Re: [HACKERS] On columnar storage (2)

2016-03-03 Thread Haribabu Kommi
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:46 PM, Bert wrote: > > Thank you for the performance test. But please not that the patch is 'thrown > away', and will be totally rewritten. I have no idea of the status of the > second / third attempt however. > However, what is interesting is that for some queries this pa

[HACKERS] proposal: psql autocomplete for casting

2016-03-03 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hi We have not autocomplete for casting introduced by symbol "::". A implementation should not be hard. Regards Pavel

Re: [HACKERS] On columnar storage (2)

2016-03-03 Thread Bert
Hello Haribabu, Thank you for the performance test. But please not that the patch is 'thrown away', and will be totally rewritten. I have no idea of the status of the second / third attempt however. However, what is interesting is that for some queries this patch is already on par with VCI. Which

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex

2016-03-03 Thread Aleksander Alekseev
> Won't it always use the same freelist to remove and add the entry from > freelist as for both cases it will calculate the freelist_idx in same > way? No. If "our" freelist is empty when we try to remove an item from it we borrow item from another freelist. Then this borrowed item will be returne

<    1   2