On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 12:09:32AM +0200, Franck Pachot wrote:
> So the proposal is great, but there is also the risk of putting a large effort
> in describing the specification and maybe a patch, and that it is rejected. It
> should probably be discussed in the -hackers list
On Mon, 2021-10-11 at 00:09 +0200, Franck Pachot wrote:
> And people will dislike it because it mentions Oracle.
I don't think so.
While "Oracle has it" is not a good enough reason for a feature, it
is certainly no counter-indication.
> Or people will dislike it because they think this should be
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 11:06 PM Jeff Holt wrote:
> TLDR; If I spend the time necessary to instrument the many functions that
> are the equivalent of the Oracle counterparts, would anyone pull those
> changes and use them? Specifically, for those who know Oracle, I'm talking
> about
On 10/8/21 11:21, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Ah, this is exactly what I wanted to know --- what people are using the
event waits for. Can you tell if these are done all externally, or if
they need internal database changes?
Well, the methodology goes like this: we get the slow queries from
Bruce Momjian schrieb am 08.10.2021 um 17:40:
I guess everyone will use that information in a different way.
We typically use the AWR reports as a post-mortem analysis tool if
something goes wrong in our application (=customer specific projects)
E.g. if there was a slowdown "last monday" or
On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 11:40 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 05:28:37PM +0200, Thomas Kellerer wrote:
> >
> > We typically use the AWR reports as a post-mortem analysis tool if
> > something goes wrong in our application (=customer specific projects)
> >
> > E.g. if there was
On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 05:28:37PM +0200, Thomas Kellerer wrote:
> Bruce Momjian schrieb am 08.10.2021 um 17:21:
> > However, I also need to ask how the wait event information, whether
> > tracing or sampling, can be useful for Postgres because that will drive
> > the solution.
>
> I guess
Bruce Momjian schrieb am 08.10.2021 um 17:21:
However, I also need to ask how the wait event information, whether
tracing or sampling, can be useful for Postgres because that will drive
the solution.
I guess everyone will use that information in a different way.
We typically use the AWR
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 11:35:16PM -0400, Mladen Gogala wrote:
>
> On 10/7/21 22:15, Jeremy Schneider wrote:
> There is an extension which does wait event sampling:
>
> https://github.com/postgrespro/pg_wait_sampling
>
> It's one of the Postgres Pro extensions, I like it a lot. Postgres Pro is
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 10:22:12PM -0700, Jeremy Schneider wrote:
>
> On Oct 7, 2021, at 19:38, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Our wait events reported in pg_stat_activity are really only a first
> > step --- I always felt it needed an external tool to efficiently
> > collect and report those wait
On Oct 7, 2021, at 19:38, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 07:15:39PM -0700, Jeremy Schneider wrote:
>> PostgreSQL added wait events starting in 9.6 and the last thing that's
>> missing is an integrated way to trace or log them. A simple starting
>> point could be a
On 10/7/21 22:15, Jeremy Schneider wrote:
On 10/5/21 13:24, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 1:06 PM Jeff Holt wrote:
Now looking closely at postgreSQL, I see an opportunity to more quickly
implement Oracle's current feature list.
I've come to this point because I see many
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 07:15:39PM -0700, Jeremy Schneider wrote:
> PostgreSQL added wait events starting in 9.6 and the last thing that's
> missing is an integrated way to trace or log them. A simple starting
> point could be a session-level GUC that enables a hook in
> pgstat_report_wait_start()
On 10/5/21 13:24, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 1:06 PM Jeff Holt wrote:
>> Now looking closely at postgreSQL, I see an opportunity to more quickly
>> implement Oracle's current feature list.
>>
>> I've come to this point because I see many roadblocks for users who want to
>>
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 08:34:29AM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > Now looking closely at postgreSQL, I see an opportunity to more quickly
> > implement Oracle's current feature list.
