: [HACKERS] WIP: Collecting statistics on CSV file data
Shigeru HANADA shigeru.han...@gmail.com writes:
Just after my post, Fujita-san posted another v7 patch[1], so I merged
v7 patches into v8 patch.
I've committed a modified version of this, but right after pushing it I had
a better idea about what
Shigeru HANADA shigeru.han...@gmail.com writes:
Just after my post, Fujita-san posted another v7 patch[1], so I merged
v7 patches into v8 patch.
I've committed a modified version of this, but right after pushing it
I had a better idea about what the AnalyzeForeignTable API should do.
An issue
On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Shigeru HANADA shigeru.han...@gmail.com writes:
Just after my post, Fujita-san posted another v7 patch[1], so I merged
v7 patches into v8 patch.
I've committed a modified version of this, but right after pushing it
I had a
Thanks, Hanada-san!
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
-Original Message-
From: Shigeru HANADA [mailto:shigeru.han...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2012 11:41 AM
To: Etsuro Fujita
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Collecting statistics on CSV file data
(2012/04
Hi Hanada-san,
Sorry for the late response.
(2012/02/10 22:05), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
(2011/12/15 11:30), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
(2011/12/14 15:34), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
I think this patch could be marked as Ready for committer with some
minor fixes. Please find attached a revised patch
(2011/12/15 11:30), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
(2011/12/14 15:34), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
I think this patch could be marked as Ready for committer with some
minor fixes. Please find attached a revised patch (v6.1).
I've tried to make pgsql_fdw work with this feature, and found that few
static
(2011/12/14 15:34), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
(2011/12/13 22:00), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Thank you for your effectiveness experiments and proposals for
improvements. I updated the patch according to your proposals.
Attached is the updated version of the patch.
I think this patch could be marked
(2011/12/09 21:16), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I updated the patch. Please find attached a patch.
I've examined v5 patch, and got reasonable EXPLAIN results which reflect
collected statistics! As increasing STATISTICS option, estimated rows
become better. Please see attached stats_*.txt for what I
Hi Hanada-san,
I updated the patch. Please find attached a patch.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
(2011/11/18 21:00), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
(2011/11/18 16:25), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Thank you for your testing. I updated the patch according to your
comments. Attached is the updated version of
Hi Hanada-san,
Thank you for your valuable comments. I will improve the items pointed
out by you at the next version of the patch, including documentation on
the purpose of AnalyzeForeignTable, how to write it, and so on. Here I
comment only one point:
- Why file_fdw skips sample tuples which
(2011/11/19 0:54), Robert Haas wrote:
2011/11/18 Shigeru Hanadashigeru.han...@gmail.com:
- I couldn't see the reason why file_fdw sets ctid of sample tuples,
though I guess it's for Vitter's random sampling algorithm. If every
FDW must set valid ctid to sample tuples, it should be mentioned in
(2011/11/18 16:25), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Thank you for your testing. I updated the patch according to your
comments. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
I'd like to share result of my review even though it's not fully
finished. So far I looked from viewpoint of API design, code
2011/11/18 Shigeru Hanada shigeru.han...@gmail.com:
- I couldn't see the reason why file_fdw sets ctid of sample tuples,
though I guess it's for Vitter's random sampling algorithm. If every
FDW must set valid ctid to sample tuples, it should be mentioned in
document of AnalyzeForeignTable.
(2011/11/07 20:26), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
(2011/10/20 18:56), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I revised the patch according to Hanada-san's comments. Attached is the
updated version of the patch.
Changes:
* pull up of logging analyzing foo.bar
* new vac_update_relstats always called
*
(2011/10/20 18:56), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I revised the patch according to Hanada-san's comments. Attached is the
updated version of the patch.
Changes:
* pull up of logging analyzing foo.bar
* new vac_update_relstats always called
* tab-completion in psql
* add foreign
Hi,
(2011/10/18 16:32), Leonardo Francalanci wrote:
New API AnalyzeForeignTable
I didn't look at the patch, but I'm using CSV foreign tables with named pipes
to get near-realtime KPI calculated by postgresql. Of course, pipes can be
read just once, so I wouldn't want an automatic analyze of
New API AnalyzeForeignTable
I didn't look at the patch, but I'm using CSV foreign tables with named pipes
to get near-realtime KPI calculated by postgresql. Of course, pipes can be
read just once, so I wouldn't want an automatic analyze of foreign tables...
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing
(2011/10/07 18:09), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Thank you for the review and the helpful information.
I rebased. Please find attached a patch. I'll add the patch to the next CF.
Changes:
* cleanups and fixes
* addition of the following to ALTER FOREIGN TABLE
ALTER [COLUMN] column
(2011/10/18 2:27), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
The new patch could be applied with some shifts. Regression tests of
core and file_fdw have passed cleanly. Though I've tested only simple
tests, ANALYZE works for foreign tables for file_fdw, and estimation of
costs and selectivity seem appropriate.
(2011/10/07 21:56), David Fetter wrote:
(But this is BTW. I'm interested in developing CREATE FOREIGN INDEX.
I've examined whether there are discussions about the design and
implementation of it in the archive, but could not find information.
If you know anything, please tell me.)
Look into
Hi Hanada-san,
I'm very sorry for late reply.
(2011/09/20 18:49), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
I took a look at the patch, and found that it couldn't be applied
cleanly against HEAD. Please rebase your patch against current HEAD of
master branch, rather than 9.1beta1.
The wiki pages below would
Hi,
I'm very sorry for the late reply.
(2011/09/21 10:00), Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from David Fetter's message of mar sep 20 21:22:32 -0300 2011:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:13:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Probably a more interesting question is why we wouldn't change
autovacuum so
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 08:09:44PM +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Hi,
I'm very sorry for the late reply.
(2011/09/21 10:00), Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from David Fetter's message of mar sep 20 21:22:32 -0300 2011:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:13:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Probably a
Hi Fujita-san,
(2011/09/12 19:40), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Hi there,
To enable file_fdw to estimate costs of scanning a CSV file more
accurately, I would like to propose a new FDW callback routine,
AnalyzeForeignTable, which allows to ANALYZE command to collect
statistics on a foreign table,
2011/9/12 Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp:
This is called when ANALYZE command is executed. (ANALYZE
command should be executed because autovacuum does not analyze foreign
tables.)
This is a good idea.
However, if adding these statistics requires an explicit ANALYZE
command, then we
Marti Raudsepp ma...@juffo.org writes:
2011/9/12 Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp:
This is called when ANALYZE command is executed. (ANALYZE
command should be executed because autovacuum does not analyze foreign
tables.)
This is a good idea.
However, if adding these statistics
On 20-09-2011 11:12, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
2011/9/12 Etsuro Fujitafujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp:
This is called when ANALYZE command is executed. (ANALYZE
command should be executed because autovacuum does not analyze foreign
tables.)
This is a good idea.
However, if adding these statistics
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:13:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Marti Raudsepp ma...@juffo.org writes:
2011/9/12 Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp:
This is called when ANALYZE command is executed. (ANALYZE
command should be executed because autovacuum does not analyze foreign
tables.)
Excerpts from David Fetter's message of mar sep 20 21:22:32 -0300 2011:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:13:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Probably a more interesting question is why we wouldn't change
autovacuum so that it calls this automatically for foreign tables.
How about a per-table
29 matches
Mail list logo
