You have already been informed. PG, as yet, does not allow incremental refresh
of a MV. It allows online refresh of a MV, but that it does by doing a full
table scan of the base table and rebuilding the MV.
From: Krithika Venkatesh
To: John R Pierce
Cc: pgsql
> On Nov 7, 2017, at 12:16 AM, Thomas Kellerer wrote:
>
> Rob Sargent schrieb am 06.11.2017 um 23:09:
>> Gosh I wish I could learn to proof-read my posts.
>> My support crew graciously set
>>
>> idle_transaction_timeout = 1
>>
>> Now to ponder if I need zero or some large number.
>
> The uni
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 7:08 AM, Rakesh Kumar
wrote:
> You have already been informed. PG, as yet, does not allow incremental
> refresh of a MV. It allows online refresh of a MV, but that it does by
> doing a full table scan of the base table and rebuilding the MV.
>
>
> -
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Sachin Kotwal wrote:
>
> Please committers give their final view on this.
>
>
They, and others, have - its a "don't want".
IOW, don't expend any effort since that effort will have been wasted - not
that it would take zero effort to accomplish.
If there is an a
Hi All,
I was analysing shared buffers content and noticed that exactly the same
disk block appears there many times with different or the same usagecount.
What's the cause of that? It's because of transactions?
SELECT
count(*),
relfilenode,
relblocknumber,
array_agg(usagecount) usagecoun
pinker writes:
> I was analysing shared buffers content and noticed that exactly the same
> disk block appears there many times with different or the same usagecount.
Postgres would be completely broken if that were true, because
modifications made to one copy would fail to propagate to other cop
Sachin Kotwal wrote:
> 3. Notify or highlight these changes in release notes because this can
> break some existing tools and user code.
Notifying people when their tools no longer work with a new server is
not the problem; they figure that out pretty quickly once they try the
new version. The p
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Rob Sargent wrote:
>
>
>> On Nov 7, 2017, at 12:16 AM, Thomas Kellerer wrote:
>>
>> I would figure values in "minutes" to be more realistic depending on the
>> workload and characteristics of the application.
>>
>> A transaction that has several seconds of "think
On 11/07/2017 09:09 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Rob Sargent wrote:
On Nov 7, 2017, at 12:16 AM, Thomas Kellerer wrote:
I would figure values in "minutes" to be more realistic depending on the
workload and characteristics of the application.
A transaction tha
Tom Lane-2 wrote
> Postgres would be completely broken if that were true, because
> modifications made to one copy would fail to propagate to other copies.
> I don't know where your data came from, but it can't be an accurate
> representation of the instantaneous state of the buffer cache.
>
> ...
Thank you Tom, you were right. I needed to group by all the columns:
reldatabase, reltablespace, relforknumber too. Now all of them are unique.
Thank you for clearing this out :)
--
Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-general-f1843780.html
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing
On 11/6/2017 11:34 PM, Krithika Venkatesh wrote:
Materialized view log is one of the feature in oracle. It creates a
log in which the changes made to the table are recorded. This log is
required for an asynchronous materialized view that is refreshed
incrementally.
I read in the below link ab
Forwarded Message
Subject:standby stop replicating, then picked back up
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 13:04:18 -0700
From: chris kim
To: pgsql-in-gene...@postgresql.org
Hello,
I had a standby hang for a while, not replicating, but then it fixed
itself but I'm not
chris kim wrote:
> I had a standby hang for a while, not replicating, but then it fixed
> itself but I'm not sure why it happened in the first place. What would I
> look into to see why this happened, or any insight into why is greatly
> appreciated.
You give us precious little information.
If
> On Nov 7, 2017, at 12:16 AM, Thomas Kellerer wrote:
>
> Rob Sargent schrieb am 06.11.2017 um 23:09:
>> Gosh I wish I could learn to proof-read my posts.
>> My support crew graciously set
>>
>> idle_transaction_timeout = 1
>>
>> Now to ponder if I need zero or some large number.
>
> The unit
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 5:17 AM, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> chris kim wrote:
>> I had a standby hang for a while, not replicating, but then it fixed
>> itself but I'm not sure why it happened in the first place. What would I
>> look into to see why this happened, or any insight into why is greatly
>> ap
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 12:41 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Sachin Kotwal wrote:
>> 3. Notify or highlight these changes in release notes because this can
>> break some existing tools and user code.
>
> Notifying people when their tools no longer work with a new server is
> not the problem; they figu
17 matches
Mail list logo
