Month: February 2018

What is the benefit of upgrading PostgreSQL?

Couple of times, in various places, I was asked: what is the benefit from upgrading to some_version.

So far, I just read release docs, and compiled list of what has changed.

But this is not necessarily simple – consider upgrade from 9.3.2 to 10.2. That's a lot of changes.

So, to be able to answer these questions faster in future, I created a site: Why upgrade PostgreSQL?.

Usage should be simple – pick from which version you want to upgrade, to which version you want to upgrade, and press gives me… button.

Hope you'll find it useful.

Which schema is using the most disk space?

I was faced with interesting problem. Which schema, in my DB, uses the most disk space? Theoretically it's trivial, we have set of helpful functions:

  • pg_column_size
  • pg_database_size
  • pg_indexes_size
  • pg_relation_size
  • pg_table_size
  • pg_tablespace_size
  • pg_total_relation_size

But in some cases it becomes more of a problem. For example – when you have thousands of tables …

Continue reading Which schema is using the most disk space?

Waiting for PostgreSQL 11 – Support all SQL:2011 options for window frame clauses.

On 7th of February 2018, Tom Lane committed patch:

Support all SQL:2011 options for window frame clauses.
 
 
This patch adds the ability to use "RANGE offset PRECEDING/FOLLOWING"
frame boundaries in window functions.  We'd punted on that back in the
original patch to add window functions, because it was not clear how to
do it in a reasonably data-type-extensible fashion.  That problem is
resolved here by adding the ability for btree operator classes to provide
an "in_range" support function that defines how to add or subtract the
RANGE offset value.  Factoring it this way also allows the operator class
to avoid overflow problems near the ends of the datatype's range, if it
wishes to expend effort on that.  (In the committed patch, the integer
opclasses handle that issue, but it did not seem worth the trouble to
avoid overflow failures for datetime types.)
 
The patch includes in_range support for the integer_ops opfamily
(int2/int4/int8) as well as the standard datetime types.  Support for
other numeric types has been requested, but that seems like suitable
material for a follow-on patch.
 
In addition, the patch adds GROUPS mode which counts the offset in
ORDER-BY peer groups rather than rows, and it adds the frame_exclusion
options specified by SQL:2011.  As far as I can see, we are now fully
up to spec on window framing options.
 
Existing behaviors remain unchanged, except that I changed the errcode
for a couple of existing error reports to meet the SQL spec's expectation
that negative "offset" values should be reported as SQLSTATE 22013.
 
Internally and in relevant parts of the documentation, we now consistently
use the terminology "offset PRECEDING/FOLLOWING" rather than "value
PRECEDING/FOLLOWING", since the term "value" is confusingly vague.
 
Oliver Ford, reviewed and whacked around some by me
 
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAGMVOdu9sivPAxbNN0X+q19Sfv9edEPv=HibOJhB14TJv_RCQg@mail.gmail.com

Continue reading Waiting for PostgreSQL 11 – Support all SQL:2011 options for window frame clauses.

Waiting for PostgreSQL 11 – Support parallel btree index builds.

Support parallel btree index builds.
 
 
To make this work, tuplesort.c and logtape.c must also support
parallelism, so this patch adds that infrastructure and then applies
it to the particular case of parallel btree index builds.  Testing
to date shows that this can often be 2-3x faster than a serial
index build.
 
The model for deciding how many workers to use is fairly primitive
at present, but it's better than not having the feature.  We can
refine it as we get more experience.
 
Peter Geoghegan with some help from Rushabh Lathia.  While Heikki
Linnakangas is not an author of this patch, he wrote other patches
without which this feature would not have been possible, and
therefore the release notes should possibly credit him as an author
of this feature.  Reviewed by Claudio Freire, Heikki Linnakangas,
Thomas Munro, Tels, Amit Kapila, me.
 
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAM3SWZQKM=Pzc=CAHzRixKjp2eO5Q0Jg1SoFQqeXFQ647JiwqQ@mail.gmail.com
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wz=AxWqDoVvGU7dq856S4r6sJAj6DBn7VMtigkB33N5eyg@mail.gmail.com

Continue reading Waiting for PostgreSQL 11 – Support parallel btree index builds.

Fix for parallel scans on explain.depesz.com

On Friday, Zr40 reported on irc that explain.depesz.com doesn't show table/index names for Parallel Seq Scan nodes.

Checked it and found couple of other omissions of the same kind with other Parallel* scans.

Fixed (I hope) all of them in:

The change is not really big, but just figured I'll let you know.