>
> Anything that improves user experience in that respect is welcome, but
> consider
> that each database has
On 10/5/21 20:02, Tim wrote:
Jeff Holt is probably pretty embarrassed there's some blowhard making
a scene using his name in a casual mailing list thread.
Wow! What a contribution to the discussion! Calling me a blowhard, all
while top-posting at the same time. Your post will be remembered
Jeff Holt is probably pretty embarrassed there's some blowhard making a
scene using his name in a casual mailing list thread.
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 5:28 PM Mladen Gogala
wrote:
> Comments in-line
>
> On 10/5/21 16:24, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 1:06 PM Jeff Holt wrote:
Comments in-line
On 10/5/21 16:24, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 1:06 PM Jeff Holt wrote:
Now looking closely at postgreSQL, I see an opportunity to more quickly
implement Oracle's current feature list.
I've come to this point because I see many roadblocks for users who want
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 1:06 PM Jeff Holt wrote:
> Now looking closely at postgreSQL, I see an opportunity to more quickly
> implement Oracle's current feature list.
>
> I've come to this point because I see many roadblocks for users who want to
> see a detailed "receipt" for their response
Comments in-line:
On 10/5/21 04:26, Laurenz Albe wrote:
have never heard of Jeff Holt, but then there are a lot of wonderful
and smart people I have never heard of. I tend to be respectful in
my conversation, regardless if I know the other person or not.
That much is apparent. However,
Em ter., 5 de out. de 2021 às 01:04, Mladen Gogala
escreveu:
> As for Jeff Holt, I believe that a person of his stature needs to be
> taken seriously and not lectured "how are things done in Postgres
> community". I am rather confused by the thinly veiled hostility toward
> Oracle. In my
On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 21:51 -0400, Mladen Gogala wrote:
>
> On 10/4/21 02:34, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > On Fri, 2021-10-01 at 15:06 -0500, Jeff Holt wrote:
> > > TLDR; If I spend the time necessary to instrument the many functions that
> > > are the equivalent
> > > of the Oracle counterparts,
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 9:04 PM Mladen Gogala wrote:
> What angered me was the presumptuous tone of voice directed to an Oracle
> legend. I have probably talked to many more Oracle people than you,
> including Tanel, whom I have met personally. I am not on Twitter,
> unfortunately I am older than
On 10/4/21 23:08, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
n all sincerity: Chill out. I don't think that this is worth getting
into an argument over. I think that there is a good chance that you'd
have had a much better experience if the conversation had been in
person. Text has a way of losing a lot of
On 10/4/21 22:25, michael...@sqlexec.com wrote:
Mladen,
Shame on u lecturing a top notch guy in the PostgreSQL world, Laurenz Albe. I
think Laurenz knows “a little bit” about Oracle having written the popular
extension, fdw_oracle, among his many other contributions to the PG world. So
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 6:51 PM Mladen Gogala wrote:
> Haughty lectures about "Oracle has it" not being good enough could
> hardly be more out of place here. To put it as politely as is possible
> in this case, shut your pie hole. What Jeff is asking for is not
> something that "Oracle has", it's
Mladen,
Shame on u lecturing a top notch guy in the PostgreSQL world, Laurenz Albe. I
think Laurenz knows “a little bit” about Oracle having written the popular
extension, fdw_oracle, among his many other contributions to the PG world. So
ironic that Laurenz was just named “PostgReSQL person
On 10/4/21 02:34, Laurenz Albe wrote:
On Fri, 2021-10-01 at 15:06 -0500, Jeff Holt wrote:
TLDR; If I spend the time necessary to instrument the many functions that are
the equivalent
of the Oracle counterparts, would anyone pull those changes and use them?
Specifically, for those who know
On Fri, 2021-10-01 at 15:06 -0500, Jeff Holt wrote:
> TLDR; If I spend the time necessary to instrument the many functions that are
> the equivalent
> of the Oracle counterparts, would anyone pull those changes and use them?
> Specifically, for those who know Oracle, I'm talking about
29 matches
Mail list logo
