Re: [HACKERS] Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM

2003-11-10 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 00:50, Neil Conway wrote: Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We can't resize shared memory because we allocate the whole thing in one big hump - which causes the shmmax problem BTW. If we allocate that in chunks of multiple blocks, we only have to give it a

Re: [HACKERS] Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM

2003-11-11 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 18:55, Jan Wieck wrote: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: On Tuesday 11 November 2003 00:50, Neil Conway wrote: Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: We can't resize shared memory because we allocate the whole thing in one big hump - which causes the shmmax problem

Re: [HACKERS] bugzilla (Was: What do you want me to do?)

2003-11-11 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 19:19, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: Seriously, I have wondered if it might be a good idea to assemble a small hit team that would take some high profile open source projects and make sure they worked with Postgres. Bugzilla would be the most

Re: [HACKERS] bugzilla (Was: What do you want me to do?)

2003-11-11 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Shridhar Daithankar writes: So forming a new group is quite beneficial? No, we don't need one group, we need many individuals (or possibly small groups) to get in contact with their second favorite projects and hang out there. I meant lets form a group within advocacy

Re: [HACKERS] Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM

2003-11-11 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Greg Stark wrote: Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If the parent postmaster mmaps anonymous memory segments and shares them with children, postgresql wouldn't be dependent upon any kernel resourse aka shared memory anymore. Anonymous memory mappings aren't shared, at least

Re: [HACKERS] 7.4 hot backup capabilities?

2003-11-12 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Austin Gonyou wrote: What facilities are/will be available for hot(online) backups with the 7.4 release? PITR, something else? TIA. pg_dump? Did you mean hot failover or hot backup? Postgresql does hot backup for a long time. Bye Shridhar ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] 7.4 hot backup capabilities?

2003-11-12 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Austin Gonyou wrote: On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 01:00, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Austin Gonyou wrote: What facilities are/will be available for hot(online) backups with the 7.4 release? PITR, something else? TIA. pg_dump? Did you mean hot failover or hot backup? Postgresql does hot backup

Re: [HACKERS] Background writer process

2003-11-13 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Friday 14 November 2003 03:05, Jan Wieck wrote: For sure the sync() needs to be replaced by the discussed fsync() of recently written files. And I think the algorithm how much and how often to flush can be significantly improved. But after all, this does not change the real checkpointing at

Re: [HACKERS] Background writer process

2003-11-17 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Friday 14 November 2003 22:10, Jan Wieck wrote: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: On Friday 14 November 2003 03:05, Jan Wieck wrote: For sure the sync() needs to be replaced by the discussed fsync() of recently written files. And I think the algorithm how much and how often to flush can

Re: [HACKERS] Background writer process

2003-11-18 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Bruce Momjian wrote: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: On Friday 14 November 2003 22:10, Jan Wieck wrote: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: On Friday 14 November 2003 03:05, Jan Wieck wrote: For sure the sync() needs to be replaced by the discussed fsync() of recently written files. And I think

Re: [HACKERS] start of transaction

2003-11-18 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Hannu Krosing wrote: Tom Lane kirjutas E, 17.11.2003 kell 02:08: Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hmmm... I agree this behavior isn't ideal, although I can see the case for viewing this as a mistake by the application developer: they are assuming that they know exactly when transactions

Re: [HACKERS] Background writer process

2003-11-18 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote: 1. Open WAL files with O_SYNC|O_DIRECT or O_SYNC(Not sure if Without grouping WAL writes that does not fly. Iff however such grouping is implemented that should deliver optimal performance. I don't think flushing WAL to the OS early (before a tx commits) is

Re: [HACKERS] Win32 port

2003-11-19 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Jean-Michel POURE wrote: OK, now, some of us will complain that Win32 is not needed at a time when the Debian Synaptic graphical installer gives access to 13.748 packages. Win32 sounds like an old Atari game station. Agreed. On the long-run, everyone will leave Win32, even my grand-mother.

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] More detail on settings for pgavd?

