On 4/13/11 5:46 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 13.04.2011 14:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I wish we could get some buildfarm coverage for HPUX. I've whined about
this in the past, but nobody's ever made an offer to provide suitable
platform(s) that I know of.
I only have temporary access to
This week several list regulars here waded into the MySQL Convention. I
decided to revisit PostgreSQL vs. MySQL performance using the sysbench
program as part of that. It's not important to what I'm going to
describe to understand exactly what statements sysbench runs here or how
to use it,
Hello
I have a problem with PQputCopyData function. It doesn't signal some error.
while ((row = mysql_fetch_row(res)) != NULL)
{
snprintf(buffer, sizeof(buffer), %s%s\n, row[0],
row[1]);
copy_result =
Hello
The way COPY works is that PQputCopyData just sends the data to the server,
and the server will buffer it in its internal buffer and processes it when
it feels like it. The PQputCopyData() calls don't even need to match line
boundaries.
Yes, it is current behave - then documentation
On 14.04.2011 10:15, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hello
I have a problem with PQputCopyData function. It doesn't signal some error.
while ((row = mysql_fetch_row(res)) != NULL)
{
snprintf(buffer, sizeof(buffer), %s%s\n, row[0],
row[1]);
On 04/14/2011 02:04 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 4/13/11 5:46 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 13.04.2011 14:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I wish we could get some buildfarm coverage for HPUX. I've whined about
this in the past, but nobody's ever made an offer to provide suitable
platform(s) that I
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:57:29PM -0700, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
While looking at the typed table/pg_upgrade problem, I ran into a few
smaller
problems in the area. ?I'm not envisioning a need for much code shift to fix
* Tom Lane:
Well, the fundamental point is that ignoring NFS is not the real
world. We can't tell people not to put data directories on NFS,
and even if we did tell them not to, they'd still do it. And NFS
locking is not trustworthy, because the remote lock daemon can crash
and restart
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:46:45PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
If we adopt the elsewhere-proposed approach of forbidding the use of
rowtypes to create typed tables, the circularity-checking logic here
can become simpler. I think it's not actually
On Apr 13, 2011, at 9:30 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 6:11 PM, A.M. age...@themactionfaction.com wrote:
I don't see why we need to get rid of SysV shared memory; needing less
of it seems just as good.
1. As long one keeps SysV shared memory around, the postgresql project
On Apr 14, 2011, at 8:22 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Tom Lane:
Well, the fundamental point is that ignoring NFS is not the real
world. We can't tell people not to put data directories on NFS,
and even if we did tell them not to, they'd still do it. And NFS
locking is not trustworthy,
Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
samples %image name symbol name
53548 6.7609 postgres AllocSetAlloc
32787 4.1396 postgres MemoryContextAllocZeroAligned
26330 3.3244 postgres base_yyparse
21723
On Apr 13, 2011, at 11:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
A.M. age...@themactionfaction.com writes:
1. As long one keeps SysV shared memory around, the postgresql project
has to maintain the annoying platform-specific document on how to
configure the poorly named kernel parameters.
No, if it's just a
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:26:33AM -0400, A.M. wrote:
1) the SysV nattch method's primary purpose is to protect the shmem
region. This is no longer necessary in my patch because the shared
memory in unlinked immediately after creation, so only the initial
postmaster and its children have
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:43:16AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I doubt that it's possible to make AllocSetAlloc radically cheaper.
I think the more likely route to improvement there is going to be to
find a way to do fewer pallocs. For instance, if we had more rigorous
rules about which data
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I doubt that it's possible to make AllocSetAlloc radically cheaper.
I think the more likely route to improvement there is going to be to
find a way to do fewer pallocs. For instance, if we had more rigorous
rules about which
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 7:26 AM, A.M. age...@themactionfaction.com wrote:
From what I understood, the primary purpose of the SysV check was to protect
the shared memory from multiple stompers. The interlock was a neat
side-effect.
Not really - the purpose of the interlock is to protect the
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
I guess my gut feeling is that it would make more sense to forbid it
outright for 9.1, and we can look at relaxing that restriction later
if we're so inclined.
Much as with the problem Tom fixed in commit
I discovered while fooling around the other night that the named
restore point patch introduced a small bug into recoveryStopsHere():
the test at the top of the function now lets through two
resource-manager IDs rather than one, but the remainder of the
function tests only the record_info flag and
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Josh Kupershmidt schmi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
In theory, we have
documentation that explains this:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/docguide-toolsets.html
While we're on the
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
rhaas=# CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION developer_lookup(id integer)
RETURNS text AS $$SELECT name FROM developer WHERE id = $1$$ LANGUAGE
sql STABLE;
Now, when this person attempts to recreate this function on a
hypothetical version of PostgreSQL that
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 5:13 AM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote:
On 1 April 2011 12:57, Shigeru HANADA han...@metrosystems.co.jp wrote:
NOT NULL constraint on foreign table is just declaration and can't
force data integrity. And I noticed that CREATE FOREIGN TABLE
document doesn't mention
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:29 AM, Shigeru HANADA
han...@metrosystems.co.jp wrote:
In addition to the 2nd GRANT above, GRANT SELECT (colour) ON stuff TO
user_a (omitting TABLE) will succeed too because parser assumes that
the target object is a regular table if object type was TABLE or
omitted.
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Erdinc Akkaya hz.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Project Title: ADJ Dashboard
Name : Erdinc AKKAYA
Email: erdinc.akk...@gmail.com
Synopsis
AnyDBJSP is a database monitoring and reporting solution with a browser
based
interface. ADJ dashboard mainly will be written
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Alexey Klyukin al...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Here's the update of Selena's patch, which also shows all errors in
configuration parameters (as well as parser errors) during reload.
