Στις Tuesday 08 July 2008 21:34:01 ο/η Tom Lane έγραψε:
> Achilleas Mantzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Στις Tuesday 08 July 2008 17:35:16 ο/η Tom Lane έγραψε:
> >> Hmm. There's a function in elog.c that breaks log messages into chunks
> >> for syslog. I don't think anyone's ever looked hard
>In FreeBSD 7.0 by default it does not fsync (except for kernel messages),
>unless the path is prefixed by "-" whereas it syncs.
Sorry, scrap the above sentence.
The correct is to say that FreeBSD 7.0 by default it does not fsync(2) (except
for kernel messages), and even in this case of kernel me
Στις Wednesday 09 July 2008 03:47:34 ο/η [EMAIL PROTECTED] έγραψε:
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2008, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> On Jul 8, 2008, at 8:24 AM, Achilleas Mantzios wrote:
> >>> File sizes of about 3M result in actual logging output of ~ 10Mb.
> >>> In this case, the IN
Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm a little bit worried about cranking up PG_SYSLOG_LIMIT in the back
> branches. Cranking it up will definitely change syslog messages text
> style and might confuse syslog handling scripts(I have no evince that
> such scripts exist though). So I suggest
> Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Jul 8, 2008, at 8:24 AM, Achilleas Mantzios wrote:
> >> File sizes of about 3M result in actual logging output of ~ 10Mb.
> >> In this case, the INSERT *needs* 20 minutes to return. This is
> >> because the logging through syslog seems to severely slow th
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Jul 8, 2008, at 8:24 AM, Achilleas Mantzios wrote:
File sizes of about 3M result in actual logging output of ~ 10Mb.
In this case, the INSERT *needs* 20 minutes to return. This is
because the logging through syslog seems t
Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Jul 8, 2008, at 8:24 AM, Achilleas Mantzios wrote:
>> File sizes of about 3M result in actual logging output of ~ 10Mb.
>> In this case, the INSERT *needs* 20 minutes to return. This is
>> because the logging through syslog seems to severely slow the system.
On Jul 8, 2008, at 8:24 AM, Achilleas Mantzios wrote:
File sizes of about 3M result in actual logging output of ~ 10Mb.
In this case, the INSERT *needs* 20 minutes to return. This is
because the logging through syslog seems to severely slow the system.
If instead, i use stderr, even with logg
Achilleas Mantzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ΣÏÎ¹Ï Tuesday 08 July 2008 17:35:16 ο/η Tom Lane ÎγÏαÏε:
>> Hmm. There's a function in elog.c that breaks log messages into chunks
>> for syslog. I don't think anyone's ever looked hard at its performance
>> --- maybe there's an O(N^2) b
Στις Tuesday 08 July 2008 17:35:16 ο/η Tom Lane έγραψε:
> Achilleas Mantzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In this case, the INSERT *needs* 20 minutes to return. This is because the
> > logging through syslog seems to severely slow the system.
> > If instead, i use stderr, even with logging_coll
Achilleas Mantzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In this case, the INSERT *needs* 20 minutes to return. This is because the
> logging through syslog seems to severely slow the system.
> If instead, i use stderr, even with logging_collector=on, the same statement
> needs 15 seconds to return.
Hmm
Hi i have experienced really bad performance on both FreeBSD and linux, with
syslog,
when logging statements involving bytea of size ~ 10 Mb.
Consider this scenario:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \d marinerpapers_atts
Table "public.marinerpapers_atts"
Column|
12 matches
Mail list logo
