: [HACKERS] WIP: Collecting statistics on CSV file data
Shigeru HANADA writes:
> Just after my post, Fujita-san posted another v7 patch[1], so I merged
> v7 patches into v8 patch.
I've committed a modified version of this, but right after pushing it I had
a better idea about what the AnalyzeF
On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Shigeru HANADA writes:
>> Just after my post, Fujita-san posted another v7 patch[1], so I merged
>> v7 patches into v8 patch.
>
> I've committed a modified version of this, but right after pushing it
> I had a better idea about what the AnalyzeFor
Shigeru HANADA writes:
> Just after my post, Fujita-san posted another v7 patch[1], so I merged
> v7 patches into v8 patch.
I've committed a modified version of this, but right after pushing it
I had a better idea about what the AnalyzeForeignTable API should do.
An issue that I'd not previously
Thanks, Hanada-san!
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
-Original Message-
From: Shigeru HANADA [mailto:shigeru.han...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2012 11:41 AM
To: Etsuro Fujita
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Collecting statistics on CSV file data
(2012/04
Hi Hanada-san,
Sorry for the late response.
(2012/02/10 22:05), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
> (2011/12/15 11:30), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> (2011/12/14 15:34), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
>>> I think this patch could be marked as "Ready for committer" with some
>>> minor fixes. Please find attached a revised
(2011/12/15 11:30), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> (2011/12/14 15:34), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
>> I think this patch could be marked as "Ready for committer" with some
>> minor fixes. Please find attached a revised patch (v6.1).
I've tried to make pgsql_fdw work with this feature, and found that few
static
(2011/12/14 15:34), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
> (2011/12/13 22:00), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> Thank you for your effectiveness experiments and proposals for
>> improvements. I updated the patch according to your proposals.
>> Attached is the updated version of the patch.
>
> I think this patch could be
(2011/12/09 21:16), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> I updated the patch. Please find attached a patch.
I've examined v5 patch, and got reasonable EXPLAIN results which reflect
collected statistics! As increasing STATISTICS option, estimated rows
become better. Please see attached stats_*.txt for what I
Hi Hanada-san,
I updated the patch. Please find attached a patch.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
> (2011/11/18 21:00), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
>> (2011/11/18 16:25), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>>> Thank you for your testing. I updated the patch according to your
>>> comments. Attached is the updated ver
(2011/11/19 0:54), Robert Haas wrote:
2011/11/18 Shigeru Hanada:
- I couldn't see the reason why file_fdw sets ctid of sample tuples,
though I guess it's for Vitter's random sampling algorithm. If every
FDW must set valid ctid to sample tuples, it should be mentioned in
document of AnalyzeForei
Hi Hanada-san,
Thank you for your valuable comments. I will improve the items pointed
out by you at the next version of the patch, including documentation on
the purpose of AnalyzeForeignTable, how to write it, and so on. Here I
comment only one point:
> - Why file_fdw skips sample tuples which
2011/11/18 Shigeru Hanada :
> - I couldn't see the reason why file_fdw sets ctid of sample tuples,
> though I guess it's for Vitter's random sampling algorithm. If every
> FDW must set valid ctid to sample tuples, it should be mentioned in
> document of AnalyzeForeignTable. Exporting some functio
(2011/11/18 16:25), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> Thank you for your testing. I updated the patch according to your
> comments. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
I'd like to share result of my review even though it's not fully
finished. So far I looked from viewpoint of API design, code
fo
(2011/11/07 20:26), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
> (2011/10/20 18:56), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> I revised the patch according to Hanada-san's comments. Attached is the
>> updated version of the patch.
>>
>> Changes:
>>
>> * pull up of logging "analyzing foo.bar"
>> * new vac_update_relstats always
(2011/10/20 18:56), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> I revised the patch according to Hanada-san's comments. Attached is the
> updated version of the patch.