You should add this here:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
rhaas=# CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION developer_lookup(id integer)
RETURNS text AS $$SELECT name FROM developer WHERE id = $1$$ LANGUAGE
sql STABLE;
Now, when this person
On 14.04.2011 17:43, Tom Lane wrote:
Greg Smithg...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
samples %image name symbol name
53548 6.7609 postgres AllocSetAlloc
32787 4.1396 postgres MemoryContextAllocZeroAligned
26330 3.3244 postgres
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:15:00AM -0700, Robert Haas wrote:
It's fairly far down in the noise on this particular profile, but in
the low-hanging fruit department, I think we should fix
ScanKeywordLookup to use a smarter algorithm that is more like O(1)
rather than O(lg n) in the number of
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
There's one very low-hanging fruit here, though. I profiled the pgbench
case, with -M prepared, and found that like in Greg Smith's profile,
hash_seq_search pops up quite high in the list. Those calls are coming
from
Hi,
On Thursday 14 April 2011 16:43:16 Tom Lane wrote:
I doubt that it's possible to make AllocSetAlloc radically cheaper.
I actually doubt your doubt. I think you could add some SLAB like interface
for common allocation sizes making it significantly faster for some uses
(because
Excerpts from Andres Freund's message of jue abr 14 17:08:34 -0300 2011:
Hi,
On Thursday 14 April 2011 16:43:16 Tom Lane wrote:
I doubt that it's possible to make AllocSetAlloc radically cheaper.
I actually doubt your doubt. I think you could add some SLAB like interface
for common
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
In this case you could just use prepared statements and get rid of all
the parser related overhead, which includes much of the allocations.
Trying that gives me around 9200 TPS instead of 5500 on my laptop, so a
pretty big gain here. Will have to include that in my
Hi,
Where is the OID of tuple stored in a WAL record of a
tuple? If not with xl_heap_header, where is it stored? Is it
stored at all?
It's stored in the tuple data portion.
I see it now. I was having alignment issues, which I resolved. Thanks for your
help. I am still not sure if I
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:08 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
This week several list regulars here waded into the MySQL Convention. I
decided to revisit PostgreSQL vs. MySQL performance using the sysbench
program as part of that. It's not important to what I'm going to describe
to
On Thursday 14 April 2011 22:21:26 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Andres Freund's message of jue abr 14 17:08:34 -0300 2011:
Hi,
On Thursday 14 April 2011 16:43:16 Tom Lane wrote:
I doubt that it's possible to make AllocSetAlloc radically cheaper.
I actually doubt your doubt.
Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes:
Where I am with you is that its quite possible that it will not make sense
(performancewise) for all contexts. Which is quite annoying.
The mcxt stuff was designed from day one to support multiple types of
contexts, so it wouldn't be very hard at all to
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Unless we make it so that no such version ever exists. Meaning that the
code works fine as is or using WHERE id = developer_lookup.id. AS id
can't ever be the parameter
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
It shouldn't be
terribly difficult to come up with some kind of hash function based
on, say, the first two characters of the keyword that would be a lot
faster than what we're doing now.
I'd look at `gperf', which
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Unless we make it so that no such version ever exists. Meaning that the
code works fine as is or
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:15:00AM -0700, Robert Haas wrote:
It shouldn't be
terribly difficult to come up with some kind of hash function based
on, say, the first two characters of the keyword that would be a lot
faster than what we're doing now.
I'd
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:15:00AM -0700, Robert Haas wrote:
It shouldn't be
terribly difficult to come up with some kind of hash function based
on, say, the first two characters of the
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Hmm, what I read Dimitri to be proposing is that we *require* parameter
names to be qualified with the function name. I don't recall hearing
that before. It would solve the problem
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
So far the most promising proposal I've seen seems to be to let
id mean the parameter called id only when it can't refer to
anything in the query.
Yeah, I've come round to that position too. I think allowing
On Thursday 14 April 2011 23:10:41 Tom Lane wrote:
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:15:00AM -0700, Robert Haas wrote:
It shouldn't be
terribly difficult to come up with some kind of hash function based
on, say, the first two characters of the keyword that
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:23:49AM -0700, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
I guess my gut feeling is that it would make more sense to forbid it
outright for 9.1, and we can look at relaxing that restriction later
if we're so inclined.
On Apr 14, 2011, at 4:20 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
So far the most promising proposal I've seen seems to be to let
id mean the parameter called id only when it can't refer to
anything in the query.
Yeah, I've
On Apr 14, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Erdinc Akkaya hz.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Project Title: ADJ Dashboard
Name : Erdinc AKKAYA
Email: erdinc.akk...@gmail.com
Synopsis
AnyDBJSP is a database monitoring and reporting solution with a browser
based
On Apr 9, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
Actually, Tom has a point in that work_mem can be set above 1GB (which
is where I had it set previously..). I didn't think it'd actually do
anything given the MaxAlloc limit, but suprisingly, it does (at least,
under 8.4). I'm currently trying
2011/4/15 Jim Nasby j...@nasby.net:
On Apr 14, 2011, at 4:20 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
So far the most promising proposal I've seen seems to be to let
id mean the parameter called id only when it can't refer to
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:43:16AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
... I think a lot of this ultimately
traces to the extensible, data-type-agnostic design philosophy. The
fact that we don't know what an integer is until we look in pg_type,
and don't know what an
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 5:13 AM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote:
On 1 April 2011 12:57, Shigeru HANADA han...@metrosystems.co.jp wrote:
NOT NULL constraint on foreign table is just declaration and can't
force data integrity. And I noticed that CREATE
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I discovered while fooling around the other night that the named
restore point patch introduced a small bug into recoveryStopsHere():
the test at the top of the function now lets through two
resource-manager IDs rather
52 matches
Mail list logo
