On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Robert Haas escribió:
>
>> A broader complaint I have with this patch is that it almost but
>> not-quite solves a problem I've had a few times in the past: namely,
>> searching through the data directory for data blocks which have LSNs
>> in
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Monday, July 08, 2013 5:16 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>On 2013-07-08 17:10:43 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Monday, July 0
Robert Haas escribió:
> A broader complaint I have with this patch is that it almost but
> not-quite solves a problem I've had a few times in the past: namely,
> searching through the data directory for data blocks which have LSNs
> in the future. This has come up a few times for me, and this too
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>>On Monday, July 08, 2013 5:16 PM Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-07-08 17:10:43 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Monday, July 08, 2013 4:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2013-07-08
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>>On Monday, July 08, 2013 5:16 PM Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-07-08 17:10:43 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Monday, July 08, 2013 4:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2013-07-08
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>On Monday, July 08, 2013 5:16 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>>>On 2013-07-08 17:10:43 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Monday, July 08, 2013 4:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-07-08 16:17:54 +0530, Hari Babu wrote:
> > +This utilit
>On Monday, July 08, 2013 5:16 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>>On 2013-07-08 17:10:43 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> On Monday, July 08, 2013 4:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>>> > On 2013-07-08 16:17:54 +0530, Hari Babu wrote:
>>> > > +This utility can also be used to decide whether backup is
>>> > requi
On Monday, July 08, 2013 5:16 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-07-08 17:10:43 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Monday, July 08, 2013 4:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2013-07-08 16:17:54 +0530, Hari Babu wrote:
> > > > +This utility can also be used to decide whether backup is
> > > requir
On Monday, July 08, 2013 5:16 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>On 2013-07-08 17:10:43 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Monday, July 08, 2013 4:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>> > On 2013-07-08 16:17:54 +0530, Hari Babu wrote:
>> > > +This utility can also be used to decide whether backup is
>> > required or
On 2013-07-08 17:10:43 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Monday, July 08, 2013 4:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2013-07-08 16:17:54 +0530, Hari Babu wrote:
> > > +This utility can also be used to decide whether backup is
> > required or not when the data page
> > > +in old-master precedes t
On Monday, July 08, 2013 4:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-07-08 16:17:54 +0530, Hari Babu wrote:
> > +This utility can also be used to decide whether backup is
> required or not when the data page
> > +in old-master precedes the last applied LSN in old-standby
> (i.e., new-master) at
On 2013-07-08 16:17:54 +0530, Hari Babu wrote:
> +This utility can also be used to decide whether backup is required or
> not when the data page
> +in old-master precedes the last applied LSN in old-standby (i.e.,
> new-master) at the
> +moment of the failover.
> +
> +
I don't t
On Friday, July 05, 2013 6:48 PM Hari Babu wrote:
>On Thursday, July 04, 2013 11:19 PM Robert Haas wrote:
The patch is updated with the following changes.
1.If the input data is data directory, all the errors occurred are displayed
at once instead of one error at a time.
2.Fixed the problem of r
On Thursday, July 04, 2013 11:19 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>+ fprintf(stderr, _("%s: .. file \"%s\" for seeking: %s\n"),
>+ progname, filename, strerror(errno));
>Weird error message style - what's with the ".."?
>+ fprintf(stderr, _("%s: .. fil
This looks better.
+ fprintf(stderr, _("%s: .. file \"%s\" for seeking: %s\n"),
+ progname, filename, strerror(errno));
Weird error message style - what's with the ".."?
+ fprintf(stderr, _("%s: .. file \"%s\" length is more than
segment
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 2:14 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> It can cause error "too many levels of symbolic links"
Sure, so you report the error and exit. No problem.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
On Wednesday, July 03, 2013 1:26 AM Robert Haas Wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Andres Freund
wrote:
>> I think the usecase for this utility isn't big enough to be included in
>> postgres since it really can only help in a very limited
>> circumstances. And I think it's too likely to be
On Wednesday, July 03, 2013 7:41 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > amit@linux:~> md test
> > amit@linux:~> cd test
> > amit@linux:~/test> ln -s ~/test link_test
> > amit@linux:~/test> ls
> > link_test
> > amit@linux:~/test> cd link_test
> > amit@linux
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> amit@linux:~> md test
> amit@linux:~> cd test
> amit@linux:~/test> ln -s ~/test link_test
> amit@linux:~/test> ls
> link_test
> amit@linux:~/test> cd link_test
> amit@linux:~/test/link_test> ls
> link_test
> amit@linux:~/test/link_test> cd link_
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Haas [mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 6:40 PM
> To: Amit Kapila
> Cc: Andres Freund; Josh Berkus; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Review: Patch to compute Max LSN of Data Pages
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Why does this patch need all of this fancy path-handling logic -
>> specifically, remove_parent_refernces() and make_absolute_path()?
