Hi,
I have tested with makeing this change and it is showing useful
readings. The point of introducing the indexes with snapshot is that it
should reduce the number of logical I/Os.(It may be from memory / from hard
disk). Logical I/Os are potential Physical I/Os.
On 10/20/07, Martijn van Oo
>
> - --On Sunday, October 21, 2007 22:38:04 -0400 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > I've posted notes over the past few days about half a dozen relatively-
> > minor-but-none-the-less-initdb-forcing issues in tsearch. We have to
> > either fix those or decide we're not going to fix them
2007/10/22, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I hadn't realized till just now that ts_debug()'s output is not
> compatible with the way the function was defined in 8.2 contrib.
> But since apparently backwards-compatibility is not a controlling
> factor here, I have a couple suggestions:
>
> * It see
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sunday, October 21, 2007 22:38:04 -0400 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> I've posted notes over the past few days about half a dozen relatively-
>> minor-but-none-the-less-initdb-forcing issues in tsearch. We have to
>> either fix those o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Sunday, October 21, 2007 22:38:04 -0400 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I've posted notes over the past few days about half a dozen relatively-
> minor-but-none-the-less-initdb-forcing issues in tsearch. We have to
> either fix those o
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Nothing motivates people to test more than moving toward RC1. ;-)
> Getting Beta2 out is vital to actually getting people to test there are
> known issues and changes with Beta1 that have made it pretty much a
> useless Bet
I hadn't realized till just now that ts_debug()'s output is not
compatible with the way the function was defined in 8.2 contrib.
But since apparently backwards-compatibility is not a controlling
factor here, I have a couple suggestions:
* It seems like a bad idea to merge the controlling-dictionar
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
We have had very few beta1 issues. I am thinking we should release
beta2 next week and perhaps accelerate beta and consider a final release
in November rather than December. Because of the length of our feature
freeze it is possible
Josh Berkus wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Those who have been with the community from long ago might remember
discussion about implementing a undo log. The big advantage of this is
that it allows UPDATE to _replace_ rows and limits the amount of cleanup
required for UPDATEs.
I am hoping that wit
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > We have had very few beta1 issues. I am thinking we should release
> > beta2 next week and perhaps accelerate beta and consider a final release
> > in November rather than December. Because of the length of our feature
> > freeze it is possible we are
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Those who have been with the community from long ago might remember
discussion about implementing a undo log. The big advantage of this is
that it allows UPDATE to _replace_ rows and limits the amount of cleanup
required for UPDATEs.
I am hoping that with HOT we will no lon
Bruce Momjian wrote:
We have had very few beta1 issues. I am thinking we should release
beta2 next week and perhaps accelerate beta and consider a final release
in November rather than December. Because of the length of our feature
freeze it is possible we are not going to have as many beta bug
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> ISTM that perhaps a more generally useful definition would be
>>
>> lwordOnly ASCII letters
>> nlword Entirely letters per iswalpha(), but not lword
>> word Entirely alphanumeric per iswalnum(), b
Tom Lane wrote:
> ISTM that perhaps a more generally useful definition would be
>
> lword Only ASCII letters
> nlwordEntirely letters per iswalpha(), but not lword
> word Entirely alphanumeric per iswalnum(), but not nlword
> (hence, includes at leas
If I am reading the state machine in wparser_def.c correctly, the
three classifications of words that the default parser knows are
lword Composed entirely of ASCII letters
nlword Composed entirely of non-ASCII letters
(where "letter" is defined by iswalpha())
wor
Tom,
Thank you for the update. I am currently working on updating the
patch Neil Conway sent in against 8.0-ish that stores only the hash
in the index and locates the entries within the page using a binary
search. Then I will fold in your recent update.
On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 01:13:48PM -0700, T
Kenneth, I just pushed the revised patch (v2!). The revised approach
samples the parent relation to estimate the number of tuples rather than
performing a complete scan. In my tests, the estimate appears to be
accurate, erring on the larger side, which is fine.
Tom,
That is great. I am loo
Trevor Talbot wrote:
> On 10/17/07, Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 02:40:14AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>> Maybe we should put an #ifdef WIN32 into guc.c to limit max_connections
>>> to something we know the platform can stand? It'd be more comfortable
>>> i
18 matches
Mail list logo
