Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Also, it's far from obvious to me that largest first is the best rule
anyhow; it's likely to be more complicated than that.
But anyway, the right place to add this sort of consideration is in
pg_restore --parallel, not pg_dump. I don't know how hard it
On 1/31/2013 2:06 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
Loading several big'o'tables in parallel tend not to give benefits in
the tests I've done so far, but that might be an artefact of python
multi threading, I will do some testing with proper tooling later.
or insufficient IO parallelism in your disk
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
Well, we could actually set the wrap value to 0, which would mean always
wrap. That wouldn't be making any assumption about the user's terminal
window size ;-)
+1
Personally I find the wrapped case MUCH more readable. I guess anything is
an
As I promised yesterday, I'll show you the precise call stack:
#0 0x003fa0cf542e in __lll_lock_wait_private () from /lib64/libc.so.6
#1 0x003fa0c7bed5 in _L_lock_9323 () from /lib64/libc.so.6
#2 0x003fa0c797c6 in malloc () from /lib64/libc.so.6
#3 0x003fa0c2fd99 in
Hi,
The fklocks patch moved HeapSatisfiesHOTandKeyUpdate (or rather
HeapSatisfiesHOTUpdate back then) to be called way earlier in
heap_update as its needed to know which lock level is
required. Unfortunately the oid of the new tuple isn't yet setup at that
point.
Due to this everytime there's
From: Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us
MauMau maumau...@gmail.com writes:
How about the case where some backend crashes due to a bug of PostgreSQL?
In this case, postmaster sends SIGQUIT to all backends, too. The
instance
is expected to disappear cleanly and quickly. Doesn't the hanging
backend
On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 8:32 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 7:42 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:53 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 29.01.2013 11:58, Amit Kapila wrote:
Can there be another way with which current patch code can be
made
Hi!
Calling SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL ... outside a transaction
block has no effect. This is unlike LOCK ... and DECLARE foo
CURSOR FOR ..., which both raise an error. This is also unlike
MySQL, where such a statement will affect the next transaction
performed. There's some risk of data
2013-01-30 17:45 keltezéssel, Zoltán Böszörményi írta:
2013-01-30 16:06 keltezéssel, Hari Babu írta:
On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 7:59 PM Zoltán Böszörményi wrote:
2013-01-28 15:20 keltezéssel, Hari Babu írta:
2. regress check failed because the expected .out file is not
updated properly.
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
Here is an implementation of the
information_schema.parameters.parameter_default column.
I ended up writing a C function to decode the whole thing from the
system catalogs, because it was too complicated in SQL, so I
Another thing I forget: The patch does not apply because of the changes in
catversion.h
Regards,
Ali Dar
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Ali Dar ali.munir@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
Here is an implementation of the
Zoltán Böszörményi wrote:
I have found a little time to look into this problem and
found a way to make pg_regress use prepared_xacts_1.out.
I had to change line 2193 in pg_regress.c from
fputs(max_prepared_transactions = 2\n, pg_conf);
to
fputs(max_prepared_transactions = 0\n,
2013-01-31 15:22 keltezéssel, Alvaro Herrera írta:
Zoltán Böszörményi wrote:
I have found a little time to look into this problem and
found a way to make pg_regress use prepared_xacts_1.out.
I had to change line 2193 in pg_regress.c from
fputs(max_prepared_transactions = 2\n, pg_conf);
On 01/31/2013 09:55 AM, Zoltán Böszörményi wrote:
2013-01-31 15:22 keltezéssel, Alvaro Herrera írta:
Zoltán Böszörményi wrote:
I have found a little time to look into this problem and
found a way to make pg_regress use prepared_xacts_1.out.
I had to change line 2193 in pg_regress.c from
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Zolt=E1n_B=F6sz=F6rm=E9nyi?= z...@cybertec.at writes:
2013-01-31 15:22 keltezéssel, Alvaro Herrera írta:
That sounds a lot more difficult than just using make installcheck and
configure the running server with zero prepared xacts ...
It didn't occur to me to use make
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com writes:
If pg_dump was to still follow the dependencies of objects, would there be
any reason why it shouldn't backup larger tables first?
Pretty much every single discussion/complaint about
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Also, it's far from obvious to me that largest first is the best rule
anyhow; it's likely to be more complicated than that.
