Re: Using FDW to connect to a more recent postgres version?

Koen De Groote writes: > The documentation speaks only of compatibility in terms of connecting to > older version: >> postgres_fdw can be used with remote servers dating back to PostgreSQL >> 8.3. Read-only capability is available back to 8.1. > But what about connecting to a foreign server that i

Using FDW to connect to a more recent postgres version?

The documentation speaks only of compatibility in terms of connecting to older version: > postgres_fdw can be used with remote servers dating back to PostgreSQL 8.3. Read-only capability is available back to 8.1. But what about connecting to a foreign server that is more recent? Like pg14 connect

Re: Naive question about multithreading/multicore

On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 6:31 AM Marc SCHAEFER wrote: > template1=> SELECT COUNT(*) FROM pg_class a, pg_class b, pg_class c; > > I see only one 100% CPU PostgreSQL process. If you set set min_parallel_table_scan_size = 0 then it uses parallelism, and completes much faster. The planner generally w

Re: Foreign Data Wrapper behavior?

Ah, thanks for that On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 5:59 PM Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 10/11/24 04:08, Koen De Groote wrote: > > In the release notes for postgres 17 I'm reading: > > > > > The PostgreSQL foreign data wrapper (postgres_fdw), used to execute > > queries on remote PostgreSQL instances, can

Naive question about multithreading/multicore

Hello, on a machine where starting two processes: perl -e 'while (1) { ; }' I see two processed at 100% CPU, which is expected (with top). Now, if I do: template1=> SELECT COUNT(*) FROM pg_class a, pg_class b, pg_class c; I see only one 100% CPU PostgreSQL process. I read that while Postgre

Re: Questions about document "Concurrenry control" section

On 10/12/24 03:17, Peter J. Holzer wrote: On 2024-10-11 21:21:16 -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote: On 10/11/24 20:10, admin@iseki.space wrote: I found. Maybe we should reply to the mailing list only. Otherwise we'll receive multiple copies of the emails. Not if you go here: https://lists.postgre

Re: Questions about document "Concurrenry control" section

Yes, this is IMOP, the best way. I have set up Thunderbird to throw everything that is not in my contact list to Trash, thus your email will never be read by me if you don't use - Reply to Mailing list -. Just saying. On 2024-10-11 11:10 p.m., admin@iseki.space wrote: I found. Maybe we should

Re: Questions about document "Concurrenry control" section

On 2024-10-11 21:21:16 -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 10/11/24 20:10, admin@iseki.space wrote: > > I found. Maybe we should reply to the mailing list only. Otherwise we'll > > receive multiple copies of the emails. > > > > > > Not if you go here: > > https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/ > >

Re: Questions about document "Concurrenry control" section

On 2024-10-12 10:25:08 +0800, iseki zero wrote: > So, should I use the [reply to all] button? This mailing-list (like most lists) sets the "List-Post" header: List-Post: So the best thing would be for the mail program to detect that and offer a [reply