Re: [HACKERS] Reduced power consumption in WAL Writer process

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs writes: >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I'd say send the signal when wal buffers are more than X% full (maybe >>> half).  The suggestion to send it when wrapping around at the end of the >>> array is not quit

Re: [HACKERS] storing TZ along timestamps

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Stuart Bishop wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Jim Nasby wrote: >> On Jun 4, 2011, at 3:56 AM, Greg Stark wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 8:58 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: I'm torn between whether the type should store the original time or the o

Re: [HACKERS] lazy vxid locks, v2

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > (1) can you re-link me to the pgbench and sysbench setup you used to > test this originally?  I'd like to implement those. I didn't use sysbench. The pgbench command I used was something like: pgbench -n -S -T $TIME -c $CLIENTS -j $CLIENTS

Re: [HACKERS] reducing the overhead of frequent table locks, v4

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 13:32 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Jul 12, 2011, at 12:02 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: >> > Yeah, I think you're right here. It's probably not much of a practical >> > concern. >> > >> > I was slightly bothered because it seem

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: a validator for configuration files

2011/7/18 Florian Pflug : > On Jul18, 2011, at 01:29 , Robert Haas wrote: >> Hmm.  Maybe what we need is a mechanism that allows the configuration >> to be associated a loadable module, and whenever that module is >> loaded, we also load the associated configuration settings.  This is >> probably t

Re: [HACKERS] patch: Allow \dd to show constraint comments

On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote: > On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote: >> I think we still need to handle my "Still TODO" concerns noted >> upthread. I don't have a lot of time this weekend due to a family >> event, but I was mulling over putting in a

Re: [HACKERS] spinlock contention

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 6:02 AM, Florian Pflug wrote: >> I don't want to fiddle with your git repo, but if you attach a patch >> that applies to the master branch I'll give it a spin if I have time. > > Patch attached. > > Beware that it needs at least GCC 4.1, otherwise it'll use a per-partition >

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Enable CHECK constraints to be declared NOT VALID

Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of dom jul 17 20:36:49 -0400 2011: > > Does git allow for additional commit fields? That would allow for easy > > tracking without much additional burden on committers. > > I mean, there's git notes, but that's not exactly what we're looking > for here, and I

Re: [HACKERS] Single pass vacuum - take 1

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > My additional requests would be that we can easily tell which blocks > have been modified like this, that we have a way to turn this off if > we get bugs for next few releases, that we check it all works with Hot > Standby just fine and that al

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Enable CHECK constraints to be declared NOT VALID

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > My understanding of git notes is that they can be added after a commit > without changing the commit - indeed that's apparently a large part of their > raison d'être: > >   A typical use of notes is to supplement a commit message without >  

Re: [HACKERS] Reduced power consumption in WAL Writer process

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > This is a bit of a detour, but probably a useful one. Attached is a > patch that replaces a tight PostmasterIsAlive() polling loop in the AV > launcher with a latch, making use of the new WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH > functionality. It's similar to

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Enable CHECK constraints to be declared NOT VALID

On 07/17/2011 08:36 PM, Robert Haas wrote: We do need a way to track this information. +1 on everything Josh said. Does git allow for additional commit fields? That would allow for easy tracking without much additional burden on committers. I mean, there's git notes, but that's not exactl

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Enable CHECK constraints to be declared NOT VALID

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > On Jul 12, 2011, at 11:30 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: This all becomes much easier if we keep the ads out of the commit messages, and stick to the technical side there. And find another venue for the other credit. >>> >>> I'm open t

Re: [HACKERS] Reduced power consumption in WAL Writer process

This is a bit of a detour, but probably a useful one. Attached is a patch that replaces a tight PostmasterIsAlive() polling loop in the AV launcher with a latch, making use of the new WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH functionality. It's similar to what we've already done for the archiver. It is relatively strai

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: a validator for configuration files

On Jul18, 2011, at 01:29 , Robert Haas wrote: > Hmm. Maybe what we need is a mechanism that allows the configuration > to be associated a loadable module, and whenever that module is > loaded, we also load the associated configuration settings. This is > probably terribly syntax, but something li

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: a validator for configuration files

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Robert Haas writes: Is there any way that we could get *rid* of custom_variable_classes? > >>> Well, we could just drop it and say you can set any dotted-name GU

[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add temp_file_limit GUC parameter to constrain temporary file sp

Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Add temp_file_limit GUC parameter to constrain temporary file space usage. > >> > >> The limit is enforced against the total amount of temp file space used by > >> each session. > >> > >> Mark Kirkwood, reviewed by C?dric Villemain

