On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Haribabu kommi
wrote:
> On 12 October 2013 11:30 Tom Lane wrote:
>>Haribabu kommi writes:
>>> To handle the above case instead of directly resetting the dead tuples
>>> as zero, how if the exact dead tuples are removed from the table stats.
>>> With this approach
> > (2013/08/08 20:52), Vik Fearing wrote:
> >> As part of routine maintenance monitoring, it is interesting for us to
> >> have statistics on the CLUSTER command (timestamp of last run, and
> >> number of runs since stat reset) like we have for (auto)ANALYZE and
> >> (auto)VACUUM. Patch against t
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 1:26 AM, Gibheer wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:09:57 +0530
> Amit Kapila wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:30 AM, Gibheer
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 11:52:57 +0530
>> >> Amit Kapila wrote:
>> >
There has recently been considerable discussion around auto-tuning.
Throughout the course of this discussion, I raised the idea of
creating a new GUC to separately control autovacuum's usage of
maintenance_work_mem [1], explaining the rationale in some detail [2].
At the time Magnus seemed to think
On 10/19/2013 02:22 AM, Christopher Browne wrote:
> I would be more inclined to let GraphViz into the process than Dia;
> the former fits *much* better into a Make-based process.
I also cast my vote for Graphviz.
--
Vik
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 05:24:49PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 02:48:20PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> > wrote:
> > > It seems we've all but decided that we'll require reindexing GIN indexes
> > > in
> > > 9.4.
> >
>
On Sat, 19 Oct 2013 12:09:57 +0530
Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:30 AM, Gibheer
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 11:52:57 +0530
> >> Amit Kapila wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Gibheer
> >>> wrote
On Sat, 2013-10-19 at 00:52 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> AFAIK graphviz can give you at least .ps .svg .fig .png .gif .dia
> formats (and some other). I believe that covers most (if not all) of
> the cases you've mentioned.
I'm not concerned about that. It's the code that would need to be
written
On Fri, 2013-10-18 at 18:46 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> As to your point about not wanting to do it for a single image- it seems
> we could potentially say that for every individual image proposed, but
> if we don't keep track of those images anywhere then we may not realize
> that 5 or 10 have a
Thanks very much to Mike Blackwell and Craig Kerstiens for their
persistence through what most people would consider a tedious and
thankless task. Thanks also to the patch submitters, reviewers and
other participants.
That the formal commitfest is over does not mean that your patch won't
get revi
On 18 October 2013 16:41, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Dean Rasheed
> wrote:
>>> Personally, I think this is too fancy anyway. I'd just complete all
>>> views and foreign tables and be done with it. We don't inspect
>>> permissions either, for example. This might be t
On 18 October 2013 15:43, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> Committed.
>
Excellent. Thank you!
And thank you Marko for your thorough review.
Regards,
Dean
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Soroosh Sardari writes:
> > I need to get a Relation instance but I have only a RelFileNode!
>
> Why do you think you need to do that? Such a lookup is inherently the
> wrong thing, because relations' relfilenode values are not fixed (unless
>
Soroosh Sardari writes:
> I need to get a Relation instance but I have only a RelFileNode!
Why do you think you need to do that? Such a lookup is inherently the
wrong thing, because relations' relfilenode values are not fixed (unless
you have a lock on the relation, which presumably you don't).
Hi
I need to get a Relation instance but I have only a RelFileNode!
I see the relcache.h, only the following function seems helpful
extern Relation RelationIdGetRelation(Oid relationId);
However, there is another problem, In the RelFileNode, only relNode exist
and as comment said this is equival
15 matches
Mail list logo