2003-11-19 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Josh Berkus wrote: Shridhar, I was looking at the -V/-v and -A/-a settings in pgavd, and really don't understand how the calculation works. According to the readme, if I set -v to 1000 and -V to 2 (the defaults) for a table with 10,000 rows, pgavd would only vacuum after 21,000 rows had

Re: [HACKERS] RPM building fun

2003-11-19 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Joshua D. Drake wrote: Is there some way to remove this piece of sh^H^Hlegacy from the configure script? Does anybody actually use info? All of GNU. Additionally it is very good resource when you use Konqueror to browse it as html.. Shridhar ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] Background writer committed

2003-11-19 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Jan Wieck wrote: I committed the first part of the background writer process. We had a consensus on attempting to avoid write() calls from regular backends, but did no come to any conclusions what to do to force the kernel to actually do some IO. Consequently, this patch is a separate process

Re: [HACKERS] RPM building fun

2003-11-20 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Thursday 20 November 2003 13:09, David Fetter wrote: On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 11:45:06AM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Joshua D. Drake wrote: Is there some way to remove this piece of sh^H^Hlegacy from the configure script? Does anybody actually use info? All of GNU

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] More detail on settings for pgavd?

2003-11-20 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Josh Berkus wrote: Shridhar, However I do not agree with this logic entirely. It pegs the next vacuum w.r.t current table size which is not always a good thing. No, I think the logic's fine, it's the numbers which are wrong. We want to vacuum when updates reach between 5% and 15% of total

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] More detail on settings for pgavd?

2003-11-20 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Thursday 20 November 2003 20:00, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: I will submit a patch that would account deletes in analyze threshold. Since you want to delay the analyze, I would calculate analyze count as deletes are already accounted for in the analyze threshold

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] More detail on settings for pgavd?

2003-11-20 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Thursday 20 November 2003 20:29, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: On Thursday 20 November 2003 20:00, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: I will submit a patch that would account deletes in analyze threshold. Since you want to delay the analyze, I would calculate analyze

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] More detail on settings for pgavd?

2003-11-21 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: But we track tuples because we can compare against the count given by the stats system. I don't know of a way (other than looking at the FSM, or contrib/pgstattuple ) to see how many dead pages exist. I think making pg_autovacuum dependent of pgstattuple is very good

[HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

2003-11-25 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Hello All, I was looking thr. the source and thought it would be worth to seek opinion on this proposal. From what I understood so far, the core shared memory handling is done in pgsql/src/backend/port/sysv_shmem.c. It is linked by configure as per the runtime environment. So I need to write

Re: [HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

2003-11-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Tom Lane wrote: Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was looking thr. the source and thought it would be worth to seek opinion on this proposal. This has been discussed and rejected before. See the archives. I went thr. this for details. http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi

Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 Plans

2003-11-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: Hi everyone, I'm just interested in what everyone's personal plans for 7.5 development are? Shridar, Gavin and myself are trying to get the tablespaces stuff off the ground. Hopefully we'll have a CVS set up for us to work in at some point (we didn't think

Re: [HACKERS] Providing anonymous mmap as an option of sharing memory

2003-11-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Tom Lane wrote: Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I covered only first point in my post. IMO it is not such a unsolvable problem. If a postmaster crashes hard but leaves a backend running, would it clean pid file etc? I don't think so. So if a postmaster can start on a 'pid-clean

Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 Plans

2003-11-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Tom Lane wrote: 1. You can't easily generate a clean diff of your local version against the original imported from postgresql.org. The changes you actually made get buried in a mass of useless $Foo$ diff lines. Stripping those out is possible in theory but painful. Is that the reason linux does

Re: [HACKERS] *sigh*

2003-12-04 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Wednesday 03 December 2003 13:59, Mark Kirkwood wrote: How about: Implement a function estimated_count that can be used instead of count. It could use something like the algorithm in src/backend/commands/analyze.c to get a reasonably accurate psuedo count quickly. The advantage of this

Re: [HACKERS] tablespaces?

2003-12-09 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Bruce Momjian wrote: Guys, where are we on tablespaces? Should I set up a project page or does it need organization? I think we need to define the command syntax and then implementation details. I don't think it is that hard and certainly is possible for 7.5. There was a offlist group

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL port to pure Java?

