On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 1:27 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Bret Stern
> wrote:
>> VoltDB maybe
>> - Original Message -
>
> VoltDB has a completely different focus than PostgreSQL really.
> PostgreSQL is a general purpose database that can achieve some very
>
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Bret Stern
wrote:
> VoltDB maybe
> - Original Message -
VoltDB has a completely different focus than PostgreSQL really.
PostgreSQL is a general purpose database that can achieve some very
impressive numbers using super fast hardware, while still being a
g
VoltDB maybe
- Original Message -
On 06:31 AM 03/23/2012 Frank Lanitz wrote:
Am 23.03.2012 14:23, schrieb Adrian Klaver:
> I would say either they got the numbers wrong or someone is pulling
> your leg. That rate is not going to happen.
Maybe twitter or facebook all in all...
Cheers,
F
On 03/23/2012 12:12 PM, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012, John R Pierce wrote:
On 03/23/12 9:17 AM, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
So in that time autovacuum is triggered.
autovacuum runs pretty much continuously in the background, its not an
on/off thing.
Yes, I know. I ment that it
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012, Tom Lane wrote:
Merlin Moncure writes:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
So I think XID overflow should be planned for one of the next PostgreSQL
releases.
two mitigating factors:
1. read only transactions do not increment xid counter
Yes.
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012, John R Pierce wrote:
On 03/23/12 9:17 AM, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
So in that time autovacuum is triggered.
autovacuum runs pretty much continuously in the background, its not an on/off
thing.
Yes, I know. I ment that it runs at least once in 1.5 days.
Ciao,
Gerhard
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> 2. xid wraparound counter is per table.
>
> That unfortunately isn't so, the XID counter is global to an installation.
yup -- thinko: I was thinking about oid counter, not xid. thanks
merlin
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-gene
On 03/23/12 9:17 AM, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
So in that time autovacuum is triggered.
autovacuum runs pretty much continuously in the background, its not an
on/off thing.
--
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast
--
Sent
Merlin Moncure writes:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Gerhard Wiesinger
> wrote:
>> So I think XID overflow should be planned for one of the next PostgreSQL
>> releases.
> two mitigating factors:
> 1. read only transactions do not increment xid counter
Yes. Ask your admin what his throug
On 23.03.2012 11:16, Jan Kesten wrote:
On 23.03.2012 06:45, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
With a database admin of a commercial database system I've discussed
that they have to provide and they also achieve 2^31 transactions per
SECOND!
As PostgreSQL uses transaction IDs (XIDs) in the range of 2^31
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On 23.03.2012 11:16, Jan Kesten wrote:
>>
>> On 23.03.2012 06:45, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
>>
>>> With a database admin of a commercial database system I've discussed
>>> that they have to provide and they also achieve 2^31 transactions
On 23.03.2012 11:16, Jan Kesten wrote:
On 23.03.2012 06:45, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
With a database admin of a commercial database system I've discussed
that they have to provide and they also achieve 2^31 transactions per
SECOND!
As PostgreSQL uses transaction IDs (XIDs) in the range of 2^31
On 03/22/12 10:45 PM, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
With a database admin of a commercial database system I've discussed
that they have to provide and they also achieve 2^31 transactions per
SECOND!
bullpucky. that's 2 transactions per NANOSECOND. light can travel
about 6" in that time. half a
Am 23.03.2012 14:23, schrieb Adrian Klaver:
> I would say either they got the numbers wrong or someone is pulling
> your leg. That rate is not going to happen.
Maybe twitter or facebook all in all...
Cheers,
Frank
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make ch
On 03/22/2012 10:45 PM, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
Hello,
With a database admin of a commercial database system I've discussed
that they have to provide and they also achieve 2^31 transactions per
SECOND!
As PostgreSQL uses transaction IDs (XIDs) in the range of 2^31 they
would turn around in abou
On 23.03.2012 06:45, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> With a database admin of a commercial database system I've discussed
> that they have to provide and they also achieve 2^31 transactions per
> SECOND!
> As PostgreSQL uses transaction IDs (XIDs) in the range of 2^31 they
> would turn around in about
Hi,
On 23 March 2012 19:14, Frank Lanitz wrote:
> Am 23.03.2012 06:45, schrieb Gerhard Wiesinger:
>> With a database admin of a commercial database system I've discussed
>> that they have to provide and they also achieve 2^31 transactions per
>> SECOND!
>
> Just corious: What is causing this many
Am 23.03.2012 06:45, schrieb Gerhard Wiesinger:
> With a database admin of a commercial database system I've discussed
> that they have to provide and they also achieve 2^31 transactions per
> SECOND!
Just corious: What is causing this many transactions?
Cheers,
Frank
--
Sent via pgsql-general
Hello,
With a database admin of a commercial database system I've discussed
that they have to provide and they also achieve 2^31 transactions per
SECOND!
As PostgreSQL uses transaction IDs (XIDs) in the range of 2^31 they
would turn around in about one second.
How can one achieve this with P
19 matches
Mail list logo
