On 2014-12-29 12:50:23 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 12/29/2014 12:39 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> >On 29/12/14 11:16, Andres Freund wrote:
> >>On 2014-12-29 12:06:07 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >>>To be honest, I think this patch should be reverted. Instead, we should
> >>>design a sys
On 12/29/2014 12:39 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 29/12/14 11:16, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-12-29 12:06:07 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
To be honest, I think this patch should be reverted. Instead, we should
design a system where extensions can define their own SLRUs to store
additional per
On 29/12/14 11:16, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-12-29 12:06:07 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
That's a little bit better, but I have to say I'm still not impressed. There
are so many implicit assumptions in the system. The first assumption is that
a 32-bit node id is sufficient.
Seriously? A
On 2014-12-29 12:06:07 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> That's a little bit better, but I have to say I'm still not impressed. There
> are so many implicit assumptions in the system. The first assumption is that
> a 32-bit node id is sufficient.
Seriously? Are we going to build facilities for re
On 12/19/2014 11:30 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
as promised I am sending code-comment patch that explains the use of
commit timestamps + nodeid C api for the conflict resolution, comments
welcome.
That's a little bit better, but I have to say I'm still not impressed.
There are so many implicit ass
On 19/12/14 13:17, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 10/12/14 16:03, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 10/12/14 04:26, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
Yeah, it was raised. I don't think it was really addre
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 10/12/14 16:03, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> On 10/12/14 04:26, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>>> wrote:
Yeah, it was raised. I don't think it was really addressed. There was
On 10/12/14 16:03, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 10/12/14 04:26, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
Yeah, it was raised. I don't think it was really addressed. There was
lengthy discussion on whether to include LSN, node id, and/or some other
information,
On 10/12/14 04:26, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
Yeah, it was raised. I don't think it was really addressed. There was
lengthy discussion on whether to include LSN, node id, and/or some other
information, but there was no discussion on:
* What
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> On 12/04/2014 01:47 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> On 04/12/14 12:26, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/04/2014 01:16 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 04/12/14 10:42, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> On 12/03/2014 04:54 PM,
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Alex Shulgin wrote:
>
>> DEBUG: inserting column 7 value "varchar_transform"
>>
>> Breakpoint 1, GetSnapshotData (snapshot=0xdb2d60 )
>> at /home/ash/src/postgresql/src/backend/storage/ipc/procarray.c:1413
>> 1413 xmax = ShmemVariableCache->latestCompletedX
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Alex Shulgin wrote:
>
>> DEBUG: inserting column 7 value "varchar_transform"
>>
>> Breakpoint 1, GetSnapshotData (snapshot=0xdb2d60 )
>> at /home/ash/src/postgresql/src/backend/storage/ipc/procarray.c:1413
>> 1413 xmax = ShmemVariableCache->latestCompletedX
Alex Shulgin writes:
>
> Figured it out with a pg_usleep in bootstrap.c anyway. Does this look sane?
>
>
> DEBUG: inserting column 6 value "0"
> DEBUG: inserted -> 0
> DEBUG: inserting column 7 value "varchar_transform"
> TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(((xmax) >= ((TransactionId) 3)))", File:
> "/
Alex Shulgin wrote:
> DEBUG: inserting column 7 value "varchar_transform"
>
> Breakpoint 1, GetSnapshotData (snapshot=0xdb2d60 )
> at /home/ash/src/postgresql/src/backend/storage/ipc/procarray.c:1413
> 1413 xmax = ShmemVariableCache->latestCompletedXid;
>
> (gdb) p ShmemVariableCac
Craig Ringer writes:
> On 12/04/2014 10:50 PM, Alex Shulgin wrote:
>> Is there a way to pause the bootstrap process so I can attach gdb to it?
>
> With a newer gdb, you can instead tell gdb to follow all forks. I wrote
> some notes on it recently.
>
> http://blog.2ndquadrant.com/processes-breakp
On 12/04/2014 10:50 PM, Alex Shulgin wrote:
> Is there a way to pause the bootstrap process so I can attach gdb to it?
With a newer gdb, you can instead tell gdb to follow all forks. I wrote
some notes on it recently.
http://blog.2ndquadrant.com/processes-breakpoints-watchpoints-postgresql/
I've
Alvaro Herrera writes:
>
> Uh, that's odd. Can you please get a stack trace? Do you have unusual
> settings or a patched build?
Is there a way to pause the bootstrap process so I can attach gdb to it?
--
Alex
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make cha
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Alex Shulgin wrote:
>
>> Also this commit breaks initdb of `make check' for me:
>>
>> creating template1 database in
>> /home/ash/build/postgresql/HEAD/src/test/regress/./tmp_check/data/base/1
>> ... TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(((xmax) >= ((TransactionId) 3)))",
>> File:
>
Alex Shulgin wrote:
> Also this commit breaks initdb of `make check' for me:
>
> creating template1 database in
> /home/ash/build/postgresql/HEAD/src/test/regress/./tmp_check/data/base/1 ...
> TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(((xmax) >= ((TransactionId) 3)))", File:
> "/home/ash/src/postgresql/src/bac
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 12/03/2014 04:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> ir commit timestamp directly as they commit,
>> or an external transaction c
>
> Sorry, I'm late to the party, but here's some random comments on this
> after a quick review:
Also this commit breaks initdb of `make ch
On 12/04/2014 01:47 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 04/12/14 12:26, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 12/04/2014 01:16 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 04/12/14 10:42, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 12/03/2014 04:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
ir commit timestamp directly as they commit,
or an external transacti
On 04/12/14 12:26, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 12/04/2014 01:16 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 04/12/14 10:42, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 12/03/2014 04:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
ir commit timestamp directly as they commit,
or an external transaction c
Sorry, I'm late to the party, but here
On 12/04/2014 01:16 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 04/12/14 10:42, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 12/03/2014 04:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
ir commit timestamp directly as they commit,
or an external transaction c
Sorry, I'm late to the party, but here's some random comments on this
after a quick
On 04/12/14 10:42, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 12/03/2014 04:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
ir commit timestamp directly as they commit,
or an external transaction c
Sorry, I'm late to the party, but here's some random comments on this
after a quick review:
* The whole concept of a node ID see
On 12/03/2014 04:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
ir commit timestamp directly as they commit,
or an external transaction c
Sorry, I'm late to the party, but here's some random comments on this
after a quick review:
* The whole concept of a node ID seems to be undocumented, and unused.
No-one c
25 matches
Mail list logo