2003-12-11 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Not to mention it would kill PostgreSQL's current speedy performance! Maybe, maybe not. Modern JVMs have much better performance characteristics than was once the case. Also, some of the things that Java buys you (memory management, threading, for example) might

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg tests compile failure

2003-12-18 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Thursday 18 December 2003 17:37, Dave Cramer wrote: test_thread.pgc:51: undefined reference to `pthread_create' undefined reference to `pthread_join' It is not linking against pthreads library. Do you have -lpthread cause in your compilation/linking command? Shridhar

Re: [HACKERS] ecpg tests compile failure

2003-12-18 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Thursday 18 December 2003 18:03, Dave Cramer wrote: Shridhar, Obviously not, but I just did make inside the test directory, so I assume the Makefile needs to be fixed. I don't think so.. Check this.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgsql]$ find . -name Makefile.global ./src/Makefile.global [EMAIL

Re: [HACKERS] Project status pages

2003-12-18 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Thursday 18 December 2003 20:16, Robert Treat wrote: On Wed, 2003-12-17 at 21:37, Bruce Momjian wrote: I have put up a list of projects being worked on and their TODO lists in hope that people will find it easier to work on them:

Re: [HACKERS] Issue with Linux+Pentium SMP Context Switching

2003-12-19 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Saturday 20 December 2003 00:00, Josh Berkus wrote: In discussions with Linux kernel hackers online, they blame the way that PostgreSQL uses shared memory. Whether or not they are correct, the effect of the issue is to harm PostgreSQL's performance and make us look bad on one of the major

Re: [HACKERS] Extending SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION

2004-01-31 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ezra Epstein wrote: I'd like to extend SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION to support a form which takes a password. Uh, a password? What purpose would that serve? Indeed. SET SESSION AUTH is already allowed only to superusers --- a superuser

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-hackers-win32] Sync vs. fsync during checkpoint

2004-02-05 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Thursday 05 February 2004 20:24, Tom Lane wrote: Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So Imho the target should be to have not much IO open for the checkpoint, so the fsync is fast enough, even if serial. The best we can do is push out dirty pages with write() via the

[HACKERS] MS SQL features for new version

2004-02-10 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Hi all, Just stumbled upon this. just an FYI, http://www.microsoft.com/sql/yukon/productinfo/top30features.asp Shridhar ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command

[HACKERS] Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it required?

2004-02-23 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Hi all, I was just going thr. the ecpg sources checking for thread safety. It looks like the mutex protects the connections list in connection.c. I do not like that from a application developers perspective. If I am developing an application and using multiple connections in multiple

[HACKERS] Sparc optimizations

2004-02-24 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
http://www.osnews.com/printer.php?news_id=6136 Shridhar ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Re: [HACKERS] Sparc optimizations

2004-02-24 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Tuesday 24 February 2004 21:15, scott.marlowe wrote: On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: http://www.osnews.com/printer.php?news_id=6136 That page gets a please don't link to printer ready pages error and redirects to here: http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=6136 My bad

Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces

2004-02-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Thursday 26 February 2004 15:37, Gavin Sherry wrote: Tying it all together: The catalogs pg_database, pg_namespace, and pg_class will have a 'tblspc' field. This will be the OID of the table space the object resides in, or 0 (default table space). Since we can then resolve relid/relname,

Re: [HACKERS] Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it

2004-02-27 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Michael Meskes wrote: On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 09:27:40PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: What I wonder is, do we really need to maintain that level of lookup? Can't we just say a connection is a 'struct connection *' which should be opaque and should not be touched or poked inside, just like

Re: [HACKERS] Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it

2004-02-27 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote: I am asking for CONNECTION being a variable of data type 'connection *' rather than 'const char *'. That would avoid name lookups. Is that out of spec? Yes, but the preprocessor could still add an optimization ala 'connection *' for the hardcoded cases (exec sql

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Collaboration Tool Proposal

2004-02-27 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Friday 27 February 2004 19:59, Andrew Dunstan wrote: I believe it should not be hard to do a one-time bulk registration of everyone on the lists, if that was desired. I agree. If possible we could also run postgresql registration system where we can track general usage of postgresql on

Re: [HACKERS] Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it

2004-02-27 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Friday 27 February 2004 20:54, Michael Meskes wrote: On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 04:22:33PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: How about, allowing 'connection *'? If somebody puts a 'connection *' there it is used. If it is a string a name search is performed. Best of both worlds. How shall

Re: [HACKERS] Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it

2004-02-28 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Friday 27 February 2004 22:24, Lee Kindness wrote: Sort of related, I was thinking about adding some more thread-related code such that if a connection wasn't explicitely specified then the last connection SET or CONNECTed to for the current thread is used, rather than just the last

Re: [HACKERS] Avoid MVCC using exclusive lock possible?

