On 03/31/2015 09:09 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 03/30/2015 09:01 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
commit 2c03216d831160bedd72d45f7 has invalidated the part of the docs
saying "If no WAL has been written since the previous checkpoint, new
checkpoin
On 03/30/2015 09:01 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
commit 2c03216d831160bedd72d45f7 has invalidated the part of the docs
saying "If no WAL has been written since the previous checkpoint, new
checkpoints will be skipped even if checkpoint_timeout has passed",
presumably by accident.
It seems that this par
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> This has the advantage that you can calculate the CRC for all the other
> fields before acquiring WALInsertLock. For xl_prev, you need to know where
> exactly the record is inserted, so it's handy that it's the last field
> before CRC.
On fre, 2012-06-15 at 00:01 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> 1. Use a 64-bit segment number, instead of the log/seg combination. And
> don't waste the last segment on each logical 4 GB log file. The concept
> of a "logical log file" is now completely gone. XLogRecPtr is unchanged,
> but it sho
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
>> So I think we should change pg_resetxlog -l option to take a WAL file
>> name as argument, and fix pg_upgrade accordingly.
> Seems reasonable I guess. It's
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> So I think we should change pg_resetxlog -l option to take a WAL file
> name as argument, and fix pg_upgrade accordingly.
Seems reasonable I guess. It's really specifying a starting WAL
location, but only to file granularity, so treating the argument as a
file name
Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of lun jun 25 20:09:34 -0400 2012:
> On 25.06.2012 21:01, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> >>> "<<" should be">>". The attached patch fixes this typo.
> >>
> >> Oh, I forgot to attach the patch.. Here is the pa
On 25.06.2012 21:01, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
"<<" should be">>". The attached patch fixes this typo.
Oh, I forgot to attach the patch.. Here is the patch.
I committed both of the patches you posted to this thread.
Thanks Robert. I was thinkin
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> "<<" should be ">>". The attached patch fixes this typo.
>
> Oh, I forgot to attach the patch.. Here is the patch.
I committed both of the patches you posted to this thread.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enter
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
> wrote:
>> Ok, committed all the WAL format changes now.
>
> I found the typo.
>
> In walsender.c
> - reply.write.xlogid, reply.write.xrecoff,
> - reply.flush.x
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> Ok, committed all the WAL format changes now.
I found the typo.
In walsender.c
-reply.write.xlogid, reply.write.xrecoff,
-reply.flush.xlogid, reply.flush.xrecoff,
-reply.apply.xlogid, rep
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> Ok, committed all the WAL format changes now.
This breaks pg_resetxlog -l at all. When I ran "pg_resetxlog -l 0x01,0x01,0x01"
in the HEAD, I got the following error message though the same command
successfully completed in 9.1.
pg_
On 24 June 2012 17:24, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> Ok, committed all the WAL format changes now.
Nice!
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Ok, committed all the WAL format changes now.
On 19.06.2012 18:57, Robert Haas wrote:
Should we keep the old representation in the replication protocol messages?
That would make it simpler to write a client that works with different
server versions (like pg_receivexlog). Or, while we're at it, p
On 20.06.2012 20:43, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:14 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
Well, that was easier than I thought. Attached is a patch to make XLogRecPtr
a uint
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:14 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> wrote:
>>> Well, that was easier than I thought. Attached is a patch to make XLogRecPtr
>>> a uint64, on top of my other WAL for
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:14 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
> wrote:
>> Well, that was easier than I thought. Attached is a patch to make XLogRecPtr
>> a uint64, on top of my other WAL format patches. I think we should go ahead
>> with this.
>
> +1.
>
Hi,
On Wednesday, June 20, 2012 12:24:54 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 19.06.2012 18:46, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 19, 2012 10:14:08 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> Well, that was easier than I thought. Attached is a patch to make
> >> XLogRecPtr a uint64, on top of my other
On 19.06.2012 18:46, Andres Freund wrote:
On Tuesday, June 19, 2012 10:14:08 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Well, that was easier than I thought. Attached is a patch to make
XLogRecPtr a uint64, on top of my other WAL format patches. I think we
should go ahead with this.
Cool. You plan to merge X
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:14 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> Well, that was easier than I thought. Attached is a patch to make XLogRecPtr
> a uint64, on top of my other WAL format patches. I think we should go ahead
> with this.
+1.
> The LSNs on pages are still stored in the old format, to avoi
On Tuesday, June 19, 2012 10:14:08 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 18.06.2012 21:08, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > On 18.06.2012 21:00, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Andres Freund
> >>
> >> wrote:
> 1. Use a 64-bit segment number, instead of the log/seg combinatio
On Monday, June 18, 2012 09:19:48 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 18.06.2012 21:45, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On Monday, June 18, 2012 08:32:54 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> On 18.06.2012 21:13, Andres Freund wrote:
> >>> On Monday, June 18, 2012 08:08:14 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Th
On 18.06.2012 21:45, Andres Freund wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2012 08:32:54 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 18.06.2012 21:13, Andres Freund wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2012 08:08:14 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
The page header contains an XLogRecPtr (LSN), so if we change it we'll
have to deal
On Monday, June 18, 2012 08:32:54 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 18.06.2012 21:13, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On Monday, June 18, 2012 08:08:14 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> The page header contains an XLogRecPtr (LSN), so if we change it we'll
> >> have to deal with pg_upgrade. I guess we cou
On 18.06.2012 21:13, Andres Freund wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2012 08:08:14 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
The page header contains an XLogRecPtr (LSN), so if we change it we'll
have to deal with pg_upgrade. I guess we could still keep XLogRecPtr
around as the on-disk representation, and convert b
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> On 18.06.2012 21:00, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Andres Freund
>> wrote:
1. Use a 64-bit segment number, instead of the log/seg combination. And
don't waste the last segment on each logical 4 GB
On Monday, June 18, 2012 08:08:14 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 18.06.2012 21:00, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Andres Freund
wrote:
> >>> 1. Use a 64-bit segment number, instead of the log/seg combination. And
> >>> don't waste the last segment on each logical 4 GB
On 18.06.2012 21:00, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
1. Use a 64-bit segment number, instead of the log/seg combination. And
don't waste the last segment on each logical 4 GB log file. The concept
of a "logical log file" is now completely gone. XLogRecPt
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> 1. Use a 64-bit segment number, instead of the log/seg combination. And
>> don't waste the last segment on each logical 4 GB log file. The concept
>> of a "logical log file" is now completely gone. XLogRecPtr is unchanged,
>> but it should n
On Thursday, June 14, 2012 11:01:42 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> As I threatened earlier
> (http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4fd0b1ab.3090...@enterprisedb.co
> m), here are three patches that change the WAL format. The goal is to
> change the format so that when you're inserting a WAL re
On Thursday, June 14, 2012 11:01:42 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> As I threatened earlier
> (http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4fd0b1ab.3090...@enterprisedb.co
> m), here are three patches that change the WAL format. The goal is to
> change the format so that when you're inserting a WAL re
31 matches
Mail list logo
