"Jeffrey Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You'll note that I'm using the DBD::Pg Perl interface. So far I've
> never seen this happen with TCP connections, only with UNIX sockets.
If it works over TCP and not over Unix socket, it's a kernel bug.
The libpq code doesn't really know the differen
Russell Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As an attempt at a first PostgreSQL patch, I'd like to see if I can do
> anything about this issue.
Trying that as a first patch is a recipe for failure... the short answer
is that no one can think of a solution that will be generally acceptable.
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 7:12 PM, Jeffrey Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lately I've noticed that local (UNIX socket) clients using libpq4
> 8.1.9 (Debian 8.1.9-0etch1) and the same version of the server can
> hang forever waiting in poll(). The symptom is that the local client
> waits forev
Lately I've noticed that local (UNIX socket) clients using libpq4
8.1.9 (Debian 8.1.9-0etch1) and the same version of the server can
hang forever waiting in poll(). The symptom is that the local client
waits forever, using no CPU time, until it is interrupted by some
event (such as attaching gdb o
Russell Smith wrote:
The 2004 thread suggests that we want a per database setting. I am
unable to see how we share shared relations between databases with
different case folder.
pg_user is an example of this;
Lowercase database; CREATE ROLE mrruss LOGIN; results in -> mrruss
as data i
Hi,
As an attempt at a first PostgreSQL patch, I'd like to see if I can do
anything about this issue.
I've read both the attached threads;
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-04/msg00818.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-10/msg01527.php
There seems no conse
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Added to TODO:
>
> o Allow pre/data/post files when dumping a single object, for
> performance reasons
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00205.php
"When dumping a single object"?? Do you mean database?
--
Alvaro H
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 06:53:27PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I did some tests with gcc 4.3 on the branches from 7.4 to 8.3 and head.
> > 8.3 and head don't have a problem. All others failed in the
> > ContribCheck state.
>
> > You can see the results on
On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 20:37 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> With no concrete patch or performance numbers, this thread has been
> removed from the patches queue.
I agree since there is no patch.
However, I think recent performance reports around the cost of
visibility checks such as "Very slow seq