2004-02-29 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Tuesday 24 February 2004 22:13, Stephen wrote: Hi, Recently, I ran a huge update on an Integer column affecting 100 million rows in my database. What happened was my disk space increased in size and my IO load was very high. It appears that MVCC wants to rewrite each row (each row was

Re: [HACKERS] Avoid MVCC using exclusive lock possible?

2004-03-01 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Tuesday 02 March 2004 06:29, Paul Tillotson wrote: However, for this to be useful, your table must not have any indexes, views, foreign keys, sequences, triggers, etc., or else you must be prepared to re-create all of them using application level code. Which isn't a big deal is it? You can

Re: [HACKERS] Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it

2004-03-03 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
AT :s_connection SELECT it INTO :s_it FROM some_table; return( s_it ); } which could be run concurrently by multiple threads. L. Shridhar Daithankar writes: On Friday 27 February 2004 20:54, Michael Meskes wrote: On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 04:22:33PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: How about, allowing

Re: [HACKERS] Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it

2004-03-03 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Lee Kindness wrote: Shridhar, want to discuss this off list a bit to work through the various options and then revent back to the list with a suitable to-do (for discussion)? I don't mind. Just for summary, I am listing the discussion/proposal so far on this issue.. - Dispose names of

Re: [HACKERS] Out of space situation and WAL log pre-allocation (was

2004-03-03 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Tom Lane wrote: I think also that Simon completely misunderstood my intent in saying that this could be user-scriptable policy. By that I meant that the *user* could write the code to behave whichever way he liked. Not that we were going to go into a mad rush of feature invention and try to

Re: [HACKERS] Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it

2004-03-04 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote: - Dispose names of connectiong and replace them with a pointer. You cannot dispose the names, you can only add something to also allow pointers. The names are in the ESQL/C standard. Can you point me to the standards text? I am googling for it but nothing

Re: [HACKERS] Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it

2004-03-08 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Sunday 07 March 2004 20:28, Michael Meskes wrote: On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 07:40:40PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Is this fine? * Allow a 'connection *' pointer to be specified instead of a string to denote a connection. ... I personally have no problem with this as long

[HACKERS] [OT] Respository [was Re: [PERFORM] Feature request: smarter use of conditional indexes]

2004-03-08 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Sunday 07 March 2004 09:16, Tom Lane wrote: Personally I consider -c format the only one of the three that is readable for reviewing purposes, so even if I weren't intending immediate application, I'd ask for -c before looking at the patch. There are some folks who consider -u format

Re: [HACKERS] WAL write of full pages

2004-03-15 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Hi, I was thinking other way round. What if we write to WAL pages only to those portions which we need to modify and let kernel do the job the way it sees fit? What will happen if it fails? Bruce Momjian wrote: Our current WAL implementation writes copies of full pages to WAL before modifying

Re: [HACKERS] Table Spaces

2004-05-19 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On Wednesday 19 May 2004 00:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This makes me worried. That's the way we *used* to do things, but the sleazy IP lawyers are looking for anything with which they can create the impression of impropriety. The open source and free projects

Re: [HACKERS] Postgresql Automatic vacuum

2002-09-24 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 25 Sep 2002 at 1:10, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: It doesn't have to make its way into the postgresql daemon itself -- in fact since some people like tuning the vacuuming, it makes more sense to make this a daemon. No, my suggestion is simple that some sort of auto-vacuumer be compiled as

[HACKERS] Performance while loading data and indexing

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Hello all, Some time back I posted a query to build a site with 150GB of database. In last couple of weeks, lots of things were tested at my place and there are some results and again some concerns. This is a long post. Please be patient and read thr. If we win this, I guess we have a good

Re: [HACKERS] Performance while loading data and indexing

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 26 Sep 2002 at 14:05, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Some time back I posted a query to build a site with 150GB of database. In last couple of weeks, lots of things were tested at my place and there are some results and again some concerns. 2) Creating index takes huge amount of time

Re: [HACKERS] Performance while loading data and indexing

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 26 Sep 2002 at 10:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, it seems you have to cluster it, I don't think you have another choise. Hmm.. That didn't occur to me...I guess some real time clustering like usogres would do. Unless it turns out to be a performance hog.. But this is just insert

