On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Gregory Smith
wrote:
> On 9/16/14, 8:18 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
>> I think the main reason for slight difference is that
>> when the size of shared buffers is almost same as data size, the number
>> of buffers it needs from clock sweep are very less, as an examp
Hi all,
In the documentation of pg_recvlogical here
(http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/app-pgrecvlogical.html),
there is the following sentence:
"Create a new logical replication slot with the name specified in
--slot, using the output plugin --plugin, then exit."
Actually that's not com
Hello,
a psycopg user is reporting [1] that the library is not marking the
connection as closed and/or bad after certain errors, such as a
connection timeout. He is emulating the error by closing the
connection fd (I don't know if the two conditions result in the same
effect, but I'll stick to thi
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 7:09 AM, Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>> > 3.
>> > I find existing comments okay, is there a need to change
>> > in this case? Part of the new comment mentions
>>
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 7:09 AM, Amit Kapila
wrote:
> > 3.
> > I find existing comments okay, is there a need to change
> > in this case? Part of the new comment mentions
> > "obtaining start LSN position", actually the start position is
On 9/16/14, 8:18 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
I think the main reason for slight difference is that
when the size of shared buffers is almost same as data size, the number
of buffers it needs from clock sweep are very less, as an example in first
case (when size of shared buffers is 12286MB), it actual
On 8/28/14, 12:18 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
At least in situations that I've encountered, it's typical to be able
to determine the frequency with which a given table needs to be
vacuumed to avoid runaway bloat, and from that you can work backwards
to figure out how fast you must process it in MB/s
I have observed a scope of considerable performance improvement in-case of
index by a very minor code change.
Consider the below schema:
create table tbl2(id1 int, id2 varchar(10), id3 int);
create index idx2 on tbl2(id2, id3);
Query as:
select count(*) from tbl2 where id2>'a' an
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-09-19 17:29:08 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > I generally have serious doubts about disabling it generally for
>> > read workloads. I imagine it e.g. will significantly penalize
>> > workloads where its likely that a cleanup lock can'
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> Thoughts?
I have been poking at that during the long flight back from Chicago
and created the attached patch that makes pg_dump able to create a
replication slot (hence have pg_dump put its hands on a synchronized
snapshot describing data
Tom Lane wrote:
> Rahila Syed writes:
> > Please find attached patch to compress FPW using pglz compression.
>
> Patch not actually attached AFAICS (no, a link is not good enough).
Well, from Rahila's point of view the patch is actually attached, but
she's posting from the Nabble interface, whic
2014-09-21 18:08 GMT+02:00 Rémi Cura :
> Hey, sorry I what I say is obvious for you .
>
> If I understood your problem correctly, it is strictly equivalent to this
> one :
>
> http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Count-of-records-in-a-row-td5775363.html
>
> there is a postgres trick to solve th
2014-09-21 17:51 GMT+02:00 Andrew Gierth :
> > "Pavel" == Pavel Stehule writes:
>
> Pavel> Hi
> Pavel> I tried to solve following task:
>
> Pavel> I have a table
>
> Pavel> start, reason, km
> Pavel> =
> Pavel> 2014-01-01 08:00:00, private, 10
> Pavel> 2014-01-01 09:00:00
Hey, sorry I what I say is obvious for you .
If I understood your problem correctly, it is strictly equivalent to this
one :
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Count-of-records-in-a-row-td5775363.html
there is a postgres trick to solve this problem :
what you want is essentially generate a u
> "Pavel" == Pavel Stehule writes:
Pavel> Hi
Pavel> I tried to solve following task:
Pavel> I have a table
Pavel> start, reason, km
Pavel> =
Pavel> 2014-01-01 08:00:00, private, 10
Pavel> 2014-01-01 09:00:00, commerc, 20
Pavel> 2014-01-01 10:00:00, commerc, 20
Pavel>
2014-09-21 17:00 GMT+02:00 Mart Kelder :
> Hi Pavel (and others),
>
> Op zondag 21 september 2014 15:35:46 schreef u:
> > 2014-09-21 14:30 GMT+02:00 Mart Kelder :
> > > Hi Pavel (and others),
> > >
> > > Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > > > Hi
> > > > I tried to solve following task:
> > > >
> > > > I hav
Hi Pavel (and others),
Op zondag 21 september 2014 15:35:46 schreef u:
> 2014-09-21 14:30 GMT+02:00 Mart Kelder :
> > Hi Pavel (and others),
> >
> > Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > > Hi
> > > I tried to solve following task:
> > >
> > > I have a table
> > >
> > > start, reason, km
> > > =
Dean,
* Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On 20 September 2014 14:08, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 7:03 AM, Dean Rasheed
> > wrote:
> >> Fortunately it looks pretty trivial though. The patch attached fixes
> >> the above test cases.
> >> Obviously this needs
2014-09-21 14:30 GMT+02:00 Mart Kelder :
> Hi Pavel (and others),
>
> Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > Hi
> > I tried to solve following task:
> >
> > I have a table
> >
> > start, reason, km
> > =
> > 2014-01-01 08:00:00, private, 10
> > 2014-01-01 09:00:00, commerc, 20
> > 2014-01-01 10:0
Hi Pavel (and others),
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hi
> I tried to solve following task:
>
> I have a table
>
> start, reason, km
> =
> 2014-01-01 08:00:00, private, 10
> 2014-01-01 09:00:00, commerc, 20
> 2014-01-01 10:00:00, commerc, 20
> 2014-01-01 11:00:00, private, 8
>
> and I w
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 09/17/2014 01:51 AM, Tapan Halani wrote:
>> Hello everyone..i am new to PostgreSQL project. I had prior experience
>> with sql+ , with oracle 11g database server. Kindly help me grasp more
>> about the project.
>
> Since you're asking on pg
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 9:27 PM, Pavel Stehule
wrote:
> Hi
> I tried to solve following task:
>
> I have a table
>
> start, reason, km
> =
> 2014-01-01 08:00:00, private, 10
> 2014-01-01 09:00:00, commerc, 20
> 2014-01-01 10:00:00, commerc, 20
> 2014-01-01 11:00:00, private, 8
>
>
Hi
I tried to solve following task:
I have a table
start, reason, km
=
2014-01-01 08:00:00, private, 10
2014-01-01 09:00:00, commerc, 20
2014-01-01 10:00:00, commerc, 20
2014-01-01 11:00:00, private, 8
and I would reduce these rows to
2014-01-01 08:00:00, private, 10
2014-01-0
On 20 September 2014 14:08, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 7:03 AM, Dean Rasheed
> wrote:
>> Fortunately it looks pretty trivial though. The patch attached fixes
>> the above test cases.
>> Obviously this needs to be fixed in 9.4 and HEAD.
> Wouldn't it be better if bundled wit
On 09/17/2014 01:51 AM, Tapan Halani wrote:
> Hello everyone..i am new to PostgreSQL project. I had prior experience
> with sql+ , with oracle 11g database server. Kindly help me grasp more
> about the project.
Since you're asking on pgsql-hackers, you're presumably interested in
getting involved
25 matches
Mail list logo
