in an online backup

[HACKERS] Re[2]: [HACKERS] standby, pg_basebackup and last xlog file

2013-02-07 Thread Миша Тюрин
Hello all and Heikki personally Thank you for your answer I have some new points: 21.01.2013, 10:08 +02:00 от Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com: On 21.01.2013 09:14, Миша Тюрин wrote: Is there any reason why pg_basebackup has limitation in an online backup from the standby

[HACKERS] pending triggers infinite list

2013-02-08 Thread Миша Тюрин
Hi all I've got suspicious behavior for transaction cooked with deferrable trigger. if trigger has update on row of his target table we get infinite recursion without limitation of stack depth. trigger - update - trigger - update - ... ... -- infinite pending list :) - Misha --

[HACKERS] Re[2]: [HACKERS] high io BUT huge amount of free memory

2013-04-24 Thread Миша Тюрин
thanks a lot for responses 1) just remind my case Intel 32 core = 2*8 *2threads Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 #1 SMP Sun May 6 04:00:17 UTC 2012 x86_64 GNU/Linux PostgreSQL 9.2.2 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compiled by gcc-4.4.real (Debian 4.4.5-8) 4.4.5, 64-bit shared_buffers 64GB / constant hit

[HACKERS] Re[3]: [HACKERS] high io BUT huge amount of free memory

2013-04-24 Thread Миша Тюрин
typo if ( user cpu + io wait ) is ~140% then i have ~140GB free. 140% === 1400% if ~14 cores are busy then ~140GB is free 10GB per process hmmm... -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

[HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Re[3]: [HACKERS] high io BUT huge amount of free memory

2013-04-24 Thread Миша Тюрин
vm state root@avi-sql09:~# /sbin/sysctl -a|grep vm vm.overcommit_memory = 0 vm.panic_on_oom = 0 vm.oom_kill_allocating_task = 0 vm.oom_dump_tasks = 0 vm.overcommit_ratio = 50 vm.page-cluster = 3 vm.dirty_background_ratio = 10 vm.dirty_background_bytes = 0 vm.dirty_ratio = 20 vm.dirty_bytes = 0

[HACKERS] Re[2]: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] high io BUT huge amount of free memory

2013-06-03 Thread Миша Тюрин
hm, in that case, wouldn't adding 48gb of physical memory have approximately the same effect? or is something else going on? imho, adding 48gb would have no effects. server already has 376GB memory and still has a lot of unused GB. let me repeat, we added 80GB for files cache by decreasing

[HACKERS] Wal sync odirect

2013-07-21 Thread Миша Тюрин
hi, list. there are my proposal. i would like to tell about odirect in wal sync in wal_level is higher than minimal. i think in my case when wal traffic is up to 1gb per 2-3 minutes but discs hardware with 2gb bbu cache (or maybe ssd under wal) - there would be better if wall traffic could not

[HACKERS] Auto explain target tables

2013-07-21 Thread Миша Тюрин
hi, list, again. the next proposal into auto explain. one would be happy if could set list of target tables and indexes. sometimes it is very hard to detect who is using your indexes. but turn total logging on under thousands transactions per seconds is not seems like nice idea couse size of

[HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Wal sync odirect

2013-07-22 Thread Миша Тюрин
i tell about wal_level is higher than MINIMAL wal_level != minimal http://doxygen.postgresql.org/xlogdefs_8h_source.html 48   * Because O_DIRECT bypasses the kernel buffers, and because we never 49   * read those buffers except during crash recovery or if wal_level != minimal hi, list.

[HACKERS] freeze cannot be finished

2013-11-16 Thread Миша Тюрин
Hello! Could anyone review patch suggested by Jeff Janes ? Initial thread http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1384356585.995240...@f50.i.mail.ru#1384356585.995240...@f50.i.mail.ru Thanks in advance! On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Sergey Burladyan eshkin...@gmail.com wrote:

[HACKERS] Re[2]: [HACKERS] Re: [Lsf-pc] Linux kernel impact on PostgreSQL performance (summary v2 2014-1-17)

2014-01-21 Thread Миша Тюрин
Hi But maybe postgres should provide its own subsystem like linux active/inactive memory over and/or near shared buffers? There could be some postgres special heuristics in its own approach. And does anyone know how mysql-innodb guys are getting with similar issues? Thank you!

[HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] On partitioning

2014-12-03 Thread Миша Тюрин
maybe vertica's approach will be a useful example http://my.vertica.com/docs/7.1.x/HTML/index.htm#Authoring/AdministratorsGuide/Partitions/PartitioningTables.htm http://my.vertica.com/docs/7.1.x/HTML/index.htm#Authoring/SQLReferenceManual/Statements/CREATETABLE.htm ... [ PARTITION BY

[HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication and WAL archive interactions

2015-02-11 Thread Миша Тюрин
  This should be a very common setup in the field, so how are  people doing it in practice? One of possible workaround with archive and streaming was to use pg_receivexlog from standby to copy/save WALs to archive. but with pg_receivexlog was also issue with fsync. [ master ] -- streaming 

[HACKERS] Re[2]: [HACKERS] Remove fsync ON/OFF as a visible option?

2015-03-21 Thread Миша Тюрин
why does we take so many attention to fsync issue? but there are also table spaces in tmpfs, wal in tmpfs, disks with cache without bbu, writeback writes and fs without ordering and journal, any CLOUDS, etc etc... in our real world installations. more over not all of these issues are usually