Re: [GENERAL] Memory usage per postmaster process
On 11/02/2013 08:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Author: Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us Branch: master Release: REL9_1_BR [3e5f9412d] 2010-10-06 19:31:05 -0400 Reduce the memory requirement for large ispell dictionaries. I checked this patch: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/AANLkTi=4fUi1zoFMpZ==yf14rjdv_g1xgakvqmdye...@mail.gmail.com I can't find it here: http://doxygen.postgresql.org/spell_8c_source.html I also don't see those changes in 9.3.1 source. Status in commitfest list is Committed. I can't see hold_memory anywhere. If you're not using ispell, it's not relevant, and I'm not sure whether the savings were significant for anything but Czech. I am using ispell. Thanks -- Regards, Grzegorz
Re: [GENERAL] Memory usage per postmaster process
=?UTF-8?B?R3J6ZWdvcnogVGHFhGN6eWs=?= golia...@polzone.pl writes: On 11/02/2013 08:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Author: Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us Branch: master Release: REL9_1_BR [3e5f9412d] 2010-10-06 19:31:05 -0400 Reduce the memory requirement for large ispell dictionaries. I checked this patch: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/AANLkTi=4fUi1zoFMpZ==yf14rjdv_g1xgakvqmdye...@mail.gmail.com I can't find it here: http://doxygen.postgresql.org/spell_8c_source.html I also don't see those changes in 9.3.1 source. Status in commitfest list is Committed. I can't see hold_memory anywhere. If you read the rest of the discussion of the patch, you'd find out that what got committed was not all that much like Pavel's original. But it has the same effect. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Re: [GENERAL] GSSAPI server side on Linux, SSPI client side on Windows
Brian, * Brian Crowell (br...@fluggo.com) wrote: However, the eventual goal was to connect to this same server from a .NET app running on Windows, and here I've run into a snag. The Npgsql library does not support GSSAPI—it only supports SSPI, which is nearly-but-not-enough-like the same thing to count in this situation, Uhhh, why not? because I can't seem to configure my PostgreSQL on Linux to accept SSPI. If I try it, I get the error: Nono, you don't try to build SSPI on Linux- that's Microsoft's implementation of GSSAPI (more-or-less). You continue to use GSSAPI on Linux... The docs say that SSPI is supported if GSSAPI is available (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/static/auth-methods.html#SSPI-AUTH). Is this just a matter of me running the wrong build? I'm using PostgreSQL 9.3 from the official builds for Debian 6. The docs could probably be a bit clearer. If the docs are wrong, and SSPI isn't available server-side on Linux, what are my other options? Build the server-side w/ GSSAPI. Your Linux system can then either join the Windows AD domain (you'll need to create a princ on the AD and then export it over to the Linux box), or set up two KDCs (one on Linux, one for AD) and then have a cross-realm trust. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [GENERAL] problem with partitioned table and indexed json field
I'll look at providing such an example later this week. Raph On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Raphael Bauduin rbli...@gmail.com writes: An explain returns an error: = explain select max(event-'_id') from events; ERROR: no tlist entry for key 2 This is certainly a bug. Can we see a self-contained example that triggers that? regards, tom lane -- Web database: http://www.myowndb.com Free Software Developers Meeting: http://www.fosdem.org
