On 02/25/2012 09:37 PM, Cédric Villemain wrote:
I've not followed all the mails about this feature but I don't find it is a
nice syntax too.
"?dbname=other" looks like dbname is an argument, but dbname is a requirement
for postgresql connexion.
Ugh, not really. AFAIK, dbname is a connection
I'm working on implementing query cache in pgpool-II. I want to know
if a table has been modified because pgpool-II has to invalidate cache
if corresponding table is modified. For DDL/DML it would be doable
since pgpool-II knows all SQLs sent from clients. Problem is, implicit
table modifications d
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> Without sorted checkpoints (or some other fancier method) you have to
>>> write out the entire pool before you can do any fsyncs. Or you have
>>> to do multiple fsyncs of the same file, with at least one occurring
>>> after the entire pool
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> On 02/14/2012 01:45 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>>
>> scale=1000, db is 94% of RAM; clients=4
>> Version TPS
>> 9.0 535
>> 9.1 491 (-8.4% relative to 9.0)
>> 9.2 338 (-31.2% relative to 9.1)
>
>
> A second pass through this data noted that the max
On 25 February 2012 16:36, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 25 February 2012 14:30, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 25 February 2012 13:28, Thom Brown wrote:
>>> On 25 February 2012 13:15, Thom Brown wrote:
On 25 February 2012 12:42, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 25 February 2012 12:07, Thom Brown wrote:
>>>
On 25-02-2012 09:23, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Do we even *need* the validate_xlog_location() function? If we just
> remove those calls, won't we still catch all the incorrectly formatted
> ones in the errors of the sscanf() calls? Or am I too deep into
> weekend-mode and missing something obvious?
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 1:01 AM, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
The attached patch allows it to reuse that memory. On my meager
On 14 November 2011 13:07, Thom Brown wrote:
> 2011/11/14 Shigeru Hanada
>>
>> (2011/11/14 11:25), Robert Haas wrote:
>> > My vote is to nuke 'em all. :-)
>>
>> +1.
>>
>> IIRC, main purpose of supporting tableoid for foreign tables was to be
>> basis of foreign table inheritance, which was not i
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> wrote:
>>> Attached is a new version, fixing that, and off-by-one bug you pointed out
>>> in the slot wraparound handling. I also m
Le mercredi 22 février 2012 20:12:35, Pavel Stehule a écrit :
> 2012/2/22 Kevin Grittner :
> > Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >> usual pattern in our application is
> >>
> >> create table xx1 as select
> >> analyze xx1
> >> create table xx2 as select from xx1,
> >> analyze xx2
> >> create
Le vendredi 24 février 2012 14:18:44, Florian Weimer a écrit :
> * Alex Shulgin:
> >> It's ugly, but it's standard practice, and seems better than a separate
> >> -d parameter (which sort of defeats the purpose of URIs).
> >
> > Hm, do you see anything what's wrong with "?dbname=other" if you don'
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Given that, I obviously cannot test this at this point,
Patch with minor corrections attached here for further review.
> but let me go
> ahead and theorize about how well it's likely to work. What Tom
> suggested before (and after some refl
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>
>> This patch extends that and actually sets the tuple header flag as
>> HEAP_XMIN_COMMITTED during the load.
>
> Fantastic!
>
> So, without bulk-load conditions, a long-lived tuple in PostgreSQL
> is written to disk at
Simon Riggs wrote:
> This patch extends that and actually sets the tuple header flag as
> HEAP_XMIN_COMMITTED during the load.
Fantastic!
