Re: [HACKERS] Rewrite, normal execution vs. EXPLAIN ANALYZE

2010-08-30 Thread Marko Tiikkaja
On 2010-08-31 12:07 AM +0300, I wrote: I looked at fixing this.. The previous patch had a bug in fmgr_sql() our regression tests didn't catch. Fixed version attached. Regards, Marko Tiikkaja *** a/src/backend/catalog/pg_proc.c --- b/src/backend/catalog/pg_proc.c *** *** 832,838

Re: [HACKERS] Rewrite, normal execution vs. EXPLAIN ANALYZE

2010-08-30 Thread Marko Tiikkaja
Hi, I looked at fixing this inconsistency by making all query list snapshot handling work like EXPLAIN ANALYZE's code does. The only reason I went this way was that implementing wCTEs on top of this behaviour is a lot easier. There were three places that needed fixing. The SPI and portal l

Re: [HACKERS] How to construct an exact plan

2010-08-30 Thread Pavel Stehule
2010/8/30 Pei He : > Hi, > I am hacking postgresql 8.2.5. a) and b) do not work for me. > > The situation is that I made a join operator, and a scan operator. > And, The join operator requires the scan operator as the inner. So, I > need to have the full control of the join plan. > > I am not ready

Re: [HACKERS] How to construct an exact plan

2010-08-30 Thread Pei He
Hi, I am hacking postgresql 8.2.5. a) and b) do not work for me. The situation is that I made a join operator, and a scan operator. And, The join operator requires the scan operator as the inner. So, I need to have the full control of the join plan. I am not ready to provide the optimization supp

Re: [HACKERS] How to construct an exact plan

2010-08-30 Thread Pei He
I forgot to mention that I am using postgresql 8.2.5. Thanks -- Pei On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Pei He wrote: > Hi, > I have developed a new operators, and I want to do some tests on it. > I do not want the optimizer to choose the plan for me, and I need to > construct a plan as exact as I

Re: [HACKERS] thousand unrelated data files in pg_default tablespace

2010-08-30 Thread Pavel Stehule
2010/8/30 Tom Lane : > Pavel Stehule writes: >> I found a PostgreSQL 8.3 server (Linux) used for large OLAP where the >> data directory is bloating. There are more than one hundred thousand >> files - 8KB or 0KB long. The filenames are not transformable to names >> via oid2name. Does somebody know

[HACKERS] How to construct an exact plan

2010-08-30 Thread Pei He
Hi, I have developed a new operators, and I want to do some tests on it. I do not want the optimizer to choose the plan for me, and I need to construct a plan as exact as I want. Can anyone provide me a way to achieve that? Thanks -- Pei -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@pos

Re: [HACKERS] thousand unrelated data files in pg_default tablespace

2010-08-30 Thread Tom Lane
Pavel Stehule writes: > I found a PostgreSQL 8.3 server (Linux) used for large OLAP where the > data directory is bloating. There are more than one hundred thousand > files - 8KB or 0KB long. The filenames are not transformable to names > via oid2name. Does somebody know about similar bug? 1. 8.3

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure on HEAD (or at least git copy of it)

2010-08-30 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > I guess that something isn't properly setting up rnode.backend in > recovery processing, but didn't find it yet. CreateFakeRelcacheEntry is the culprit ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure on HEAD (or at least git copy of it)

2010-08-30 Thread Tom Lane
"Kevin Grittner" writes: > LOG: database system was interrupted; last known up at 2010-08-30 > 09:13:23 CDT > LOG: database system was not properly shut down; automatic recovery in > progress > LOG: consistent recovery state reached at 0/5C5D04 > LOG: redo starts at 0/5C5D04 > TRAP: FailedAsse

[HACKERS] thousand unrelated data files in pg_default tablespace

2010-08-30 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello I found a PostgreSQL 8.3 server (Linux) used for large OLAP where the data directory is bloating. There are more than one hundred thousand files - 8KB or 0KB long. The filenames are not transformable to names via oid2name. Does somebody know about similar bug? Regards Pavel Stehule -- Se

