nill wrote:
> Given a view, I need to extract tables, the join columns (ON) . I need to do
> this analysis because of the view (agreements with the join condition and
> where) I can say that there is a foreign key
Do I understand right that you want to find out the tables involved in
a view defini
Hi,
I have a query that involves an external sort:
-> Sort (cost=13662680.01..13850498.48 rows=75127389 width=16)
(actual time=980098.397..1021411.862 rows=74181544 loops=1)
Sort Key: (ROW(account_id, (purchase_time)::date))
Sort Method: external merge Disk: 3
Thats exactly what I was thinking after all other experiments. Couple of
questions:
1) why did you say that 300 seconds is the upper limit? Is this enforced by
Postgres? What if I want to set it to 10 minutes?
2) whats the downside of bigger replication timeout?
Thanks.
Ajay
___
From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Anand Kumar, Karthik
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 9:04 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] Increase in max_connections
Hi all,
We're running postgres 9.3.2, server configuration
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torsten_F=F6rtsch?= writes:
> I have a query that involves an external sort:
>-> Sort (cost=13662680.01..13850498.48 rows=75127389 width=16)
> (actual time=980098.397..1021411.862 rows=74181544 loops=1)
> Sort Key: (ROW(account_id, (purchase_time)::date)
On 11/03/14 14:36, Tom Lane wrote:
> Perhaps you fat-fingered the SET somehow?
I just repeated it:
# select * from pg_settings where name='work_mem';
-[ RECORD 1 ]
name | work_mem
setting| 52428800
unit | kB
...
# explain (analyze,buffers)
select
Laurenz Thanks for your reply, it is going to help me.
I use this query to get the dependencies of view with the objects in the db
SELECT *
FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.view_column_usage
I now have to explain the attributes of the join tree, that is JOIN
expressions e JOIN clauses.
Thanks
--
Marko, Tom, Adrian, Jeff, Daniel - thank you all for valuable feedback!
Two general questions:
- when using PQsetSingleRowMode() function - does it give an option to
define how many rows to cache on client's side (like JDBC setFetchSize()
does) or leaves it at pqlib's discretion?
- is it/would
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torsten_F=F6rtsch?= writes:
> On 11/03/14 14:36, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Perhaps you fat-fingered the SET somehow?
> I just repeated it:
[ thinks for awhile... ] Oh, I know what's happening: your sort is so
large that it's being constrained by the MaxAllocSize limit on the tuple
point
On 11/03/14 16:03, Tom Lane wrote:
> [ thinks for awhile... ] Oh, I know what's happening: your sort is so
> large that it's being constrained by the MaxAllocSize limit on the tuple
> pointer array. This has been fixed in HEAD, but it's not yet in any
> shipping release. According to the log ent
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Anand Kumar, Karthik <
karthik.anandku...@classmates.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We're running postgres 9.3.2, server configuration below.
>
> Seemingly randomly, we will see the number of active queries in postgres
> go up until we hit max_connections. The DB wi
No errors in the logs, except when we hit max_connections
No shared memory problems – no associated spike in I/O or system CPU indicating
shared memory is either unused or over used. Sufficient memory in
cache/buffers, zero swapping or anything indicative of a memory problem.
The box is pretty b
Thanks Jeff. We have scripts in place now to capture the incoming rate of
requests. Waiting on the crash to happen to see if it spikes up :)
Re: min_log_duration – we *do* see a good number of requests in the log that
hit our cap (of 100ms). Just that nothing stands out when we have the issue.
Marti Raudsepp wrote:
> Reece Hart wrote:
>
>> I should be able to chase pg_depends entries to create this
>> ordering, right?
>
> Not always, there may be circular dependencies between them.
I haven't been able to think of a way to create circular references
among a set of materialized views, s
On 3/11/2014 5:50 AM, Aggarwal, Ajay wrote:
Thats exactly what I was thinking after all other experiments. Couple
of questions:
1) why did you say that 300 seconds is the upper limit? Is this
enforced by Postgres? What if I want to set it to 10 minutes?
2) whats the downside of bigger replicati
Kevin Grittner writes:
> Marti Raudsepp wrote:
>> Not always, there may be circular dependencies between them.
> I haven't been able to think of a way to create circular references
> among a set of materialized views, short of committing violence
> against the system catalog tables directly. Wha
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> I haven't been able to think of a way to create circular references
> among a set of materialized views, short of committing violence
> against the system catalog tables directly. What have I missed?
Not directly, but you can create circles
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Anand Kumar, Karthik <
karthik.anandku...@classmates.com> wrote:
> Thanks Jeff. We have scripts in place now to capture the incoming rate
> of requests. Waiting on the crash to happen to see if it spikes up :)
>
> Re: min_log_duration - we *do* see a good numbe
On 3/11/2014 10:20 AM, Anand Kumar, Karthik wrote:
We typically see about 500-700 active queries at a time
if these are primarily small/fast queries, like OLTP operations, and you
DONT have 200-400 CPU cores on this server, you will likely find that if
you use a queueing mechanism to only exe
Hi Brian!
I got a patch to fix this. Unfortunately, I'm having some problems with
github at this moment and I couldn't push it to create a pull request.
Would you mind to patch a local copy of Npgsql code and give it a try?
Here is the patch:
diff --git a/Npgsql/Npgsql/NpgsqlConnector.cs
b/Np
As I have very low wal_keep_segments compare to my wal generation, I am
collecting archive wal files at slave.
Now in order to clean up archive wal collection directory at slave, I used
"archive_cleanup_command".
I watched that after archive wal files were pilling up at slave and after
certain poin
Herouth Maoz wrote:
> I have a production system using Postgresql 9.1.2.
That's asking for trouble. There have been many bugs fixed in 9.1
since 2011-12-05, including security vulnerabilities and (more to
the point) bugs which caused vacuum processes to interact poorly
with tables used as queue
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 10:03 AM, AI Rumman wrote:
As I have very low wal_keep_segments compare to my wal generation, I am
> collecting archive wal files at slave.
> Now in order to clean up archive wal collection directory at slave, I used
> "archive_cleanup_command".
> I watched that after arch
23 matches
Mail list logo
