Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 03:23, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 08/17/2011 07:42 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: I don't like exposing this information only on title processes. It would be difficult for client apps (for example, PGAdmin) to track this kind of information and it

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Compiling PostgreSQL using ActiveState Python 3.2

2011-08-18 Thread Ashesh Vashi
Please ignore the previous patch. Please find the updated patch. -- Thanks Regards, Ashesh Vashi EnterpriseDB INDIA: Enterprise PostgreSQL Companyhttp://www.enterprisedb.com *http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi*http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:57 PM,

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Dimitri Fontaine
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: Also, unrelated to that, wouldn't this information be interesting for non-autovacuum queries as well? I was about to say that I would like to see it for normal queries too, but I guess we already have it: = explain (analyze, buffers, costs off)

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Em 18-08-2011 03:39, Magnus Hagander escreveu: Also, unrelated to that, wouldn't this information be interesting for non-autovacuum queries as well? Yes, it would. AFAICS, the patch will display that message in process titles. However, analyze code also uses the vacuum_delay_point(). How do

[HACKERS] vacuum rusage fix

2011-08-18 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Hi, While looking at Greg's patch I spotted that resource usage code for vacuum is initialized even if we won't use it. Attached is a small patch that moves it to the right place (this code mimics do_analyze_rel function). -- Euler Taveira de Oliveira - Timbira

Re: [HACKERS] plpython crash

2011-08-18 Thread Jan Urbański
On 17/08/11 23:10, Tom Lane wrote: =?UTF-8?B?SmFuIFVyYmHFhHNraQ==?= wulc...@wulczer.org writes: Here are two patches that fix two separate bugs that you found simultaneously. Because they're actually separate issues, it turned out fixing them was a bit more tricky than I expected (fixing one

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Compiling PostgreSQL using ActiveState Python 3.2

2011-08-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tor, 2011-08-18 at 14:51 +0530, Ashesh Vashi wrote: Please ignore the previous patch. Please find the updated patch. Committed more or less like that. In passing I also fixed the build with Python 3 on Windows, which apparently never worked before. But I suppose you have been referring to

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Compiling PostgreSQL using ActiveState Python 3.2

2011-08-18 Thread Ashesh Vashi
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: On tor, 2011-08-18 at 14:51 +0530, Ashesh Vashi wrote: Please ignore the previous patch. Please find the updated patch. Committed more or less like that. Thanks In passing I also fixed the build with Python 3 on

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes: On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 03:23, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 08/17/2011 07:42 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: I don't like exposing this information only on title processes. I tend to build the simplest possible thing that is useful

Re: [HACKERS] SSI 2PC coverage

2011-08-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 07.07.2011 18:43, Kevin Grittner wrote: Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote: On 05.07.2011 20:06, Kevin Grittner wrote: There's two expected output files for this, one for max_prepared_xacts=0 and another for the normal case. The max_prepared_xacts=0 case isn't

Re: [HACKERS] vacuum rusage fix

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 7:02 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira eu...@timbira.com wrote: While looking at Greg's patch I spotted that resource usage code for vacuum is initialized even if we won't use it. Attached is a small patch that moves it to the right place (this code mimics do_analyze_rel

Re: [HACKERS] SSI 2PC coverage

2011-08-18 Thread Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes: On 07.07.2011 18:43, Kevin Grittner wrote: OK. I'll work on this tonight unless Dan jumps in to claim it. Committed. I removed the second expected output file, and marked the prepared-transactions tests in the schedule as ignore

Re: [HACKERS] SSI 2PC coverage

2011-08-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 18.08.2011 17:07, Tom Lane wrote: Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes: On 07.07.2011 18:43, Kevin Grittner wrote: OK. I'll work on this tonight unless Dan jumps in to claim it. Committed. I removed the second expected output file, and marked the

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 08/17/2011 07:42 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: I don't like exposing this information only on title processes. It would be difficult for client apps (for example, PGAdmin) to track this kind of information and

Re: [HACKERS] Change format of FDW options used in \d* commands

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
2011/8/18 Shigeru Hanada shigeru.han...@gmail.com: Thanks for the review. (2011/08/13 3:59), Robert Haas wrote: IMHO, the new format should put parentheses around the options list. Agreed.  Revised version of patch has been attached.  This version puts parentheses around FDW option only

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tor, 2011-08-18 at 08:39 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: Also, unrelated to that, wouldn't this information be interesting for non-autovacuum queries as well? Last year we were discussing some details on progress reporting, and some people suggested that instead of printing a single

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: On tor, 2011-08-18 at 08:39 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: Also, unrelated to that, wouldn't this information be interesting for non-autovacuum queries as well? Last year we were discussing some details on progress

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 17:13, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: On tor, 2011-08-18 at 08:39 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: Also, unrelated to that, wouldn't this information be interesting for non-autovacuum

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 17:13, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: On tor, 2011-08-18 at 08:39 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: Also,

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 17:23, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote: On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 17:13, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Greg Smith
On 08/18/2011 10:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote: Perhaps a reasonable way to break up the patch would be: - Part 1: Gather the information and display it in the log_autovacuum_min_duration output. - Part 2: Add the ability to see the information incrementally (via some mechanism yet to be agreed

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Greg Smith
On 08/18/2011 10:54 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: So how about adding a column to pg_stat_activity, progress_metrics or something like that, and add that information there. Adding a field here (I'd go for the simpler progress) and updating it regularly would be a reasonable way to go here.