So, without bulk-load conditions, a long-lived tuple in PostgreSQL
is written to disk at least five times[1]:
(1) The WAL record for the inserted tuple
Vik Reykja wrote:
> Kevin Grittner wrote:
>
>> One of the problems that Florian was trying to address is that
>> people often have a need to enforce something with a lot of
>> similarity to a foreign key, but with more subtle logic than
>> declarative foreign keys support. One example would be t
2012/2/24 Peter Eisentraut :
> On fre, 2012-02-10 at 17:44 +0100, Jean-Baptiste Quenot wrote:
>>
>> Please find attached a patch that solves this issue. Instead of a PG
>> crash, we get the following message:
>>
>> ERROR: plpy.Error: no result fetched
>
> Hmm, should it be an error or just return
On 25 February 2012 14:30, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 25 February 2012 13:28, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 25 February 2012 13:15, Thom Brown wrote:
>>> On 25 February 2012 12:42, Thom Brown wrote:
On 25 February 2012 12:07, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 25 February 2012 12:00, Dimitri Fontaine
>>>
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 02:03, Greg Smith wrote:
> On 01/15/2012 12:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> Please follow the style already used for system catalogs; ie I think
>> there should be a summary table with one entry per view, and then a
>> separate description and table-of-columns for each view.
>
On 25 February 2012 13:28, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 25 February 2012 13:15, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 25 February 2012 12:42, Thom Brown wrote:
>>> On 25 February 2012 12:07, Thom Brown wrote:
On 25 February 2012 12:00, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
D'oh, just as I sent some more queries.
On 25 February 2012 13:15, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 25 February 2012 12:42, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 25 February 2012 12:07, Thom Brown wrote:
>>> On 25 February 2012 12:00, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
>>>
>>> D'oh, just as I sent some more queries...
>>>
Thom Brown writes:
> Is there any re
Re: Peter Eisentraut 2012-02-24 <1330107599.32452.15.ca...@vanquo.pezone.net>
> On fre, 2012-02-24 at 11:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > We have the same problem with testing extensions at build-time in
> > the
> > > Debian packages. The server's SHAREDIR /usr/share/postgresql/... is
> > > only wri
On 25 February 2012 12:42, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 25 February 2012 12:07, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 25 February 2012 12:00, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
>>
>> D'oh, just as I sent some more queries...
>>
>>> Thom Brown writes:
Is there any reason why the list of commands that command triggers can
2012/2/25 Magnus Hagander :
> I've asked for this a few times before, but it seems others aren't as
> keen on it as me :-) Personally, I find the docs easier to read when
> formatted with the new website styles that Thom put together, and I
> also like to see things the way they're going to look wh
I've asked for this a few times before, but it seems others aren't as
keen on it as me :-) Personally, I find the docs easier to read when
formatted with the new website styles that Thom put together, and I
also like to see things the way they're going to look when they go up
there.
Attached patch
On 25 February 2012 12:07, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 25 February 2012 12:00, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
>
> D'oh, just as I sent some more queries...
>
>> Thom Brown writes:
>>> Is there any reason why the list of commands that command triggers can
>>> be used with isn't in alphabetical order? Also i
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 09:32, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira
> wrote:
>> On 08-02-2012 09:35, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
>> Fujii, new patch attached. Thanks for your tests.
>
> Thanks for the new patch!
>
>>> But another problem happened. When I chang
On 25 February 2012 12:00, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
D'oh, just as I sent some more queries...
> Thom Brown writes:
>> Is there any reason why the list of commands that command triggers can
>> be used with isn't in alphabetical order? Also it appears to show
>
> Any reason why? I don't suppose
On 24 February 2012 23:43, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 24 February 2012 23:01, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 24 February 2012 22:39, Thom Brown wrote:
>>> On 24 February 2012 22:32, Thom Brown wrote:
On 24 February 2012 22:04, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please find attached the la
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 00:45, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>> Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of vie feb 24 19:19:10 -0300 2012:
>>> In looking over our authentication code, I noticed that we create the
>>> child process before we check any of the pg_hba.conf file. Now, I
>>>
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> I'm sorry, but the releases are already tagged :-( So they will contain
> the buggy output for a while yet.
Ah, I see, ok, wait next! :)
--
Sergey Burladyan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
h
30 matches
Mail list logo