Re: [HACKERS] string function - "format" function proposal

2010-08-30 Thread Pavel Stehule
2010/8/30 Alvaro Herrera : > Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of lun ago 30 07:51:55 -0400 2010: >> 2010/8/30 Itagaki Takahiro : >> > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 7:58 PM, Pavel Stehule >> > wrote: >> >> propsals: >> >> * "format" function - uses same formatting as PL/pgSQL RAISE statement >> >>

Re: [HACKERS] bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process

2010-08-30 Thread Markus Wanner
Hi, On 08/30/2010 04:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Let me just point out that awhile back we got a *measurable* performance boost by eliminating a single indirect fetch from the buffer addressing code path. I'll take a look a that, thanks. So I don't have any faith in untested assertions Neither

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure on HEAD (or at least git copy of it)

2010-08-30 Thread Tom Lane
Joe Conway writes: > I'm seeing it on a checkout from CVS head. Basically do Oh, OK, I misread Kevin to say this would happen during make installcheck itself. So the lack of buildfarm reports is not relevant. Will get some caffeine in me and then take a look. regards, t

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure on HEAD (or at least git copy of it)

2010-08-30 Thread Joe Conway
On 08/30/2010 08:16 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > "Kevin Grittner" writes: >> Checking out HEAD from the git repository I see an assertion >> failure. > > The buildfarm isn't reporting any such thing. Could you get a CVS > checkout and diff it against the git results? I'm seeing it on a checkout from C

Re: [HACKERS] string function - "format" function proposal

2010-08-30 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of lun ago 30 07:51:55 -0400 2010: > 2010/8/30 Itagaki Takahiro : > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 7:58 PM, Pavel Stehule > > wrote: > >> propsals: > >> * "format" function - uses same formatting as PL/pgSQL RAISE statement > >> * "sprintf" function > >> > >> Now

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure on HEAD (or at least git copy of it)

2010-08-30 Thread Kevin Grittner
Tom Lane wrote: > Could you get a CVS checkout and diff it against the git results? Will do. -Kevin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure on HEAD (or at least git copy of it)

2010-08-30 Thread Tom Lane
"Kevin Grittner" writes: > Checking out HEAD from the git repository I see an assertion > failure. The buildfarm isn't reporting any such thing. Could you get a CVS checkout and diff it against the git results? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (

Re: [HACKERS] bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process

2010-08-30 Thread Tom Lane
Markus Wanner writes: > AFAICT we currently have three fixed size blocks to manage shared > buffers: the buffer blocks themselves, the buffer descriptors, the > strategy status (for the freelist) and the buffer lookup table. > It's not obvious to me how these data structures should perform bett

[HACKERS] Assertion failure on HEAD (or at least git copy of it)

2010-08-30 Thread Kevin Grittner
Checking out HEAD from the git repository I see an assertion failure. Steps to reproduce: make distclean ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/pgsql-serializable \ --enable-debug --enable-depend --enable-cassert make check sudo make install cd contrib/ make sudo make install cd ../ rm -fr /var/pgsql

Re: [HACKERS] cost_hashjoin

2010-08-30 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 13:34 +0100, Greg Stark wrote: > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > > cost_hashjoin() has some treatment of what occurs when numbatches > 1 > > but that additional cost is not proportional to numbatches. > > Because that's not how our hash batching works.