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 17:54, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 08/18/2011 10:54 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: So how about adding a column to pg_stat_activity, progress_metrics or something like that, and add that information there. Adding a field here (I'd go for the simpler

Re: [HACKERS] [v9.1] sepgsql - userspace access vector cache

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Kohei Kaigai kohei.kai...@emea.nec.com wrote: The attached patch is revised userspace-avc patch. List of updates: - The GUC of sepgsql.avc_threshold was removed. - char *ucontext of avc_cache was replaced by bool tcontext_is_valid. - Comments added onto

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 08/18/2011 10:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote: Perhaps a reasonable way to break up the patch would be: - Part 1: Gather the information and display it in the log_autovacuum_min_duration output. - Part 2: Add the ability to

Re: [HACKERS] [v9.1] sepgsql - userspace access vector cache

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Kohei Kaigai kohei.kai...@emea.nec.com wrote: The attached patch is revised userspace-avc patch. List of updates: - The GUC of sepgsql.avc_threshold was removed. - char *ucontext of

Re: [HACKERS] [v9.1] sepgsql - userspace access vector cache

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Kohei Kaigai kohei.kai...@emea.nec.com wrote: The attached patch is revised userspace-avc patch. List of

Re: [HACKERS] [v9.1] sepgsql - userspace access vector cache

2011-08-18 Thread Kohei Kaigai
That's lame. I think we need to patch contrib/sepgsql so that it fails to build in that case, rather than building and then not working. It might be the following fix, but I have no idea to generate an error when $(with_selinux) != yes on makefile. diff --git a/contrib/sepgsql/Makefile

Re: [HACKERS] [v9.1] sepgsql - userspace access vector cache

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: [more problems] OK, I'm giving up for now. I hit two more snags: 1. chkselinuxenv uses which, and a Fedora 15 minimal install doesn't include that. I fixed that by installing which, but maybe we ought to be looking for

Re: [HACKERS] Full GUID support

2011-08-18 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Jul 14, 2011, at 9:53 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: (2011/07/14 3:49), Thomas Lotterer wrote: Thanks for the hint. Our ftp daemon is dumping core. We are debugging ... Ah, good news, thanks. Where should I report stuff like this in the future? I sent a message about this to

Re: [HACKERS] [v9.1] sepgsql - userspace access vector cache

2011-08-18 Thread Kohei Kaigai
OK, I'm giving up for now. I hit two more snags: 1. chkselinuxenv uses which, and a Fedora 15 minimal install doesn't include that. I fixed that by installing which, but maybe we ought to be looking for a way to eliminate that dependency, like testing for the commands you need by running

Re: [HACKERS] [v9.1] sepgsql - userspace access vector cache

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Kohei Kaigai kohei.kai...@emea.nec.com wrote: That's lame.  I think we need to patch contrib/sepgsql so that it fails to build in that case, rather than building and then not working. It might be the following fix, but I have no idea to generate an error when

Re: [HACKERS] Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost

2011-08-18 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Em 18-08-2011 12:54, Greg Smith escreveu: I was hoping to eventually take the useful summary bits at the end, the totals, and save those into statistics somewhere each time a VACUUM of either sort finishes. It would fit with the information shown in pg_stat_tables, but that's obviously getting

Re: [HACKERS] the big picture for index-only scans

2011-08-18 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: Robert Haas wrote: Any thoughts welcome. ?Incidentally, if anyone else feels like working on this, feel free to let me know and I'm happy to step away, from all of it or from whatever part someone else wants to tackle.

[HACKERS] mb_regress.sh gripes

2011-08-18 Thread Josh Kupershmidt
Hi all, A few gripes about mb_regress.sh: 1. No exit code is specified, so even if there are differences between results/ and expected/ the script will still return 0. 2. The 'dropdb' command is used to wipe out the utf8 database before the run. This generates an error message like: dropdb:

[HACKERS] make -j4 world falls over

2011-08-18 Thread Tom Lane
I ran into $SUBJECT whilst doing trial RPM packaging of 9.1. The problem is that make starts building contrib modules before errcodes.h has been made, leading to failures such as In file included from ../../src/include/postgres.h:48:0, from auth_delay.c:12: