On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:28 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> [Action required within three days. This is a generic notification.]
>
> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item. Robert,
> since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
> item. If some
On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 10:45:26AM +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >> Based on the earlier discussions, I have prepared a patch that would
> >> allow pgstathashindex() to show the number of unused pages in hash
> >> index. Please find the attached patch for the same. Thanks.
> >
> > My idea is that
Hi,
>>
>> Based on the earlier discussions, I have prepared a patch that would
>> allow pgstathashindex() to show the number of unused pages in hash
>> index. Please find the attached patch for the same. Thanks.
>
> My idea is that we shouldn't end up with both a zero_pages column and
> an unused_
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>> Yeah, but I think "unused" might be better. Because a page could be
>> in use (as an overflow page or primary bucket page) and still be
>> empty.
>
> Based on the earlier discussions, I have prepared a patch that would
> allow pgstathashi
>>
>> +1. If we consider some more names for that column then probably one
>> alternative could be "empty pages".
>
> Yeah, but I think "unused" might be better. Because a page could be
> in use (as an overflow page or primary bucket page) and still be
> empty.
>
>
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:24 PM, Ashutosh Sharma
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Amit Kapila
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:24 PM, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Amit Kapila
>>> wrote:
> Maybe we should call them "unused pages".
>>
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:24 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
Maybe we should call them "unused pages".
>>>
>>> +1. If we consider some more names for that column then probably on
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> Maybe we should call them "unused pages".
>>
>> +1. If we consider some more names for that column then probably one
>> alternative could be "empty pages".
>
> Yeah, but I think "unu
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Maybe we should call them "unused pages".
>
> +1. If we consider some more names for that column then probably one
> alternative could be "empty pages".
Yeah, but I think "unused" might be better. Because a page could be
in use (as an overf
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 2:04 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
>>> Committed with those changes.
>>
>> Thanks for above corrections and commit. But, There are couple of
>> things that we might have to change once the patch for 'WAL in Hash
>> Index
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>> Committed with those changes.
>
> Thanks for above corrections and commit. But, There are couple of
> things that we might have to change once the patch for 'WAL in Hash
> Indexes' gets checked-in.
>
> 1) The test-case result needs to be c
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 1:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> Committed with those changes.
>
> Thanks for above corrections and commit. But, There are couple of
> things that we might have to change once the patch for 'WAL in Hash
> Indexes' g
On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 1:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:13 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 8:36 PM, Kuntal Ghosh
>> wrote:
>>> Nothing else to add from my side. I'm marking this 'Ready for commiter'.
>>
>> Moved to CF 2017-03 with the same status.
>
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:13 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 8:36 PM, Kuntal Ghosh
> wrote:
>> Nothing else to add from my side. I'm marking this 'Ready for commiter'.
>
> Moved to CF 2017-03 with the same status.
OK, I took a look at this.
- The handling of the extension s
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 8:36 PM, Kuntal Ghosh
wrote:
> Nothing else to add from my side. I'm marking this 'Ready for commiter'.
Moved to CF 2017-03 with the same status.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>> I've looked at the patch. It looks good. However, I was wondering why
>> an exclusive lock for extension is necessary for reading the number
>> blocks in this case. Please refer to the following code.
>>
>> + /* Get the current rela
> I've looked at the patch. It looks good. However, I was wondering why
> an exclusive lock for extension is necessary for reading the number
> blocks in this case. Please refer to the following code.
>
> + /* Get the current relation length */
> + LockRelationForExtension(rel, Exclusiv
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please find the attached v4 patch rebased on a latest commitID in
> head. I had to rebase it as the following git commit has some changes
> in pgstatindex.c file due to which 'git apply' was failing.
>
I've looked at the patch. It l
Hi,
Please find the attached v4 patch rebased on a latest commitID in
head. I had to rebase it as the following git commit has some changes
in pgstatindex.c file due to which 'git apply' was failing.
commit f21a563d25dbae153937aec062161184189478b8
Author: Peter Eisentraut
Date: Fri Jan 20 20:
> However, I've some minor comments on the patch:
>
> +/*
> + * HASH_ALLOCATABLE_PAGE_SZ represents allocatable
> + * space (pd_upper - pd_lower) on a hash page.
> + */
> +#define HASH_ALLOCATABLE_PAGE_SZ \
> + BLCKSZ - \
> + (SizeOfPageHeaderData + sizeof(HashPageOpaque
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
I've successfully applied the patch on the latest head and ran a
regression tests without any failure. There is no major changes.
However, I've some minor comments on the patch:
+/*
+ * HASH_ALLOCATABLE_PAGE_SZ represents allocatable
+ * spa
Hi,
> I think the calculation for max available spcae is wrong here. You
> should subtract the page header and special area from the total page size.
> A check for non-zero denominator should be added while calculating the
> percentage.
> There can be multiple bitmap pages. Right?
Yes, we can hav
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 7:22 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I have introduced a new function 'pgstathashindex()' inside pgstatuple
> extension to view the statistics related to hash index table.
>
I think this feature is going to be helpful. I've some initial review
for the patch.
I've n
24 matches
Mail list logo
