Please don't top post.
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Tom Wilcox wrote:
> On 12/07/2010 19:26, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 12 July 2010 14:50, Tom Wilcox wrote:
>>>
Hi Thom,
I am performing update statements t
I could perform the settings manually (set config, restart svr, execute
script, come back 2 days later, reset config, restart svr, execute more
script,...), but that sort of defeats the point. My aim to have the
simplest, automatic setup possible. Preferably completely contained
within PostgreS
Andres Freund wrote:
What you can change (and that makes quite a bit of sense in some situations)
is the "synchronous_commit" setting.
Right. In almost every case where people think they want to disable
fsync, what they really should be doing instead is turning off
synchronous commit--whi
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 12 July 2010 14:50, Tom Wilcox wrote:
>> Hi Thom,
>>
>> I am performing update statements that are applied to a single table that is
>> about 96GB in size. These updates are grouped together in a single
>> transaction. This transaction runs
On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 14:57 +0100, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 12 July 2010 14:50, Tom Wilcox wrote:
> > Hi Thom,
> >
> > I am performing update statements that are applied to a single table that is
> > about 96GB in size. These updates are grouped together in a single
> > transaction. This transaction
On Monday 12 July 2010 15:29:14 Tom Wilcox wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to configure postgres from SQL?
>
> I am interested in turning off fsync for a set of queries (that take
> ages to run) and then turn fsync back on again afterwards.
disabling fsync is nearly never a good idea.
What you c
Le 12/07/2010 17:02, Tom Wilcox a écrit :
> Hi Thom,
>
> Yeah They can be divided up, but my main issue is that I would like
> these functions wrapped up so that the client (who has little to no
> experience using PostgreSQL) can just run a SQL function that will
> execute all of these updates and
Hi Thom,
Yeah They can be divided up, but my main issue is that I would like
these functions wrapped up so that the client (who has little to no
experience using PostgreSQL) can just run a SQL function that will
execute all of these updates and prepare many tables and functions for a
product.
On Monday 12 July 2010 6:29:14 am Tom Wilcox wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to configure postgres from SQL?
Yes to a degree, see here:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/functions-admin.html
>
> I am interested in turning off fsync for a set of queries (that take
> ages to run) and t
On 12 July 2010 14:50, Tom Wilcox wrote:
> Hi Thom,
>
> I am performing update statements that are applied to a single table that is
> about 96GB in size. These updates are grouped together in a single
> transaction. This transaction runs until the machine runs out of disk space.
>
> What I am try
> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to configure postgres from SQL?
>
> I am interested in turning off fsync for a set of queries (that take
> ages to run) and then turn fsync back on again afterwards.
There are things that can be changed at runtime using SQL - in that case
you may just type "SET enable_seqs
On 12 July 2010 14:29, Tom Wilcox wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to configure postgres from SQL?
>
> I am interested in turning off fsync for a set of queries (that take ages to
> run) and then turn fsync back on again afterwards.
>
> Cheers,
> Tom
>
You can only change that option in postgresql
Hi,
Is it possible to configure postgres from SQL?
I am interested in turning off fsync for a set of queries (that take
ages to run) and then turn fsync back on again afterwards.
Cheers,
Tom
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscri
13 matches
Mail list logo
