Is there any method or utility to convert content of WAL files into
Human Readable format.
xlogdump (or xlog viewer) might help. Sorry, I've never used it yet.
http://pgfoundry.org/projects/xlogviewer/
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In version
o change the parameters in later versions, i.e.
"managed_* parameters are not supported from this release. Please use
shared_buffers..." Is it a "must" to release 8.3 by this summer? I
think that delaying the release a bit for correct (reliable) vacuum
resolution is worth
From: "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Right. Which is why you're likely to see better performance if you
keep
> shared buffers smaller. There is something in dealing with it that's
> slow on win32, per reports from the field. It needs to be
investigated
> further...
> We've had reports that
From: "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> hnetcfg.dll is a part of Windows. "Home Networking Configuration
> Manager". LPK.DLL is also a part of Windows - it's the language
pack.
Thank you for information.
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 09:50:26PM +0900,
From: "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Meeting FHS requirements is no bad thing, though. And the ability to
> include a common configuration set in multiple instances is surely
> useful to a number of people. After all, you aren't forced to use
these
> facilities - I typically don't.
Thank y
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> It's still not 100% bulletproof, because it's possible that some
other
> backend is holding an open file in the database as a consequence of
> having had to dump some shared buffer for itself, but that should be
> pretty darn rare if the bgwriter is getting it
ROTECTED]>
To: "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
; "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Idea for fixing the Windows fsync problem
>
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I wrote:
>> I've committed a tentative patch along these lines to HEAD. Please
>> test.
>
> So I come home from dinner out, and find the buildfarm all red :-(
>
> I'm not sure why I didn't see this failure in my own testing, but in
> hindsight it's quite obvio
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Still, I don't understand well why config files need to be placed
>> outside the data directory, except for daring conform to FHS.
>
> The killer ar
From: "Bruce Momjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Takayuki Tsunakawa wrote:
>> In section "17.1. Setting Parameters", include directive is
described.
>> Why was this directive prepared? What usage is assumed? Is it for
>> GUI tools, or for placing cus
Hello,
Let me ask about the background of configuration files. I couldn't
find the relevant information in the 8.2 documentation. I'm sorry to
cause you trouble.
In section "17.1. Setting Parameters", include directive is described.
Why was this directive prepared? What usage is assumed? Is i
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I suggested that here
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-01/msg00642.php
> but have received no feedback about it ...
I'm sorry, I missed it.
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote
From: "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> But yeah, that's probably a good idea. A quick look at the code says
we
> should at least ask people who have this problem to give it a run
with
> logging at DEBUG5 which should then log exactly what the errorcode
was.
> Or are you seeing more places th
From: "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I'm of the opinion that the solution to FSM being fixed-size is to
keep
>> it somewhere else, ie, on disk (possibly with some sort of cache in
>> shared memory for currently-used entries).
>
> What do you think
m-san told me that Linux had a few I/O
schedulers but I'm not familiar with them. I'll find information
about them (how to change the scheduler settings) and try the same
test.
- Original Message -
From: "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Takayuki
From: "Bruce Momjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On an idle system, would someone dirty a large file, and watch the
disk
> I/O to see how long it takes for the I/O to complete to disk?
I ran "dd if=/dev/zero of= bs=8k count=`expr 1048576
/ 8`, that is, writing 1GB file with 8KB write()'s. It took abou
Hello, Inaam-san,
> There are four IO schedulers in Linux. Anticipatory, CFQ (default),
deadline, and noop. For typical OLTP type loads generally deadline is
recommended. If you are constrained on CPU and you have a good controller
then its better to use noop.
> Deadline attempts to merge requests
l Message -
From: "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Load distributed checkpoint
"Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot
From: "Greg Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> This is actually a question I'd been meaning to throw out myself to
this
> list. How hard would it be to add an internal counter to the buffer
> management scheme that kept track of the current number of dirty
pages?
> I've been looking at the bufmgr code l
From: Inaam Rana
> Which IO Shceduler (elevator) you are using?
