Thanks you so much. I am sorry for the mixup. We will get it in there
ASAP when it arrives.
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> > Can you confirm that it is OK now? Your email from October 18th below
> > seems to indicate it is not correct. Can I get a diff against the
> > cur
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can you confirm that it is OK now? Your email from October 18th below
> seems to indicate it is not correct. Can I get a diff against the
> current CVS source that I can apply? Thanks. Sorry for the confusion.
It wasn't okay before I left to Keny
On 18 Oct 2000, Gunnar R|nning wrote:
> Peter Mount <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> > > couldn't produce a full patch using cvs diff -c this time since I have
> > > created new files and anonymous cvs usage doesn't allow you to
> > > adds. I'm supplying the modified src/interfaces/jdbc as a t
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Keith L. Musser wrote:
> jdbc7.0-1.2.jar 1.89 ms5.0 ms 3.9 ms
> postgresql.jar (191450 bytes)1.36 ms3.1 ms 3.2 ms
> postgresql.jar (204223 bytes)1.78 ms3.9 ms 4.1 ms
>
> In Test #2 w/ GC, I purposefully ran System.gc() every 1
"Keith L. Musser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I did try out Peter's new JDBC driver on two very simple query-only
> applications. It was about 15% slower on one of the apps and 10% faster
> on the other, compared with jdbc7.0-1.2.jar. It worked correctly on
> both tests.
>
> Neither is parti
PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, October 09, 2000 6:55 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Re: JDBC Performance
>On 9 Oct 2000, Gunnar R|nning wrote:
>
>> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Applied, and new files added.
>> >
>>
>> Scares me
PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, October 09, 2000 6:55 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Re: JDBC Performance
>On 9 Oct 2000, Gunnar R|nning wrote:
>
>> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Applied, and new files added.
>> >
>>
>> Scares me
Applied, and new files added.
> Peter Mount <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >
> > Anything of this nature always does.
> >
>
> Okay, I have some new code in place that hopefully should work better. I
> couldn't produce a full patch using cvs diff -c this time since I have
> created new files
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; PostgreSQL general mailing list
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Keith L. Musser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 4:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Re: JDBC Performance
>
>
> >On 2 Oct 2
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 4:57 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Re: JDBC Performance
>On 2 Oct 2000, Gunnar R|nning wrote:
>
>> Peter Mount <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > I'm now off work for the next two weeks (off sick that is), so
On 2 Oct 2000, Gunnar R|nning wrote:
> Peter Mount <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm now off work for the next two weeks (off sick that is), so I'll have
> > some more time now to get the driver up to date. I'm finishing off the
> > outstanding stuff now, so this should be in CVS today (fina
On 2 Oct 2000, Gunnar R|nning wrote:
> Peter Mount <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >
> > For JDBC2, I'm planning (may get done for 7.1) an alternate ResultSet
> > class that uses cursors. This would speed things up as the entire
> > resultset isn't received in one go. That's the biggest bottlen
On 2 Oct 2000, Gunnar R|nning wrote:
> Peter Mount <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Our concurrency is done by locking against the pg_Stream object. As there
> > is only one per connection this works (as it prevents the network protocol
> > from getting messed up).
> >
> > The pool of free byt
"Keith L. Musser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gunnar,
>
> Your new JDBC driver (postgresql.jar, 29-Sept-2000, 14:47, 187K) caused
> the following error.
>
>
> SELECT host, port FROM Servers WHERE PID=1;
> Bad Integer int4
> at org.postgresql.jdbc2.ResultSet.getInt(ResultSet.java:261)
> at o
"Keith L. Musser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gunnar,
>
> Your new JDBC driver (postgresql.jar, 29-Sept-2000, 14:47, 187K) caused
> the following error.
>
Thanks, I will look into the problem. The regression tests that Peter Mount
talking about would have been nice to have to catch things li
gt;; Keith L. Musser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, September 29, 2000 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Re: JDBC Performance
>Peter Mount <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>
>> Email them to me, as the modifications will break when I commit my
changes
>> (delayed d
The performance of my client Java app using JDBC to access PGSL is very
finicky. Sometimes it's fast, and sometimes it's slow, depending on how
much memory I'm allocating in my program.
This appears to be an issue with the JVM I'm using on Linux.
Performance is very consistent using HotSpot JDK1
On 28 Sep 2000, Gunnar R|nning wrote:
> Tim Kientzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > I'm finding that ... my CPU spends about 60% of the time in JDBC, and about
> > > 40% of the time in the postmaster backend.
> > > (Each query takes 2 msec on my machine, RH Linux 6.2, 733 MHz Intel, w/
> >
Tim Kientzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm finding that ... my CPU spends about 60% of the time in JDBC, and about
> > 40% of the time in the postmaster backend.
> > (Each query takes 2 msec on my machine, RH Linux 6.2, 733 MHz Intel, w/
> > lots of memory.)
>
> This doesn't sound too bad
19 matches
Mail list logo