But anyway, the right place to add this sort of
2013-01-31 16:39 keltezéssel, Tom Lane írta:
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Zolt=E1n_B=F6sz=F6rm=E9nyi?= z...@cybertec.at writes:
2013-01-31 15:22 keltezéssel, Alvaro Herrera írta:
That sounds a lot more difficult than just using make installcheck and
configure the running server with zero prepared xacts ...
=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Zolt=E1n_B=F6sz=F6rm=E9nyi?= z...@cybertec.at writes:
Thanks. A question though: how does make check or make installcheck
chooses between the *.out and its different *_N.out incarnations?
I couldn't find traces of prepared_xacts_1.out in any file saying this
is the one to be
Christopher Browne escribió:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
I'd be inclined to do something a bit more sophisticated than just
age(relfrozenxid) for wraparound; I'd be inclined to kick off large tables'
wraparound vacuums earlier than those for
Alvaro Herrera escribió:
Okay, here's a patch along these lines. I haven't considered Jim's
suggestion downthread about discounting dead tuples from relpages; maybe
we can do that by subtracting the pages attributed to dead ones,
estimating via tuple density (reltuples/relpages).
Patch
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Alvaro Herrera escribió:
Okay, here's a patch along these lines. I haven't considered Jim's
suggestion downthread about discounting dead tuples from relpages; maybe
we can do that by subtracting the pages
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Instead, what I propose (and is not really in the patch), as a
backpatchable item, is an approach in which the functions to compute
each rel's Browne strength and sort are hooks. Normal behavior is not
to sort at
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Instead, what I propose (and is not really in the patch), as a
backpatchable item, is an approach in which the functions to compute
each rel's Browne strength and sort are hooks. Normal behavior is not
to sort at all, as currently, and sites
Tom Lane escribió:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Instead, what I propose (and is not really in the patch), as a
backpatchable item, is an approach in which the functions to compute
each rel's Browne strength and sort are hooks. Normal behavior is not
to sort at all, as
Robert Haas escribió:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Alvaro Herrera escribió:
Okay, here's a patch along these lines. I haven't considered Jim's
suggestion downthread about discounting dead tuples from relpages; maybe
we can do that by
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Robert Haas escribió:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Alvaro Herrera escribió:
Okay, here's a patch along these lines. I haven't considered Jim's
suggestion
On 1/30/13 9:11 AM, MauMau wrote:
When I ran pg_ctl stop -mi against the primary, some applications
connected to the primary did not stop. The cause was that the backends
was deadlocked in quickdie() with some call stack like the following.
I'm sorry to have left the stack trace file on the
Hello
2013/1/29 Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com:
On 29 January 2013 08:19, Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com wrote:
* The width field is optional, even if the '-' flag is specified. So
'%-s' is perfectly legal and should be interpreted as '%s'. The
current implementation treats it
On 1/9/13 8:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
However, it seems to me that this behavior is actually wrong for our
purposes, as it represents a too-literal reading of the spec. The SQL
standard has no concept of privileges on schemas, only ownership.
We do have privileges on schemas, so it seems to me
2013-01-31 19:38 keltezéssel, Tom Lane írta:
=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Zolt=E1n_B=F6sz=F6rm=E9nyi?= z...@cybertec.at writes:
Thanks. A question though: how does make check or make installcheck
chooses between the *.out and its different *_N.out incarnations?
I couldn't find traces of prepared_xacts_1.out
On 1/10/13 6:42 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
This updated patch contains all the intended functionality, including
operators for the json_get_path functions, so you can say things like
select jsonval-array['f1','0','f2] ...
I would like to not create any - operators, so that that syntax
On 01/31/2013 05:06 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 1/10/13 6:42 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
This updated patch contains all the intended functionality, including
operators for the json_get_path functions, so you can say things like
select jsonval-array['f1','0','f2] ...
I would like to
From: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net
On 1/30/13 9:11 AM, MauMau wrote:
When I ran pg_ctl stop -mi against the primary, some applications
connected to the primary did not stop. The cause was that the backends
was deadlocked in quickdie() with some call stack like the following.
I'm sorry to
MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
Just doing pkill postgres will unexpectedly terminate postgres
of other instances.