>
> Changes:
>
>* pull up of logging "analyzing foo.bar"
>* new vac_update_relstats always called
>* tab-completion in psql
>* add "fo
Hi,
(2011/10/18 16:32), Leonardo Francalanci wrote:
New API AnalyzeForeignTable
I didn't look at the patch, but I'm using CSV foreign tables with named pipes
to get near-realtime KPI calculated by postgresql. Of course, pipes can be
read just once, so I wouldn't want an "automatic analyze" of
> New API AnalyzeForeignTable
I didn't look at the patch, but I'm using CSV foreign tables with named pipes
to get near-realtime KPI calculated by postgresql. Of course, pipes can be
read just once, so I wouldn't want an "automatic analyze" of foreign tables...
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailin
(2011/10/18 2:27), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
> The new patch could be applied with some shifts. Regression tests of
> core and file_fdw have passed cleanly. Though I've tested only simple
> tests, ANALYZE works for foreign tables for file_fdw, and estimation of
> costs and selectivity seem appropriat
(2011/10/07 18:09), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> Thank you for the review and the helpful information.
> I rebased. Please find attached a patch. I'll add the patch to the next CF.
>
> Changes:
>
>* cleanups and fixes
>* addition of the following to ALTER FOREIGN TABLE
>ALTER [COLUMN] c
(2011/10/07 21:56), David Fetter wrote:
(But this is BTW. I'm interested in developing CREATE FOREIGN INDEX.
I've examined whether there are discussions about the design and
implementation of it in the archive, but could not find information.
If you know anything, please tell me.)
Look into the
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 08:09:44PM +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm very sorry for the late reply.
>
> (2011/09/21 10:00), Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >Excerpts from David Fetter's message of mar sep 20 21:22:32 -0300 2011:
> >>On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:13:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
>
Hi,
I'm very sorry for the late reply.
(2011/09/21 10:00), Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from David Fetter's message of mar sep 20 21:22:32 -0300 2011:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:13:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Probably a more interesting question is why we wouldn't change
autovacuum so tha
Hi Hanada-san,
I'm very sorry for late reply.
(2011/09/20 18:49), Shigeru Hanada wrote:
> I took a look at the patch, and found that it couldn't be applied
> cleanly against HEAD. Please rebase your patch against current HEAD of
> master branch, rather than 9.1beta1.
>
> The wiki pages below wo
Excerpts from David Fetter's message of mar sep 20 21:22:32 -0300 2011:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:13:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Probably a more interesting question is why we wouldn't change
> > autovacuum so that it calls this automatically for foreign tables.
>
> How about a per-table
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:13:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Marti Raudsepp writes:
> > 2011/9/12 Etsuro Fujita :
> >> This is called when ANALYZE command is executed. (ANALYZE
> >> command should be executed because autovacuum does not analyze foreign
> >> tables.)
>
> > This is a good idea.
>
>
On 20-09-2011 11:12, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
2011/9/12 Etsuro Fujita:
This is called when ANALYZE command is executed. (ANALYZE
command should be executed because autovacuum does not analyze foreign
tables.)
This is a good idea.
However, if adding these statistics requires an explicit ANALYZE
c
Marti Raudsepp writes:
> 2011/9/12 Etsuro Fujita :
>> This is called when ANALYZE command is executed. (ANALYZE
>> command should be executed because autovacuum does not analyze foreign
>> tables.)
> This is a good idea.
> However, if adding these statistics requires an explicit ANALYZE
> comman
2011/9/12 Etsuro Fujita :
> This is called when ANALYZE command is executed. (ANALYZE
> command should be executed because autovacuum does not analyze foreign
> tables.)
This is a good idea.
However, if adding these statistics requires an explicit ANALYZE
command, then we should also have a comma
Hi Fujita-san,
(2011/09/12 19:40), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> To enable file_fdw to estimate costs of scanning a CSV file more
> accurately, I would like to propose a new FDW callback routine,
> AnalyzeForeignTable, which allows to ANALYZE command to collect
> statistics on a foreign ta
Hi there,
To enable file_fdw to estimate costs of scanning a CSV file more
accurately, I would like to propose a new FDW callback routine,
AnalyzeForeignTable, which allows to ANALYZE command to collect
statistics on a foreign table, and a corresponding file_fdw function,
fileAnalyzeForeignTable.
30 matches
Mail list logo