Re: [HACKERS] Surprising behaviour of \set AUTOCOMMIT ON

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Venkata Balaji N <nag1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Rahila Syed <rahilasye...@gmail.com> >> wr

Re: [HACKERS] Surprising behaviour of \set AUTOCOMMIT ON

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Rahila Syed > wrote: > > Thank you for inputs everyone. > > > > The opinions on this thread can be classified into following > > 1. Commit > > 2. Rollback > > 3.

Re: [HACKERS] recovery_target_time ignored ?

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:28 AM, David Steele da...@pgmasters.net wrote: On 3/24/15 6:12 AM, Venkata Balaji N wrote: On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 9:54 AM, David Steele da...@pgmasters.net mailto:da...@pgmasters.net wrote: On 3/23/15 12:42 AM, Venkata Balaji N wrote: Hi

Re: [HACKERS] pg_rewind in contrib

.* *No rewind required.* I am not getting this too. Regards, Venkata Balaji N

Re: [HACKERS] recovery_target_time ignored ?

On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 9:54 AM, David Steele da...@pgmasters.net wrote: On 3/23/15 12:42 AM, Venkata Balaji N wrote: Hi, Assuming that this might require a patch, i am posting this in pgsql-hackers. Apologies, if this is not the appropriate mailing list to start this discussion. I

[HACKERS] recovery_target_time ignored ?

. Regards, Venkata Balaji N

Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication and WAL archive interactions

on that are welcome too, but I haven't tested it much. I'll do more testing next week. Patch did get applied successfully to the latest master. Can you please rebase. Regards, Venkata Balaji N

Re: [HACKERS] Redesigning checkpoint_segments

I am wondering a bit about interaction with wal_keep_segments. One thing is that wal_keep_segments is still specified in number of segments and not size units, maybe it would be worth to change it also? And the other thing is that, if set, the wal_keep_segments is the real max_wal_size from

Re: [HACKERS] Redesigning checkpoint_segments

files=13, longest=0.286 s, average=0.051 s; distance=1244483 kB, estimate=2632860 kB Above checkpoint logs are generated at the time when pg_xlog size was at 5.4G *Code* *Review* I had a look at the code and do not have any comments from my end. Regards, Venkata Balaji N

Re: [HACKERS] Redesigning checkpoint_segments

Missed adding pgsql-hackers group while replying. Regards, Venkata Balaji N On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Venkata Balaji N nag1...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: On 01/30/2015 04:48 AM, Venkata Balaji N wrote: I