Re: [HACKERS] Scalable postgresql using sys_epoll

2004-03-10 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > >IBM has rewritten their Domino database system to use the new > >sys_epoll call available in the Linux 2.6 kernel. > > > >Would Postgresql benefit from using this API? Is anyone looking at > >this? > I'm not familiar enough with the postgres internal

Re: [HACKERS] Named arguments in function calls

2004-01-26 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004, Tom Lane wrote: > >> If that was IS, then foo(x is 13) makes sense. > > > I like that syntax. For example > > select interest(amount is 500.00, rate is 1.3) > > is very readable, yet brief. > > On second thought though, it doesn't work. > > select func(x is null); > > i

Re: [HACKERS] Preventing stack-overflow crashes (improving on

2003-12-31 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > > Is ABS enough on a 64-bit architecture ? > > That was pseudocode, I wasn't actually planning to rely on a function. > Something more like > > longdiff; FWIW, ISO has a ptrdiff_t, which may be useful here. Matthew. > diff = stack_base_ptr

Re: [HACKERS] Pre-allocation of shared memory ...

2003-06-14 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > $ ls -l /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory > > -rw-r--r--1 root root0 Jun 14 18:58 > > /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory > > $ uname -a > > Linux stinky.hoopy.net 2.4.20-20.1.1995.2.2.nptl #1 Fri May 23 12:18:31 EDT 2003 > > i686 i686 i386

Re: [HACKERS] Pre-allocation of shared memory ...

2003-06-14 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > The trouble with this advice is that if I am an SA wanting to run a > DBMS server, I will want to run a kernel supplied by a vendor, not an > arbitrary kernel released by a developer, even one as respected as > Alan Cox. Like, say, Red Hat: $ ls -l /p

Re: [HACKERS] Suggestion; "WITH VACUUM" option

2002-12-17 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, mlw wrote: > update largetable set foo=bar; > > Lets also assume that "largetable" has tens of millions of rows. [..] > On some of my databases a statement which updates all the rows is > unworkable in PostgreSQL, on Oracle, however, there is no poblem. .. provided you have a

Re: [HACKERS] HEADS UP: Win32/OS2/BeOS native ports

2002-05-07 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 7 May 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > > Nobody actually needs to connect to the socket. Simple, > > race-free, 10 lines of code. > > ... and we already do it. But it protects the port number, not > the data directory. If I understood him correctly, Marc was suggesting a further domain socket i

Re: [HACKERS] HEADS UP: Win32/OS2/BeOS native ports

2002-05-07 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Mon, 6 May 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > > As a backend is started up, connect to that socket ... if socket is open > > when trying to start a new frontend, fail as there are currently other > > connections attached to it? > > But the backends would only have the socket open, they'd not be > activel

Re: [HACKERS] HEADS UP: Win32/OS2/BeOS native ports

2002-05-04 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Fri, 3 May 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > But what we must *not* do is allow a new postmaster to start while the > old backends are still running; that would mean two sets of backends > running without contact with each other, which would be fatal for data > integrity. The SysV API lets us detect th

Re: [HACKERS] Bitmap indexes?

2002-03-19 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Oleg Bartunov wrote: Sorry to reply over you, Oleg. > On 13 Mar 2002, Greg Copeland wrote: > > > One of the reasons why I originally stated following the hackers list is > > because I wanted to implement bitmap indexes. I found in the archives, > > the follow link, http://w

Re: [HACKERS] Survey results on Oracle/M$NT4 to PG72/RH72 migration

2002-03-14 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Jean-Paul ARGUDO wrote: > This daemon wakes up every 5 seconds. It scans (SELECT...) for new > insert in a table (lika trigger). When new tuples are found, it > launches the work. The work consist in computing total sales of a big > store... You might find it worthwhile to i

Re: [HACKERS] anoncvs and CVS link off developers.postgresql.org

2001-10-06 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Sat, 6 Oct 2001, Larry Rosenman wrote: > If I try: > cvs -d :pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvsroot login > I get a time out Moi aussi. I can't reach www.postgresql.org either. It doesn't seem obviously to be a routing problem. Matthew. ---(end of broadcast)--

Re: [HACKERS] Notes about int8 sequences

2001-08-07 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > > I'm not worried about the size of the return type of > > a sequence, but I like the idea of Oracle-compatible > > "seq.nextval" syntax. > > I didn't realize we had any Oracle-compatibility issues here. What > exactly does Oracle's sequence facility look li

Re: [HACKERS] Notes about int8 sequences

2001-08-07 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > * How should one invoke nextval() and friends on such a sequence? > Perhaps we could allow people to write nextval(sequencename) and/or > sequencename.nextval, which would expose the sequence object to the > parser so that datatype overloading could occur.

Re: [HACKERS] Performance TODO items

2001-07-31 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > * Improve spinlock code, perhaps with OS semaphores, sleeper queue, or > spining to obtain lock on multi-cpu systems You may be interested in a discussion which happened over on linux-kernel a few months ago. Quite a lot of people want a lightweight

Re: [HACKERS] Re: New Linux xfs/reiser file systems

2001-05-03 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Thu, 3 May 2001, mlw wrote: > I would bet it is a huge amount of work to use a "table space" system > and no one wants that. >From some stracing of 7.1, the most common syscall issued by postgres is an lseek() to the end of the file, presumably to find its length, which seems to happen up to

[HACKERS] Archived redo logs / Managed recovery mode?