Not if you run each instance under a different OS user, and execute
pkill with the right user. (Never use root for that!) This is
just one of the reasons that you should not
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
On 01/31/2013 05:06 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 1/10/13 6:42 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
This updated patch contains all the intended functionality, including
operators for the json_get_path functions, so you can
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
On 01/31/2013 05:06 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I would like to not create any - operators, so that that syntax could
be used in the future for method invocation or something
On Jan 31, 2013, at 2:20 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
I'm happy to take opinions about this, and I expected some bikeshedding, but
your reaction is contrary to everything others have told me. Mostly they love
the operators.
I guess that '~' and '~' would work as well as
On 01/31/2013 07:16 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jan 31, 2013, at 2:20 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
I'm happy to take opinions about this, and I expected some bikeshedding, but
your reaction is contrary to everything others have told me. Mostly they love
the operators.
I
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
On 01/31/2013 07:16 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
I suppose that := is out of the question?
Even if it were I would not on any account use it. As an old Ada
programmer my mind just revolts at the idea of using this for anything
but assignment.
Ada
On Jan 31, 2013, at 4:32 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Ada or no, its use in plpgsql would render that a seriously bad idea.
I assumed that its use in function params would be the main reason not to use
it.
David
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 01/02/13 13:26, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 01/31/2013 07:16 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jan 31, 2013, at 2:20 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
I'm happy to take opinions about this, and I expected some
bikeshedding, but your reaction is contrary to everything others
have
If we're going to start installing safeguards against doing stupid
things, there's a long list of scenarios that happen far more
regularly than this ever will and cause far more damage.
What's wrong with making it easier for sysadmins to troubleshoot things?
Again, I'm not talking about
Heikki,
I thought this was only a 9.3 issue, but it turns out to be
reproduceable on 9.2.2. Basically, I did:
1. master is queicent ... no writes occuring.
2. createded cascading replica (reprep1) from replica (repmaster)
3. reprep1 remains in recovery mode until a write occurs on master
I've
What's the best way for me to find out if a given parameter of a
function is a constant? The context is that it's expensive to process,
and in most cases will in fact be a constant, so if it is in fact a
constant I'd like to process it once and stash the results.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent
On 02/01/2013 12:01 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
If we're going to start installing safeguards against doing stupid
things, there's a long list of scenarios that happen far more
regularly than this ever will and cause far more damage.
What's wrong with making it easier for sysadmins to
On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 10:25 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
The attached patch looks for pkg-config first, and finds libxml2 using
that if available. Otherwise it falls back to using xml2-config.
What happens if pkg-config is installed but doesn't know
On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 10:00 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
I've done another review of this patch and it looks pretty good to me.
My only complaint is that there isn't a single comment inside
makeRecursiveViewSelect().
Added some of that and committed.
One other thought is- I'm guessing this
hello
2013/2/1 Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net:
What's the best way for me to find out if a given parameter of a function is
a constant? The context is that it's expensive to process, and in most cases
will in fact be a constant, so if it is in fact a constant I'd like to
process it once
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
What's the best way for me to find out if a given parameter of a
function is a constant? The context is that it's expensive to process,
and in most cases will in fact be a constant, so if it is in fact a
constant I'd like to process it once and
On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 6:53 AM Morten Hustveit wrote:
Hi!
Calling SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL ... outside a transaction
block has no effect. This is unlike LOCK ... and DECLARE foo
CURSOR FOR ..., which both raise an error. This is also unlike
MySQL, where such a statement
Hello
can you look, please, on updated version - it respects Tom's proposal
and it is significantly reduced?
Thank you
Pavel Stehule
2013/1/28 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com:
Hello
2013/1/26 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
+1. This looks
Hello
minor update - fix align NULL for %L
Regards
Pavel
2013/1/31 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com:
Hello
2013/1/29 Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com:
On 29 January 2013 08:19, Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com wrote:
* The width field is optional, even if the '-' flag is
On Sunday, 27 January 2013, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
If we're going to start installing safeguards against doing stupid
things, there's a long list of scenarios that happen far more
regularly than this ever will and cause far more damage.
+1
--
Regards,
Peter Geoghegan
54 matches
Mail list logo