Elevator? Sorry, I'm not familiar with the kernel implementation, so I
don't what it is. My Linux distribution is Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4.0 for
AMD64/EM64T, and the kernel is 2.6.9-42.ELsmp. I probably havn't changed
any kernel
From: "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> (5) (4) + /proc/sys/vm/dirty* tuning
> dirty_background_ratio is changed from 10 to 1, and dirty_ratio is
> changed from 40 to 4.
>
> 308 349 84 349 84
Sorry, I forgot to include the result when using Itagaki-s
Hello, Itagaki-san,
Thank you for an interesting piece of information.
From: "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> If you use linux, try the following settings:
> 1. Decrease /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio and dirty_background_ratio.
> 2. Increase wal_buffers to redule WAL flushing.
> 3. Set wal_
Hello, Mr. Grittner,
From: "Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> We have 3,000 "directly connected" users, various business partner
> interfaces, and public web entry doing OLTP in 72 databases
distributed
> around the state, with real-time replication to central databases
which
> are considered
- Original Message -
From: "Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "ITAGAKI
Takahiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Yes, I used half the size of RAM as the shared buffers, which is
>
To: "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Load distributed checkpoint
>
From: "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
&
From: "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> You were running the test on the very memory-depend machine.
>> shared_buffers = 4GB / The scaling factor is 50, 800MB of data.
> Thet would be why the patch did not work. I tested it with DBT-2,
10GB of
> data and 2GB of memory. Storage is always the
On 12/20/06, Takayuki Tsunakawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [Conclusion]
> > I believe that the problem cannot be solved in a real sense by
> > avoiding fsync/fdatasync(). We can't ignore what commercial databases
> > have done so far. The kernel does
> That implies that fsyncing a datafile blocks fsyncing the WAL. That
> seems terribly unlikely (although...). What OS/Kernel/Filesystem is
> this. I note a sync bug in linux for ext3 that may have relevence.
Oh, really? What bug? I've heard that ext3 reports wrong data to
iostat when it perform
From: "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Do you use the same delay autovacuum uses?
>
> What do you mean 'the same delay'? Autovacuum does VACUUM, not
CHECKPOINT.
> If you think cost-based-delay, I think we cannot use it here. It's
hard to
> estimat
Hello, Itagaki-san, all
I have to report a sad result. Your patch didn't work. Let's
consider the solution together. What you are addressing is very
important for the system designers in the real world -- smoothing
response time.
Recall that unpatched PostgreSQL showed the following tps's in c
Hello, Itagaki-san
> I posted a patch to PATCHES. Please try out it.
Really!? I've just joined pgsql-patches. When did you post it,
yesterday? I couldn't find the patch in the following page which
lists the mails to pgsql-patches of this month:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/200
From: "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
How about mimicing postgres with a script that starts gdb to run
> postgres? That is, rename the original postgres module to
> postgres.org and create a shell script named postgres like this:
>
> #!/bin/bash
> gdb pos
Hello, Mr. Stark
> Are there any tricks people have for debugging bootstrapping
processing? I
> just need to know what index it's trying to build here and that
should be
> enough to point me in the right direction:
As Mr. Lane says, it would be best to be able to make postgres sleep
for an arbitr
Hello, Mr. Lane
> "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> But none has appeared on pgsql-hackers ML yet. What's wrong?
>> One thing I worry about is the size. The size of my mail is 42KB.
It
>> has only text and no attachment. Is there
Hello,
Sorry for this noisy mail. If there is more appropriate address to
send to, please tell me.
I sent one mail about load-distributed checkpoint three times on the
following dates as I couldn't see the mail on the ML:
2006/12/16 17:53
2006/12/18 9:07
2006/12/18 12:10
But none has appeared
Hello,
From: "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Also, I have a dumb question... BgBufferSync uses buf_id1 to keep
track
> of what buffer the bgwriter_all scan is looking at, which means that
> it should remember where it was at the end of the last scan; yet
it's
> initialized to 0 every time BgBu
Mr. Riggs,
Thank you for teaching me the following. I seem to have misunderstood.
I'll learn more.
From: "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 11:05 +0900, Takayuki Tsunakawa wrote:
>> I understand that checkpoints occur during crash
>>
Hello,
From: "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Takayuki Tsunakawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm afraid it is difficult for system designers to expect steady
>> throughput/response time, as long as PostgreSQL depends on the
>>
38 matches
Mail list logo