2001-04-27 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
Hi, Firstly, the attached patch implements archiving of off- line redo logs, via the wal_archive_dir GUC option. It builds and appears to work (though it looks like guc-file.l has some problems with unquoted strings containing slashes). TODO: handle EXDEV from link/rename, and copy rather than

Re: [HACKERS] Spinlocks on SGI's

2001-03-27 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Robert E. Bruccoleri wrote: > BTW, SGI is distributing its compilers for Linux/Intel under an > open source license. Depending on the progress of Intel chips > versus MIPS chips, the cost issue of the compilers on SGI's will > eventually disappear. Do you mean their ia64 co

Re: [HACKERS] WAL & SHM principles

2001-03-13 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Alfred Perlstein wrote: [..] > Linux does not filesystem-sync file-backed writable mmap pages on a > regular basis. Very intersting. I'm not sure that is necessarily the case in 2.4, though -- my understanding is that the new all-singing, all-dancing page cache makes very l

Re: [HACKERS] WAL & SHM principles

2001-03-13 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Ken Hirsch wrote: > > mlock() guarantees that the locked address space is in memory. This > > doesn't imply that updates are not written to the backing file. > > I've wondered about this myself. It _is_ true on Linux that mlock > prevents writes to the backing store, I don

Re: [HACKERS] Re: PostgreSQL on multi-CPU systems

2001-03-13 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Thomas Lockhart wrote: > > did anyone from here follow the discussion about postgresql on > > smp machines on the linux kernel malinglist in the last days? > > (just as an info) > > I didn't. Do you have a synopsis or references? The thread starts here: http://www.mail-arc

Re: [HACKERS] RE: xlog checkpoint depends on sync() ... seems unsafe

2001-03-13 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > > I was told the same a long ago about FreeBSD. How much can we count on > > this undocumented sync() feature? > > Sounds quite unreliable to me. Unless there's some interlock ... > like, say, the second sync not being able to advance past a buffer > page

[HACKERS] Multi-process pgbench?

2001-03-04 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
Hi, Did I read allegations here a while ago that someone had a multi-process version of pgbench? I've poked around the website and mail archives, but couldn't find it. I have access to a couple of 4-CPU boxes, and reckon that a single-process benching tool could well prove a bottleneck. Matthe

[HACKERS] Re: mmap for zeroing WAL log

2001-02-28 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > Matthew Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I had assumed that the overhead would come from synchronous > > metadata incurring writes of at least the inode, block bitmap > > and probably an indirect block for each syscall.

[HACKERS] Re: mmap for zeroing WAL log

2001-02-27 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Sat, 24 Feb 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I am confused why mmap() is better than writing to a real file. > > > It isn't, except that it allows to initialise the logfile in > > one syscall, without first allocating and zeroing (and hence > > dirtying) 16Mb of memory. > > Uh, the existing code d

Re: [HACKERS] WAL and commit_delay

2001-02-19 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Matthew Kirkwood wrote: > BTW, I have attached two patches which streamline log initialisation > a little. The first (xlog-sendfile.diff) adds support for Linux's > sendfile system call. Whoops, don't use this. It looks like Linux won't sendfile

Re: [HACKERS] WAL and commit_delay

2001-02-19 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Sun, 18 Feb 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > I think that there may be a performance advantage to pre-filling the > logfile even so, assuming that file allocation info is stored in a > Berkeley/McKusik-like fashion (note: I have no idea what ext2 or > reiserfs actually do). ext2 is a lot like [UF]FS.

Re: [HACKERS] Linux 2.2 vs 2.4

2001-02-18 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > the default -B is way too small for WAL. OK, here are some 2.4 numbers with 1K transactions/client and -B10240. > Huh? With the exception of the 16-user case (possibly measurement > noise), 2.4 looks better across the board, AFAICS. But see below. OK.

[HACKERS] beta4 RPM bug

2001-02-18 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
Hi, There seems to be a teeny-tiny bug in the beta4 RPMS. /etc/rc.d/init.d/postgresql contains: # PGVERSION is: PGVERSION=7.1beta3 Matthew.

[HACKERS] Linux 2.2 vs 2.4

2001-02-17 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
Hi, Not sure if anyone will find this of interest, but I ran pgbench on my main Linux box to see what sort of performance difference might be visible between 2.2 and 2.4 kernels. Hardware: A dual P3-450 with 384Mb of RAM and 3 SCSI disks. The pg datafiles live in a half-gig partition on the firs

Re: [HACKERS] SSL Connections

2000-12-21 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Oliver Elphick wrote: > To create a quick self-signed certificate, use the CA.pl script > included in OpenSSL: > > CA.pl -newcert Or you can do it manually: openssl req -new -text -out cert.req (you will have to enter a password) mv privkey.pem cert.pem.pw openssl rsa -in

Re: [HACKERS] F_SETLK is looking worse and worse...

2000-11-29 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote: > That is, if the socket file name is /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432, we'd create a > plain file /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432.lock > I can only think of one scenario where this is worse than what we have > now: if someone is running a /tmp-directory-sweeper that is bright > enough

Re: [HACKERS] 8192 BLCKSZ ?

2000-11-29 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote: > Nathan Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > In the event of a power outage, the drive will stop writing in > > mid-sector. > > Really? Any competent drive firmware designer would've made sure that > can't happen. The drive has to detect power loss well b

Re: [HACKERS] Autoconf version discrepancies

2000-10-09 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Sun, 8 Oct 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Are there any platforms that do not have mktemp? Hard to imagine. mktemp(1) or mktemp(3)? The latter is pretty much universal (and dangerous too). The former is, AFAICS, available only on some Linux and BSD. But it's under the BSD licence, and is not