Hi,
thanks for checking.
On 02/11/17 10:00, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:19 PM, Petr Jelinek
> wrote:
>> sorry for the delay but I didn't have much time in past weeks to follow
>> this thread.
>
> +TimestampTz now = GetCurrentTimestamp();
> +
> /* output previously gat
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:19 PM, Petr Jelinek
wrote:
> sorry for the delay but I didn't have much time in past weeks to follow
> this thread.
+TimestampTz now = GetCurrentTimestamp();
+
/* output previously gathered data in a CopyData packet */
pq_putmessage_noblock('d', ctx->out->da
Hi,
sorry for the delay but I didn't have much time in past weeks to follow
this thread.
On 02/10/17 05:44, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> Hello Sokolov.
>
> At Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:19:23 +0300, Sokolov Yura
> wrote in
>
>> I don't want to make test to lasts so long and generate so many data.
>>
Hello Sokolov.
At Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:19:23 +0300, Sokolov Yura
wrote in
> I don't want to make test to lasts so long and generate so many data.
> That is why I used such small timeouts for tests.
I understand your point, but still *I* think such a short timeout
is out of expectation by design
Good day, Kyoutaro
On 2017-09-29 11:26, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
Hello,
At Wed, 27 Sep 2017 14:28:37 +0300, Sokolov Yura
wrote in
<90bb67da7131e6186b50897c4b0f0...@postgrespro.ru>
On 2017-09-12 11:28, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> Hello,
> At Wed, 06 Sep 2017 13:46:16 +, Yura Sokolov
> wrot
Hello,
At Wed, 27 Sep 2017 14:28:37 +0300, Sokolov Yura
wrote in <90bb67da7131e6186b50897c4b0f0...@postgrespro.ru>
> On 2017-09-12 11:28, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> > Hello,
> > At Wed, 06 Sep 2017 13:46:16 +, Yura Sokolov
> > wrote in
> > <20170906134616.18925.88390.p...@coridan.postgresql
On 2017-09-12 11:28, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
Hello,
At Wed, 06 Sep 2017 13:46:16 +, Yura Sokolov
wrote in
<20170906134616.18925.88390.p...@coridan.postgresql.org>
I've changed to "need review" to gain more attention from other.
I understand that the problem here is too fast network proh
Hello,
At Wed, 06 Sep 2017 13:46:16 +, Yura Sokolov
wrote in <20170906134616.18925.88390.p...@coridan.postgresql.org>
> I've changed to "need review" to gain more attention from other.
I understand that the problem here is too fast network prohibits
walsender from sending replies.
In physi
I've changed to "need review" to gain more attention from other.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 2017-05-25 17:52 Petr Jelinek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have had issue with walsender timeout when used with logical
> decoding and the transaction is taking long time to be decoded
> (because it contains many changes)
>
> I was looking today at the walsender code and realized that it's
> because if
On 2017-08-09 16:23, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 02/08/17 19:35, Yura Sokolov wrote:
The following review has been posted through the commitfest
application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: not tested
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:n
On 9 August 2017 at 21:23, Petr Jelinek
wrote:
> On 02/08/17 19:35, Yura Sokolov wrote:
> > The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
> > make installcheck-world: tested, passed
> > Implements feature: not tested
> > Spec compliant: not tested
> > D
On 02/08/17 19:35, Yura Sokolov wrote:
> The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
> make installcheck-world: tested, passed
> Implements feature: not tested
> Spec compliant: not tested
> Documentation:not tested
>
> There is no check fo
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: not tested
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:not tested
There is no check for (last_reply_timestamp <= 0 || wal_sender_timeout <=
On 30/05/17 15:44, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 30/05/17 11:02, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
>>
>> +TimestampTz now = GetCurrentTimestamp();
>>
>> I think it is not recommended to read the current time too
>> frequently, especially within a loop that hates slowness. (I
>> suppose that a loop that c
On 30/05/17 11:02, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> At Thu, 25 May 2017 17:52:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek
> wrote in
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have had issue with walsender timeout when used with logical decoding
>> and the transaction is taking long time to be decoded (because it
>> contains many changes)
>>
>>
At Thu, 25 May 2017 17:52:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek
wrote in
> Hi,
>
> We have had issue with walsender timeout when used with logical decoding
> and the transaction is taking long time to be decoded (because it
> contains many changes)
>
> I was looking today at the walsender code and realized t
17 matches
Mail list logo
