On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 4:51 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 10/5/16 9:58 AM, Francisco Olarte wrote:
>> Is the system catalog a bottleneck for people who has real use for
>> paralell vacuum? I mean, to me someone who does this must have a very
>> big db on a big iron. If that does not consist of thousa
On 10/5/16 9:58 AM, Francisco Olarte wrote:
Is the system catalog a bottleneck for people who has real use for
paralell vacuum? I mean, to me someone who does this must have a very
big db on a big iron. If that does not consist of thousands and
thousands of smallish relations, it will normally be
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Francisco Olarte
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> >> wrote:
> > ...
> >>> I wonder if the real answer isn't just to disallow -f with parallel
> >>> vacuumin
Robert:
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Francisco Olarte
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>>> wrote:
>> ...
I wonder if the real answer isn't just to dis
On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Francisco Olarte
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> wrote:
> ...
>>> I wonder if the real answer isn't just to disallow -f with parallel
>>> vacuuming.
>> Seems like we should figure o
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
...
>> I wonder if the real answer isn't just to disallow -f with parallel
>> vacuuming.
> Seems like we should figure out which catalog tables are needed in
> order to perform a VACUUM,
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Francisco Olarte
>> wrote:
>> > After some messages due to vacuumdb auto-deadlocking itself on the
>> > system tables when doing paralell vacuum of a full database I
>> > suggested addi
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Francisco Olarte
>> What messages are you seeing, exactly? "auto-deadlocking" isn't a thing.
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/57EBC9AE.2060302%40163.com
Besides that even the do
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Francisco Olarte
> wrote:
> > After some messages due to vacuumdb auto-deadlocking itself on the
> > system tables when doing paralell vacuum of a full database I
> > suggested adding some flags to make vacuumdb process schemas. I was
> > aske
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Francisco Olarte
wrote:
> After some messages due to vacuumdb auto-deadlocking itself on the
> system tables when doing paralell vacuum of a full database I
> suggested adding some flags to make vacuumdb process schemas. I was
> asked wether I could write a patch
On 9/30/16, Francisco Olarte wrote:
> Hello everyone.
Hello, Francisco!
> Also, although I feel confident in my coding I have zero knowledge of
> developing for postgres,
It is easy enough and all important steps are documented in the wiki.
Also some interesting things can be found in presentat
Hello everyone. I've been using the bugs/general mailing lists for a
while, but never been on hackers, so please take that into account.
After some messages due to vacuumdb auto-deadlocking itself on the
system tables when doing paralell vacuum of a full database I
suggested adding some flags to m
12 matches
Mail list logo
