On Thu, 9 Jan 2025, 12:26 Feike Steenbergen,
wrote:
> I'm trying to change a few applications to fully use this, as PostgreSQL
> 17 added this support.
>
> The application does something like this:
>
> - fetch information from a source system and store it in a temp table
> - run a MERGE with a ta
tails, another two tables and
> it's query are similar.
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
>
> David Mullineux 於 2024年12月22日週日 上午12:41寫道：
>
>> Depends on a lot of thongs...Visibility map sounds like it's impacted
>> here. Are your inserts towards the index (like a
Depends on a lot of thongs...Visibility map sounds like it's impacted here.
Are your inserts towards the index (like a monotonically increasing serial
id) or scattered around the index values ? How big is the table index
and shared buffers ? An example would really help
On Sat, 21 Dec 2024,
Yes.
Also, are you sure you mean deadlock ? It sounded like this is just a
simple lock conflict and not a deadlock.
The first transaction could be blocked on something else (even tho it's not
ally short and quick ).
Lock requests are in a queue
On Mon, 9 Dec 2024, 21:16 Eric Schwarzenbach,
wrot
On Wed, 20 Nov 2024, 22:26 Tom Lane, wrote:
> [ please don't top-quote, it makes the conversation hard to follow ]
>
> David Mullineux writes:
> > On Wed, 20 Nov 2024, 15:46 Tom Lane, wrote:
> >> Yeah. Also, are you building with openssl, or not?
>
> > N
No, not at all!
On Wed, 20 Nov 2024, 15:46 Tom Lane, wrote:
> =?UTF-8?Q?Fr=C3=A9d=C3=A9ric_Yhuel?= writes:
> > On 9/11/24 12:47, David Mullineux wrote:
> >> This feels like a build configuration problem. Just can't put my finger
> >> on it yet.
>
> &g
on
it yet.
On Wed, 11 Sept 2024, 10:40 Peter Eisentraut, wrote:
> On 10.09.24 15:58, David Mullineux wrote:
> > I'm getting a bit concerned by the slow performance of generating uidds
> > on latest dev code versus older versions. Here I compare the time to
> > generate