Re: [HACKERS] Performance while loading data and indexing

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 26 Sep 2002 at 11:50, Mario Weilguni wrote: Well the test runs were for 10GB of data. Schema is attached. Read in fixed fonts..Last nullable fields are dummies but may be used in fututre and varchars are not acceptable(Not my requirement). Tuple size is around 100 bytes.. The index

Re: [HACKERS] Insert Performance

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 26 Sep 2002 at 12:28, Michael Paesold wrote: But why is performance so much degrading? After 1 updates on a row, the row seems to be unusable without vacuum! I hope the currently discussed autovacuum daemon will help in such a situation. Let mw know if it works. Use CVS BTW.. I am

Re: [HACKERS] Performance while loading data and indexing

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 26 Sep 2002 at 11:17, Mario Weilguni wrote: On 26 Sep 2002 at 14:05, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Some time back I posted a query to build a site with 150GB of database. In last couple of weeks, lots of things were tested at my place and there are some results and again some concerns

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Performance while loading data and indexing

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 26 Sep 2002 at 19:17, Justin Clift wrote: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: snip 3) Any suggsestions for runtime as data load and query will be going in parallel. That sounds unusual. From reading this, it *sounds* like you'll be running queries against an incomplete dataset, or maybe just

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Performance while loading data and indexing

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 26 Sep 2002 at 19:05, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 02:05:44PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: 1) Database load time from flat file using copy is very high 2) Creating index takes huge amount of time. 3) Any suggsestions for runtime as data load and query

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Performance while loading data and indexing

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 26 Sep 2002 at 10:33, Tom Lane wrote: Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: RedHat7.2/PostgreSQL7.1.3 I'd suggest a newer release of Postgres ... 7.1.3 is pretty old ... I agree.. downloadind 7.2.2 right away.. Create unique composite index on 2 char and a timestamp field

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Performance while loading data and indexing

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 26 Sep 2002 at 10:42, Tom Lane wrote: Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If it's any help, when I was testing recently with WAL on a separate drive, the WAL logs were doing more readwrites per second than the main data drive. ... but way fewer seeks. For anything involving lots

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Performance while loading data and indexing

2002-09-26 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 27 Sep 2002 at 1:12, Justin Clift wrote: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: As a curiosity point, how predictable are the queries you're going to be running on your database? They sound very simple and very predicatable. Mostly predictable selects. Not a domain expert on telecom so not very sure

Re: [HACKERS] How to REINDEX in high volume environments?

2002-09-28 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 28 Sep 2002 at 17:08, Justin Clift wrote: Have moved the indexes to another drive, then created symlinks to them. Ran a benchmark against the database, REINDEX'd the tables, VACUUM FULL ANALYZE'd, prepared to re-run the benchmark again and guess what? The indexes were back on the

Re: [HACKERS] How to REINDEX in high volume environments?

2002-09-28 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 28 Sep 2002 at 17:51, Justin Clift wrote: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: snip Looks like we should have a subdirectory in database directory which stores index. That was my first thought also, but an alternative/additional approach would be this (not sure if it's workable

Re: [HACKERS] How to REINDEX in high volume environments?

2002-09-29 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 28 Sep 2002 at 12:18, Tom Lane wrote: Justin Clift [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Looks like we should have a subdirectory in database directory which stores index. That was my first thought also, but an alternative/additional approach would

Re: [HACKERS] How to REINDEX in high volume environments?

2002-09-29 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 29 Sep 2002 at 0:43, Justin Clift wrote: Shridhar Daithankar wrote: The reason that I was thinking of having a different path per index would be for high volume situations like this: /dev/dsk1 : /pgdata - data here /dev/dsk2 : /pgindexes1 - some indexes here /dev/dsk3 : /pgindexes2

[HACKERS] Large databases, performance

2002-10-03 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Hi, Today we concluded test for database performance. Attached are results and the schema, for those who have missed earlier discussion on this. We have (almost) decided that we will partition the data across machines. The theme is, after every some short interval a burst of data will be

Re: [HACKERS] Threaded Sorting

2002-10-04 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 4 Oct 2002 at 9:46, Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote: Did anybody think about threaded sorting so far? Assume an SMP machine. In the case of building an index or in the case of sorting a lot of data there is just one backend working. Therefore just one CPU is used. What about starting a

