On 03/29/2015 03:25 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
On 03/28/2015 09:36 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
Thanks! Do you know if it is possible to add index-only scan support to
range indexes? I have never looked at those and do not know if they are
lossy.
Seems like range types are not compressed at al
On 03/28/2015 09:36 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
Thanks! Do you know if it is possible to add index-only scan support to
range indexes? I have never looked at those and do not know if they are
lossy.
Seems like range types are not compressed at all so implementing
index-only scans was trivial.
On 29/03/15 13:07, David G. Johnston wrote:
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Michael Paquier
mailto:michael.paqu...@gmail.com>>wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 5:34 AM, Gavin Flower
mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>> wrote:
> On 28/03/15 21:58, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> [...]
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 5:34 AM, Gavin Flower
> wrote:
> > On 28/03/15 21:58, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> > [...]
> >>
> >>
> >> Andrew mentioned that there have been complaints from people doing
> >> calculations with monetary data that we don
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Janes writes:
> > Analyze on functional indexes cannot be interrupted very easily.
> > ...
> > The attached patch fixes it, but don't vouch for its safety.
>
> Hm. The other per-sample-row loops in analyze.c use vacuum_delay_point()
> rath
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 5:34 AM, Gavin Flower
wrote:
> On 28/03/15 21:58, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> [...]
>>
>>
>> Andrew mentioned that there have been complaints from people doing
>> calculations with monetary data that we don't implement
>> round-to-nearest-even (Banker's) rounding. It's actually t
On 03/10/2015 04:42 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
Thank you for the correction.
At Wed, 4 Mar 2015 01:01:48 -0600, Jim Nasby wrote in
<54f6addc.8030...@bluetreble.com>
On 3/3/15 8:04 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
Note: The OID alias types don't sctrictly comply the transaction
isolation ru
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Pavel Stehule
wrote:
> Hi
>
> 2015-01-27 11:41 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule :
>
>>
>>
>> 2015-01-26 21:44 GMT+01:00 Jim Nasby :
>>
>>> On 1/25/15 4:23 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>>
I tested a concept iteration over array in format [key1, value1, key2,
va
On 28.3.2015 11:21, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Hello Tomas,
>
>> I do agree that fprintf is not cheap, actually when profiling pgbench
>> it's often the #1 item, but the impact on the measurements is actually
>> quite small. For example with a small database (scale 10) and read-only
>> 30-second ru
So I did some more in depth look, I do have couple of comments.
I would really like to have something like "Logical Replication
Infrastructure" doc section that would have both decoding and
identifiers (and possibly even CommitTs) underneath.
There is typo in docs:
+
+ The optiona
Jeff Janes writes:
> Analyze on functional indexes cannot be interrupted very easily.
> ...
> The attached patch fixes it, but don't vouch for its safety.
Hm. The other per-sample-row loops in analyze.c use vacuum_delay_point()
rather than CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() directly. Ordinarily that wouldn
Analyze on functional indexes cannot be interrupted very easily.
Example:
create language plperl;
create table foo1 as select x::text from generate_series(1,1000) foo (x);
create table foo2 as select reverse(x) from foo1;
--use a fast version to set up the demo, as we are impatient
CREATE or repl
On 03/28/2015 02:12 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Looks good to me. Committed, thanks.
Thanks! Do you know if it is possible to add index-only scan support to
range indexes? I have never looked at those and do not know if they are
lossy.
Andreas
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgs
On 28/03/15 21:58, Dean Rasheed wrote:
[...]
Andrew mentioned that there have been complaints from people doing
calculations with monetary data that we don't implement
round-to-nearest-even (Banker's) rounding. It's actually the case that
various different financial calculations demand different
Hi,
Just had a longer chat with Peter about this patch.
* Not a fan of the heap flags usage, the reusage seems sketch to me
* Explain should show the arbiter index in text as well
* AddUniqueSpeculative is a bad name, it should refer IndexInfo
* Work on the ExecInsert() comments
* Let's remove th
Dean Rasheed wrote:
> Sure, using round-to-nearest-even for intermediate rounding in
> complex numeric methods would be a good way to reduce (but not
> completely eliminate) rounding errors. But that's a somewhat
> different proposition from changing the default for round(),
> which is a much mor
On 03/28/2015 01:14 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
On 03/26/2015 10:31 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I've pushed Anastasia's patch to support index-only scans with GiST, and
it's time to add opclasses support for all the opclasses that are not
lossy. I think at least all the btree_gist opclasses ne
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On 27 March 2015 at 23:26, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think the concern over backwards compatibility here is probably
>> overblown; but if we're sufficiently worried about it, a possible
>> compromise is to invent a numeric_rounding_mode GUC, so that
Hello Tomas,
I do agree that fprintf is not cheap, actually when profiling pgbench
it's often the #1 item, but the impact on the measurements is actually
quite small. For example with a small database (scale 10) and read-only
30-second runs (single client), I get this:
no logging: 18672 1879
On 28 March 2015 at 05:16, Andrew Gierth wrote:
>> "Tom" == Tom Lane writes:
>
> Tom> I think the concern over backwards compatibility here is probably
> Tom> overblown; but if we're sufficiently worried about it, a possible
> Tom> compromise is to invent a numeric_rounding_mode GUC, so th
On 27 March 2015 at 23:26, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
>> It sounds appealing to switch the default behavior to something that
>> is more IEEE-compliant, and not only for scale == 0. Now one can argue
>> as well that changing the default is risky for existing applications,
>> or the
On 25 March 2015 at 01:11, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <
horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> Hi, thanks for the new patch.
>
> I made an additional shrink from your last one. Do you have a
> look on the attached?
>
>
Thanks, for looking again.
I'm not too sure I like the idea of relying on join remov
22 matches
Mail list logo