Re: [HACKERS] cost_hashjoin

2010-08-30 Thread Greg Stark
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > cost_hashjoin() has some treatment of what occurs when numbatches > 1 > but that additional cost is not proportional to numbatches. Because that's not how our hash batching works. We generate two temp files for each batch, one for the outer a

Re: [HACKERS] pg_subtrans keeps bloating up in the standby

2010-08-30 Thread Fujii Masao
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 09:59 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >> However, is it safe to use GetOldestXMin() during recovery? Or to put it >> other way, is GetOldestXMin() functioning correctly during hot standby? >> It only scans through the P

register/unregister standby Re: [HACKERS] Synchronous replication

2010-08-30 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:58 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 05/08/10 17:14, Fujii Masao wrote: >> >> I'm thinking to make users register and unregister each standbys via SQL >> functions like register_standby() and unregister_standby(): > > The register/unregister facility should be accessible

Re: [HACKERS] string function - "format" function proposal

2010-08-30 Thread Pavel Stehule
2010/8/30 Itagaki Takahiro : > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 7:58 PM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: >> propsals: >> * "format" function - uses same formatting as PL/pgSQL RAISE statement >> * "sprintf" function >> >> Now I propose a compromise - "format" function with only three tags: >> %s .. some string >>

Re: [HACKERS] string function - "format" function proposal

2010-08-30 Thread Itagaki Takahiro
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 7:58 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > propsals: > * "format" function - uses same formatting as PL/pgSQL RAISE statement > * "sprintf" function > > Now I propose a compromise - "format" function with only three tags: > %s .. some string > %i  .. SQL identifier > %l  .. string lit

[HACKERS] string function - "format" function proposal

2010-08-30 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello I am returning back to string functions. For me, the most important function isn't commited still. There was discussion about "format" or "sprintf" fuction. So I'll do a small resume. goal: to get function that helps with formatting a message texts and helps with building a SQL commands (us

[HACKERS] cost_hashjoin

2010-08-30 Thread Simon Riggs
cost_hashjoin() has some treatment of what occurs when numbatches > 1 but that additional cost is not proportional to numbatches. The associated comment talks about "an extra time", making it sound like we think numbatches would only ever be 2 (or 1). Can someone explain the current code, or is

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing the Xact commit order to the user

2010-08-30 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2010-05-23 at 16:21 -0400, Jan Wieck wrote: > In some systems (data warehousing, replication), the order of commits is > important, since that is the order in which changes have become visible. > This information could theoretically be extracted from the WAL, but > scanning the entire WAL

Re: [HACKERS] pg_subtrans keeps bloating up in the standby

2010-08-30 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 09:59 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > However, is it safe to use GetOldestXMin() during recovery? Or to put it > other way, is GetOldestXMin() functioning correctly during hot standby? > It only scans through the ProcArray, but not the known-assigned xids > array. That

Re: [HACKERS] bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process

2010-08-30 Thread Markus Wanner
(Sorry, need to disable Ctrl-Return, which quite often sends mails earlier than I really want.. continuing my mail) On 08/27/2010 10:46 PM, Robert Haas wrote: Yeah, probably. I think designing something that works efficiently over a network is a somewhat different problem than designing someth

Re: [HACKERS] bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process

2010-08-30 Thread Markus Wanner
Hi, On 08/27/2010 10:46 PM, Robert Haas wrote: What other subsystems are you imagining servicing with a dynamic allocator? If there were a big demand for this functionality, we probably would have been forced to implement it already, but that's not the case. We've already discussed the fact th

Re: [HACKERS] upcoming wraps

2010-08-30 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On sön, 2010-08-29 at 23:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > And what about 9.1alpha1? > > Peter muttered something about doing that this week. The major blocker is preparing the release notes. If someone has time for that ... -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To

Re: [HACKERS] pg_subtrans keeps bloating up in the standby

2010-08-30 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 09:59 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 27/08/10 20:17, Fujii Masao wrote: > > Yes. StartupXLOG calls that before bgwriter is invoked. That is, we can > > ensure that StartupSUBTRANS has always been done before bgwriter > > performs a restartpoint. > > Hmm, the comment in

Re: [HACKERS] pg_subtrans keeps bloating up in the standby

2010-08-30 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 27/08/10 20:17, Fujii Masao wrote: Yes. StartupXLOG calls that before bgwriter is invoked. That is, we can ensure that StartupSUBTRANS has always been done before bgwriter performs a restartpoint. Hmm, the comment in CreateCheckpoint() isn't totally accurate either: * Truncate pg_subtrans