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance

2002-10-03 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 3 Oct 2002 at 19:33, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: On 3 Oct 2002 at 13:56, Nigel J. Andrews wrote: It's one hell of a DB you're building. I'm sure I'm not the only one interested so to satisfy those of us who are nosey: can you say what the application is? I'm sure we'll all understand

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance

2002-10-03 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 3 Oct 2002 at 8:54, Charles H. Woloszynski wrote: Can you comment on the tools you are using to do the insertions (Perl, Java?) and the distribution of data (all random, all static), and the transaction scope (all inserts in one transaction, each insert as a single transaction, some

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance

2002-10-03 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 3 Oct 2002 at 11:23, Greg Copeland wrote: On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 10:56, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Well, we were comparing ext3 v/s reiserfs. I don't remember the journalling mode of ext3 but we did a 10 GB write test. Besides converting the RAID to RAID- 0 from RAID-5 might have

Re: [HACKERS] Large databases, performance

2002-10-04 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 3 Oct 2002 at 18:53, Manfred Koizar wrote: On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 21:47:03 +0530, Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe that was vacuum analyze only. Well there is VACUUM [tablename]; and there is ANALYZE [tablename]; And VACUUM ANALYZE

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance

2002-10-07 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
better performance in data load etc? Will keep you guys updated.. Regards, Shridhar --- Shridhar Daithankar LIMS CPE Team Member, PSPL. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone:- +91-20-5678900 Extn.270 Fax :- +91-20-5678901

Table spaces again [was Re: [HACKERS] Threaded Sorting]

2002-10-07 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 4 Oct 2002 at 21:13, Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote: Bingo = great :). The I/O problem seems to be solved :). A table space concept would be top of the histlist :). The symlink version is not very comfortable and I think it would be a real hack. Also: If we had a clean table space

Re: [HACKERS] Implicit Lock Row

2002-10-07 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 5 Oct 2002 at 23:56, Antoine Lobato wrote: I currently develop an interface to simulate a indexed sequential file management with PostgreSql. I must reproduce the same philosophy used of control of locking of the records. I seek a solution to lock and unlock implicitly a row of a

Re: Table spaces again [was Re: [HACKERS] Threaded Sorting]

2002-10-07 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 7 Oct 2002 at 16:49, Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote: Mount a directory on a partition. If the data exceeds on that partition, there would be disk error. Like tablespace getting overflown. I have seen both the scenarios in action.. Of course it can be done somehow. However, with tablespaces

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-performance] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance

2002-10-07 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 7 Oct 2002 at 10:30, Tom Lane wrote: Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: MySQL 3.23.52 with innodb transaction support: 4 concurrent queries:- 257.36 ms 40 concurrent queries :- 35.12 ms Postgresql 7.2.2 4 concurrent queries

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-performance] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance

2002-10-07 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 7 Oct 2002 at 11:21, Tom Lane wrote: Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I say if it's a char field, there should be no indicator of length as it's not required. Just store those many characters straight ahead.. Your assumption fails when considering UNICODE or other

Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] Hot Backup

2002-10-07 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 7 Oct 2002 at 13:48, Neil Conway wrote: Sandeep Chadha [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Postgresql has been lacking this all along. I've installed postgres 7.3b2 and still don't see any archive's flushed to any other place. Please let me know how is hot backup procedure implemented in

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance

2002-10-09 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 9 Oct 2002 at 10:00, Manfred Koizar wrote: On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 15:07:29 +0530, Shridhar Daithankar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Only worry is database size. Postgresql is 111GB v/s 87 GB for mysql. Shridhar, here is an implementation of a set of user types: char3, char4, char10. Put

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-performance] [GENERAL] Large databases, performance

2002-10-09 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 9 Oct 2002 at 9:32, Tom Lane wrote: Manfred Koizar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: here is an implementation of a set of user types: char3, char4, char10. Coupla quick comments on these: CREATE FUNCTION charNN_lt(charNN, charNN) RETURNS boolean AS '$libdir/fixchar'

Re: [HACKERS] contrib/fixchar (Was: Large databases, performance)

2002-10-10 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 10 Oct 2002 at 15:30, Manfred Koizar wrote: On Wed, 09 Oct 2002 10:00:03 +0200, I wrote: here is an implementation of a set of user types: char3, char4, char10. New version available. As I don't want to spam the list with various versions until I get it right eventually, you can get

Re: [HACKERS] Peer to peer replication of Postgresql databases

2002-10-11 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:16, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote: Hi all, I am trying to add some replication features to postgres (yes, I have already looked at ongoing work), in a peer to peer manner. The goal is to achive `nearly complete fault tolerence' by replicating data. Sounds a lot like

Re: [HACKERS] MySQL vs PostgreSQL.

