Michael Fuhr wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 09:47:45PM +0200, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
What version of PostgreSQL are you using
The latest and greatest from CVS.
Which branch? HEAD? REL8_0_STABLE?
Sorry. To me latest always defaults to HEAD and by greatest I mean
the coming 8.1.
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 02:11 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 23:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
You tell us ;-). You've got the test case, attach to it with a debugger
and find out what it's doing.
I wasn't entirely sure how to catch it in
Well, this guy has it nailed. He cites Flajolet and Martin, which was (I
thought) as good as you could get with only a reasonable amount of memory per
statistic. Unfortunately, their hash table is a one-shot deal; there's no way
to maintain it once the table changes. His incremental update
In the last exciting episode, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us (Bruce Momjian) wrote:
o integrated auto-vacuum (Bruce)
If this can kick off a vacuum of a Very Large Table at an unfortunate
time, this can turn out to be a prety painful misfeature.
What I'd _really_ love to see (and alas, it's beyond
Hello, pgsql-hackers.
I have an idea ( :-) ) about
SELECT field1,agregate(field2) FROM view GROUP BY field1;
(and its variant SELECT agragate(field2) FROM view)
where view is SELECT ... UNION ALL ... :
As i understood from thread
Christopher Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the last exciting episode, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us (Bruce Momjian) wrote:
o integrated auto-vacuum (Bruce)
If this can kick off a vacuum of a Very Large Table at an unfortunate
time, this can turn out to be a prety painful misfeature.
[ shrug...
Tom Lane wrote:
Christopher Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the last exciting episode, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us (Bruce Momjian) wrote:
o integrated auto-vacuum (Bruce)
If this can kick off a vacuum of a Very Large Table at an unfortunate
time, this can turn out to be a prety painful
Hello All,
I'd like to report about suprising (for me) results of performance testing of
bitmap indexes in nested loop join plans.
I have the table q3c
test=# \d q3c
Table public.q3c
Column | Type | Modifiers
++---
ipix | bigint |
errbox | box|
ra
Brent Verner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now, the hard part...where should this code live? I'm thinking a
src/transport directory seems sensible.
Our experience with trying to write single files to serve both server
and client sides has been, um, painful. I recommend you not try this.
My
Thomas Hallgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ideally I'd like to write something like this:
SELECT xyz(a, b) AS (x int, y int, z timestamptz) FROM abc;
but that yields a syntax error.
While that's probably doable if anyone were really motivated,
I'm not sure it's worth the trouble in view of
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 10:09:43 -0400,
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Christopher Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the last exciting episode, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us (Bruce Momjian)
wrote:
o integrated auto-vacuum (Bruce)
If this can kick off a
Tom Lane wrote:
Christopher Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If this can kick off a vacuum of a Very Large Table at an unfortunate
time, this can turn out to be a prety painful misfeature.
[ shrug... ] You'll always be able to turn it off if you don't want it.
I'm not sure that we'll be
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 10:09:43 -0400,
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Christopher Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the last exciting episode, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us (Bruce Momjian) wrote:
o integrated auto-vacuum (Bruce)
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 12:43:37 -0300,
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Except for the surprise of peridically having the system go unresponsive
because it hit a large table, and that new user wondering what is wrong
with postgresql
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 02:11 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Hm, I wonder if there is something broken about the SQL parsing logic
in _sendSQLLine, such that it could go into an infinite loop given the
right input?
Let me see if I can put together a test case which
Matthew T. O'Connor matthew@zeut.net writes:
What to people think about having an optional maintenance window so
that autovac only takes action during an approved time. But perhaps
just using the vacuum delay settings will be enough.
I'm not sure autovac should go completely catatonic
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
Matthew T. O'Connor matthew@zeut.net writes:
What to people think about having an optional maintenance window so
that autovac only takes action during an approved time. But perhaps
just using the vacuum delay settings will be enough.
I'm not sure autovac
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 10:36:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
regression=# select (xyz(unique1,unique2)).* from tenk1 limit 5;
This is a little off topic, but I've noticed that the above invokes
the function once per output column:
CREATE FUNCTION xyz(INOUT x integer, INOUT y integer, OUT z
Michael Fuhr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 10:36:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
regression=# select (xyz(unique1,unique2)).* from tenk1 limit 5;
This is a little off topic, but I've noticed that the above invokes
the function once per output column:
Yeah, that is unfortunate
Sergey E. Koposov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like to report about suprising (for me) results of performance testing of
bitmap indexes in nested loop join plans.
I'm surprised too. There's something weird in the indexscans
themselves:
- Index Scan using ipix_idx on q3c
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 10:17:44AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Our experience with trying to write single files to serve both server
and client sides has been, um, painful. I recommend you not try this.
BTW, why not get rid of src/corba?
--
Alvaro Herrera ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
XML! Exclaimed C++.
I've deliberately let the dust settle slightly on this.
One thing that might help is a more open sponsorship clearing house.
Example (not meant as a bid, but just to illustrate): the JDBC driver
needs a scanner overhaul - it breaks on dollar quoting and a bunch of
other stuff. I could do that
I think what you're suggesting is that vacuum settings (most likely
delay) take into consideration the load on the database, which I think
is a great idea. One possibility is if vacuum tracks how many blocks
it's read/written, it can see how many blocks the database has done
overall; subtract the
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
- Index Scan using ipix_idx on q3c (cost=0.01..9686.37 rows=35
width=48) (actual time=0.006..0.006 rows=0 loops=300)
Index Cond: ((q3c.ipix = (outer.ipix - 1000)) AND (q3c.ipix =
(outer.ipix - 993)))
- Bitmap
Hi,
While trying to determine if SPI_cursor_move can rewind
(and receiving a great help from the guys at the irc), we
found out that since the count parameter is int
and FETCH_ALL is LONG_MAX then setting
the count parameter to FETCH_ALL to rewind
will not work on 64bit systems.
On my pIII 32 bit
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc G.
Fournier) wrote:
I know one person was talking about being able to target only those
that pages that have changes, instead of the whole table ... but some
sort of load monitoring that checks # of active connections and
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Christopher Browne wrote:
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc G. Fournier) wrote:
I know one person was talking about being able to target only those
that pages that have changes, instead of the whole table ... but some
sort of load monitoring
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I've deliberately let the dust settle slightly on this.
One thing that might help is a more open sponsorship clearing house.
Example (not meant as a bid, but just to illustrate): the JDBC driver
needs a scanner overhaul - it breaks on dollar quoting and a bunch of
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Christopher Browne wrote:
Some reasonable approximations might include:
- How much disk I/O was recorded in the last 60 seconds?
- How many application transactions (e.g. - invoices or such) were
issued in the last 60 seconds (monitoring a sequence
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Regarding the secret code stuff - I predict that it will quickly bite
whoever does it, unless they are extremely lucky.
Yeah. Bruce and I were worrying about this on the phone today.
If a company is doing some work with the intent that it's a
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
One thing that might help is a more open sponsorship clearing house.
Example (not meant as a bid, but just to illustrate): the JDBC driver
needs a scanner overhaul - it breaks on dollar quoting and a bunch of
other stuff. I could do that work
31 matches
Mail list logo