>> Surely its needs are not that different from pg_ctl or pg_resetxlog or
>> pg_controldata. If they all need
On Wednesday, July 03, 2013 1:26 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Andres Freund
> wrote:
> > I think the usecase for this utility isn't big enough to be included
> in
> > postgres since it really can only help in a very limited
> > circumstances. And I think it's too likely
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> I think the usecase for this utility isn't big enough to be included in
> postgres since it really can only help in a very limited
> circumstances. And I think it's too likely to be misused for stuff it's
> not useable for (e.g. remastering).
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 11:26 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-06-27 11:16:25 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 10:19 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Amit Kapila
>
> > > >> > One more use case for which this utility was done is as
> below:
On 2013-06-27 11:16:25 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 10:19 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Amit Kapila
> > >> > One more use case for which this utility was done is as below:
> > >> > It will be used to decide that on new-standby (old-master
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 10:19 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 4:40 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> >> Hi Amit,
> >>
> >> On 2013-06-26 16:22:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> > On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:20 PM Andres Fr
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 4:40 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>> Hi Amit,
>>
>> On 2013-06-26 16:22:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:20 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>> > > On 2013-06-26 08:50:27 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 4:40 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi Amit,
>
> On 2013-06-26 16:22:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:20 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2013-06-26 08:50:27 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 11:12 PM Andres Freund wrot
Hi Amit,
On 2013-06-26 16:22:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:20 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2013-06-26 08:50:27 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 11:12 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > On 2013-06-16 17:19:49 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > > > >
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:20 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-06-26 08:50:27 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 11:12 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2013-06-16 17:19:49 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > > > Amit posted a new version of this patch on January 23rd. But
> last
On 2013-06-26 08:50:27 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 11:12 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2013-06-16 17:19:49 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > > Amit posted a new version of this patch on January 23rd. But last
> > > comment on it by Tom is "not sure everyone wants this".
> >
On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 11:12 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2013-06-16 17:19:49 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Amit posted a new version of this patch on January 23rd. But last
> > comment on it by Tom is "not sure everyone wants this".
> >
> > https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/pat
Hi,
On 2013-06-16 17:19:49 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Amit posted a new version of this patch on January 23rd. But last
> comment on it by Tom is "not sure everyone wants this".
>
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=905
> ... so, what's the status of this patch?
That comm
Hackers,
Amit posted a new version of this patch on January 23rd. But last
comment on it by Tom is "not sure everyone wants this".
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=905
... so, what's the status of this patch?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
On Sunday, January 20, 2013 10:50 AM Amit kapila wrote:
On Sunday, January 20, 2013 4:04 AM Dickson S. Guedes wrote:
2013/1/18 Amit kapila :
>>> Please find the rebased Patch for Compute MAX LSN.
>>The function 'remove_parent_refernces' couldn't be called
>>'remove_parent_references' ?
> Shall f
2013/1/20 Amit kapila :
> On Sunday, January 20, 2013 4:04 AM Dickson S. Guedes wrote:
> 2013/1/18 Amit kapila :
>>> Please find the rebased Patch for Compute MAX LSN.
>
>>The function 'remove_parent_refernces' couldn't be called
>>'remove_parent_references' ?
>
> Shall fix this.
>
>> Why not an ex
On Sunday, January 20, 2013 4:04 AM Dickson S. Guedes wrote:
2013/1/18 Amit kapila :
>> Please find the rebased Patch for Compute MAX LSN.
>The function 'remove_parent_refernces' couldn't be called
>'remove_parent_references' ?
Shall fix this.