2002-10-11 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:20, Antti Haapala wrote: Check out: http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/MySQL-PostgreSQL_features.html Well, I guess there are many threads on this. You can dig around archives.. Upgrading MySQL Server is painless. When you are upgrading MySQL Server, you don't need to

Re: [HACKERS] Peer to peer replication of Postgresql databases

2002-10-11 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 11 Oct 2002 at 8:30, Greg Copeland wrote: I'd be curious to hear in a little more detail what constitutes not good for postgres on a mosix cluster. On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 06:15, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote: On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 04:29:53PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Have already

Re: [HACKERS] Peer to peer replication of Postgresql databases

2002-10-13 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 14 Oct 2002 at 11:55, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote: On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 07:10:26PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: On 11 Oct 2002 at 8:30, Greg Copeland wrote: I'd be curious to hear in a little more detail what constitutes not good for postgres on a mosix cluster. Well, I

Re: [HACKERS] Postgresql and multithreading

2002-10-16 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 16 Oct 2002 at 1:25, Bruce Momjian wrote: Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote: Thanks, Bruce. But what I want to know is whether multithreading is likely to get into in postgresql, say somewhere in 8.x, or even in 9.x? (as they did with Apache). Are there any plans to do so, or is postgres

Re: [HACKERS] Postgresql and multithreading

2002-10-16 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 16 Oct 2002 at 15:40, Gavin Sherry wrote: In that case, I wonder if it is worth folking a new project to add threading support to the backend? Of course, keeping in sync with the original would be lot of work. http://sourceforge.net/projects/mtpgsql Last discussion that happened

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Postgres-based system to run .org registry?

2002-10-16 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 15 Oct 2002 at 18:19, Bruce Momjian wrote: We are showing up in places I never expected: .org registry, tons of books, conventions, everywhere. It is just a wave that keeps getting bigger and bigger. I am starting to imagine what Linus felt seeing Linux take off; you just sit around

Re: Antw: Re: [HACKERS] Postgresql and multithreading

2002-10-19 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 18 Oct 2002 at 18:10, Ulrich Neumann wrote: Marc, not only the global variables are a problem. PostgreSQL doesn't clean up all the memory before a process terminates and you must deal with signals between threads. OK, first of all let me say this. I am interested in seeing postgresql

Re: [HACKERS] Large databases, performance

2002-10-03 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
--- Shridhar Daithankar LIMS CPE Team Member, PSPL. mailto:shridhar_daithankar;persistent.co.in Phone:- +91-20-5678900 Extn.270 Fax :- +91-20-5678901 --- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you

Re: [HACKERS] Peer to peer replication of Postgresql databases

2002-10-11 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:39, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote: On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 04:04:29PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:29, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote: On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 03:54:15PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: I will look at it, too. Thanks

Re: [HACKERS] Peer to peer replication of Postgresql databases

2002-10-11 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:29, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote: On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 03:54:15PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: I will look at it, too. Thanks for the link. In some cases, starting anew is faster than learning unmaintained existing code. While that's true, usogres code is just few

Re: [HACKERS] contrib/fixchar (Was: Large databases, performance)

2002-10-12 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 12 Oct 2002 at 8:54, Giles Lean wrote: Portable code uses 'unsigned char' when using ctype.h features, even though for many platforms where 'char' is an unsigned type it's not necessary for correct functioning. I don't see any isspace() or similar in the code though, so I'm not sure why

Re: Changing Column Order (Was Re: [HACKERS] MySQL vs PostgreSQL.)

2002-10-12 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
On 12 Oct 2002 at 2:54, Jeff Davis wrote: As far as I can tell, the order the attributes are returned makes no difference in a client application, unless you're referencing attributes by number. All applications that I've made or seen all use the name instead, and I've never heard

  1   2   3   >