On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:18:30PM -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 May 2007 19:41, Guillaume Smet wrote:
> > On 5/9/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Any time this happens it's generally a nasty surprise for users.
> > >
> > > R
These patches are updated as discussed to remove the incomplete
feature. Unfortunately I have a wedding to go to this weekend and
won't get them tested until next week. Will post when I've done so.
On Mar 31, 2007, at 3:41 PM, Henry B. Hotz wrote:
These patches have been reasonably tested
Or we could switch to a more compact representation of the dead tuples,
and not need such a big maintenance_work_mem in the first place.
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:18:30PM -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 19:41, Guillaume Smet wrote:
On 5/9/07, Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Or we could switch to a more compact representation of the dead tuples,
> and not need such a big maintenance_work_mem in the first place.
Hm, you got any ideas? One constraint is that it doesn't seem
acceptable to make the search function any slo
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 07:57:44PM +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Or we could switch to a more compact representation of the dead tuples,
> and not need such a big maintenance_work_mem in the first place.
Sure, but even with a more compact representation you can still run out
of maintenance_w
Moving to -hackers.
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:37:44PM +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >If you know when the checkpoint ended, and you know how long each of the
> >pieces took, you can reconstruct the other times easily. The way you
> >describe this it is true--that the summary is redundant
On May 11, 2007, at 10:55 AM, Gregory Stark wrote:
Also, if anyone has any better ideas for names than \cswitch and
\cnowait
now's the time. I had intended them only as placeholders because I
couldn't
think of anything better but it doesn't sound like anyone else has
any better
ideas either.
Added to TODO:
* Have configure choose integer datetimes by default
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-05/msg00046.php
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, 2007-06-05
Attached are two patches that try to recast the ideas of Itagaki
Takahiro's auto bgwriter_lru_maxpages patch in the direction I think this
code needs to move. Epic-length commentary follows.
The original code came from before there was a pg_stat_bgwriter. The
first patch (buf-alloc-stats) ta