> Why not an extension in PGXN instead of a contrib
2013/1/18 Amit kapila :
> Please find the rebased Patch for Compute MAX LSN.
The function 'remove_parent_refernces' couldn't be called
'remove_parent_references' ?
Why not an extension in PGXN instead of a contrib?
Regards,
--
Dickson S. Guedes
mail/xmpp: gue...@guedesoft.net - skype: guediz
ht
Please find the rebased Patch for Compute MAX LSN.
There was one compilation error as "undefined reference to XLByteLT " as
earlier XLogRecPtr was a structure as
typedef struct XLogRecPtr
{
uint32xl
On Saturday, December 08, 2012 9:44 AM Tom Lane wrote:
Amit kapila writes:
> On Friday, December 07, 2012 7:43 PM Muhammad Usama wrote:
>>> Although I am thinking why are you disallowing the absolute path of file.
>>> Any particular reason?
>> The reason to disallow absolute path is that, we nee
Amit kapila writes:
> On Friday, December 07, 2012 7:43 PM Muhammad Usama wrote:
>> Although I am thinking why are you disallowing the absolute path of file.
>> Any particular reason?
> The reason to disallow absolute path is that, we need to test on multiple
> platforms and to keep the scope l
Hi Muhammad,
On Friday, December 07, 2012 7:43 PM Muhammad Usama wrote:
>Hi Amit
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Amit kapila
mailto:amit.kap...@huawei.com>> wrote:
>>I think we should expect provided path to be relative to current directory
>> or may consider it to be relative to either one of D
Hi Amit
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Amit kapila wrote:
> >I think we should expect provided path to be relative to current
> directory
> > or may consider it to be relative to either one of Data or CWD.
> >Because normally we expect path to be relative to CWD if some program is
> > asking f
>I think we should expect provided path to be relative to current directory
> or may consider it to be relative to either one of Data or CWD.
>Because normally we expect path to be relative to CWD if some program is
> asking for path in command line.
Please find the attached patch to make the path
On Wednesday, November 28, 2012 11:49 AM Muhammad Usama wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Amit kapila wrote:
Friday, November 23, 2012 5:38 AM Muhammad Usama wrote:
>>> - For -p {file | dir} option the utility expects the file path relative
to
>>> the specified data directory path which m
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:06 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Amit Kapila escribió:
> >
> > Friday, November 23, 2012 5:38 AM Muhammad Usama wrote:
>
> > >- I think when finding the max LSN of single file the utility should
> > > consider all relation segments.
> > Would you like to find for all rela
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Amit kapila wrote:
> Friday, November 23, 2012 5:38 AM Muhammad Usama wrote:
>
> > Observations and Comments
> > ---
>
> > - If no option is given to pg_computemaxlsn utility then we get a wrong
> > error message
> > ./pg_c
On Wednesday, November 28, 2012 3:36 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Amit Kapila escribió:
> >
> > Friday, November 23, 2012 5:38 AM Muhammad Usama wrote:
>
> > >- I think when finding the max LSN of single file the utility should
> > > consider all relation segments.
> > Would you like to find for a
Amit Kapila escribió:
>
> Friday, November 23, 2012 5:38 AM Muhammad Usama wrote:
> >- I think when finding the max LSN of single file the utility should
> > consider all relation segments.
> Would you like to find for all relation related segments:
> Like 12345, 12345.1 ... 12345.nOr
>
Friday, November 23, 2012 5:38 AM Muhammad Usama wrote:
> Observations and Comments
> ---
> - If no option is given to pg_computemaxlsn utility then we get a wrong
> error message
> ./pg_computemaxlsn ../data
> pg_computemaxlsn: file or directory "(null)" e
Friday, November 23, 2012 5:38 AM Muhammad Usama wrote:
> Hi Amit
> I have reviewed and tested the patch, Following are my observations and
comments.
Thank you for the review.
I need some clarification regarding some of the comments
> Observations and Comments
> --
Hi Amit
I have reviewed and tested the patch, Following are my observations and
comments.
Basic stuff
-
- Patch applies OK
- Compiles cleanly with no warnings
- All regression tests pass.
Observations and Comments
---
- If no option is gi
52 matches
Mail list logo
