"Jaime Casanova" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 6/25/07, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In any case, this is an exported symbol so maybe it's not a good idea to
>> mess with it. OTOH I checked PL/R and PL/php and neither uses it, so
>> this may not be a problem at all.
> FWIW, we
On 6/25/07, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This function seems to have an argument that is no longer used (probably
> > leftover from when it used to report an error message?).
>
> Yeah, I recall having left the argument
[ back to this thread... ]
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> The other question is why is execMain involved in this? That makes the
>> design nonfunctional for tuples inserted in any other way than through
>> the main executor --- COPY for instance. Also, if thi
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The way transitions between completely idle and all-out bursts happen were
> one problematic area I struggled with. Since the LRU point doesn't move
> during the idle parts, and the lingering buffers have a usage_count>0, the
> LRU scan won't touch them;
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Please describe the class of transactions and the service guarantees so
that we can reproduce that, and figure out what's the best solution.
I'm confident you're already moving in that direction by noticing how the
90th percentile numbers were ki
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
It only scans bgwriter_lru_percent buffers ahead of the clock hand. If the
hand isn't moving, it keeps scanning the same buffers over and over again.
You can crank it all the way up to 100%, though, in which case it would work,
but that starts to
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Greg, is this the kind of workload you're having, or is there some other
scenario you're worried about?
The way transitions between completely idle and all-out bursts happen were
one problematic area I struggled with. Since the LRU point doesn't
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > SIBackendInit returns a flag indicating whether it worked or not. Since
> > there is only one caller and it dies with a FATAL error when
> > SIBackendInit failed, it seems better to move the elog and remove the
> > return value, per
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> If you have a system with a very bursty transaction rate, it's possible
>>> that when it's time for a checkpoint, there hasn't been any WAL logged
>>> activity since last checkpo
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I wrote:
Would making a change like this in those 12 places be so ugly?
Specifically, I propose the following patch, which should fix the issues
buildfarm apparently has with the XP command shell (or some incarnations
of it).
Stri
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> I wrote:
>>
>>
>> Would making a change like this in those 12 places be so ugly?
>>
>
> Specifically, I propose the following patch, which should fix the issues
> buildfarm apparently has with the XP command shell (or some incarnations
> of it).
>
> Strictly speaking
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> SIBackendInit returns a flag indicating whether it worked or not. Since
> there is only one caller and it dies with a FATAL error when
> SIBackendInit failed, it seems better to move the elog and remove the
> return value, per this patch.
The reason fo
Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On further thought, there is one workload where removing the non-LRU
part would be counterproductive:
If you have a system with a very bursty transaction rate, it's possible
that when it's time for a checkpoint, there hasn't been
SIBackendInit returns a flag indicating whether it worked or not. Since
there is only one caller and it dies with a FATAL error when
SIBackendInit failed, it seems better to move the elog and remove the
return value, per this patch.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/reg
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This function seems to have an argument that is no longer used (probably
> > leftover from when it used to report an error message?).
>
> Yeah, I recall having left the argument in place because it seemed like
> we might want it agai
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This function seems to have an argument that is no longer used (probably
> leftover from when it used to report an error message?).
Yeah, I recall having left the argument in place because it seemed like
we might want it again someday. But that was for
This function seems to have an argument that is no longer used (probably
leftover from when it used to report an error message?). This rather
trivial patch removes it and fixes associated fallout.
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.advogato.org/person/alvherre
"Before you were b
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On further thought, there is one workload where removing the non-LRU
> part would be counterproductive:
> If you have a system with a very bursty transaction rate, it's possible
> that when it's time for a checkpoint, there hasn't been any WAL log
Tom Lane wrote:
I agree with removing the non-LRU
part of the bgwriter's write logic though; that should simplify matters
a bit and cut down the overall I/O volume.
On further thought, there is one workload where removing the non-LRU
part would be counterproductive:
If you have a system with
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 12:31:44AM -0700, Henry B. Hotz wrote:
>
> On Jun 24, 2007, at 11:03 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
> >>I'm told that the way Apple's equivalent to mod_auth_kerb works is it
> >>uses GSS_C_NO_CREDENTIAL and then does a case-insensitive compare of
> >>the resulting match to "
Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would like to inform, that New Zealand changed DST rules and new
> timezone files are available. See
> http://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/wpg_URL/Services-Daylight-Saving-Daylight-saving-to-be-extended
> Patch for head attached.
We do not "patch
On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 12:56 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Didn't we already add other featuers that makes recovery much *faster* than
> before? In that case, are they faster enugh to neutralise this increased
> time (a guestimate, of course)
>
> Or did I mess that up with stuff we added for 8.2
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 10:15:07AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
As you say, we can put comments in the release notes to advise people of
50% increase in recovery time if the parameters stay the same. That
would be balanced by the comment that checkpoints are now considerably
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 10:15:07AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 01:33 -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 Jun 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >
> > > Greg can't choose to use checkpoint_segments as the limit and then
> > > complain about unbounded recovery time, because that w
I would like to inform, that New Zealand changed DST rules and new
timezone files are available. See
http://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/wpg_URL/Services-Daylight-Saving-Daylight-saving-to-be-extended
Patch for head attached. I kept zic.c untouched, but I think it would be
nice to update it
On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 01:33 -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jun 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > Greg can't choose to use checkpoint_segments as the limit and then
> > complain about unbounded recovery time, because that was clearly a
> > conscious choice.
>
> I'm complaining
I apologise
Greg Smith wrote:
LDC certainly makes things better in almost every case. My "allegiance"
comes from having seen a class of transactions where LDC made things
worse on a fast/overloaded system, in that it made some types of service
guarantees harder to meet, and I just don't know who else migh
On Jun 24, 2007, at 11:03 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
I'm told that the way Apple's equivalent to mod_auth_kerb works is it
uses GSS_C_NO_CREDENTIAL and then does a case-insensitive compare of
the resulting match to "HTTP". We could do the same thing, if you
think it's worth it.
Do you know i
On Jun 23, 2007, at 1:44 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Stephen Frost wrote:
* Henry B. Hotz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Jun 22, 2007, at 9:56 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Most likely it's just checking the keytab to find a principal
with the
same name as the one presented from the client. Sin
29 matches
Mail list logo