Re: [HACKERS] Re: patch review : Add ability to constrain backend temporary file space

On 18/07/11 06:25, Tom Lane wrote: Mark Kirkwood writes: [ temp-files-v6.patch.gz ] I've applied this patch with some editorialization, notably: Awesome, the changes look great! Cheers Mark -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subsc

Re: [HACKERS] Re: patch review : Add ability to constrain backend temporary file space

>> ereport(ERROR, >> (errcode(ERRCODE_QUERY_CANCELED), >> errmsg("aborting due to exceeding temp file limit, >> current usage %dkB, requested size %dkB, thus it will exceed temp file limit >> %dkB", >>

Re: [HACKERS] Reduced power consumption in WAL Writer process

Simon Riggs writes: > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'd say send the signal when wal buffers are more than X% full (maybe >> half).  The suggestion to send it when wrapping around at the end of the >> array is not quite right, because that's an arbitrary condition that's >>

Re: [HACKERS] Re: patch review : Add ability to constrain backend temporary file space

Tatsuo Ishii writes: >> You didn't show us how you computed those numbers, but I'm really >> dubious that FileWrite() has got any ability to produce numbers that >> are helpful. Like Cedric, I think the write amount in any one call >> is usually going to be one block. > Here it is(fd.c). >

Re: [HACKERS] Reduced power consumption in WAL Writer process

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Jul 15, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >>> The only difference is how bulk write operations are handled. As long >>> as we wake WALWriter before wal_buffers fills then we'll be good. >>> Wakeup once per wal buffer

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add temp_file_limit GUC parameter to constrain temporary file sp

Bruce Momjian writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Add temp_file_limit GUC parameter to constrain temporary file space usage. >> >> The limit is enforced against the total amount of temp file space used by >> each session. >> >> Mark Kirkwood, reviewed by C?dric Villemain and Tatsuo Ishii > Should we d

[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add temp_file_limit GUC parameter to constrain temporary file sp

Tom Lane wrote: > Add temp_file_limit GUC parameter to constrain temporary file space usage. > > The limit is enforced against the total amount of temp file space used by > each session. > > Mark Kirkwood, reviewed by C?dric Villemain and Tatsuo Ishii Should we document that sessions that exceed

Re: [HACKERS] Re: patch review : Add ability to constrain backend temporary file space

>> Could you please elaborate why "Current usage 8000kB" can bigger than >> "temp file limit 8kB"? I undertstand the point that temp files are >> allocated by 8kB at once, but I don't understand why those numbers you >> suggested could happen. Actually I tried with the modified patches and >> got:

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: new contrib module plpgsql's embeded sql validator

On Jul 7, 2011, at 11:31 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > a lazy deep SQL validation inside plpgsq functions is interesting > attribute. It allows to work with temporary tables and it make testing > and debugging harder, because lot of errors in embedded queries are > detected too late. I wrote a simple

Re: [HACKERS] storing TZ along timestamps

On Jul 6, 2011, at 9:24 AM, Alexey Klyukin wrote: > So, I'd think there are 2 reasonable approaches to storing the > timezone part: > > 1. Store the timezone abbreviation (i.e. 'EST' along w/ the timestamp > data). > 2. Assign OID to each of the timezones and store it w/ the timestamp. > > The f

[HACKERS] PostgreSQL Buildfarm client release 4.6

I have just released version 4.6 of the PostgreSQL Buildfarm client. It can be downloaded from: Note that this is NOT on PgFoundry, as it seems to have a rather uncertain future. Changes: * Ability to specify 'ALL

Re: [HACKERS] Re: patch review : Add ability to constrain backend temporary file space

Mark Kirkwood writes: > [ temp-files-v6.patch.gz ] I've applied this patch with some editorialization, notably: I changed the datatype of temporary_files_size to uint64 so as to avoid worries about accumulating roundoff error over a long transaction. This is probably just paranoia, since on most

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Enable CHECK constraints to be declared NOT VALID

On Jul 12, 2011, at 11:30 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>> This all becomes much easier if we keep the ads out of the commit >>> messages, and stick to the technical side there. And find another >>> venue for the other credit. >> >> I'm open to ideas. > > I think the commit log isn't actually usefu

Re: [HACKERS] psql: bogus descriptions displayed by \d+

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > After a bit of review of the archives, the somebody was me: > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=b7d67954456f15762c04e5269b64adc88dcd0860 > > and this thread was the discussion about it: > http://archives.postgresql