BTW, while nosing around looking for an explanation for our
cross-version-upgrade woes, I chanced to notice that
relation_statistics_update rejects negative values for
relpages and relallvisible. This is nonsense. Internally
those values are BlockNumbers and can have any value from
0 to UINT32_MA
On 2025-Feb-21, Sami Imseih wrote:
> > If we want to include 'role' in this output, what I'd propose is to
> > have \conninfo issue "SHOW role", which is accepted by every server
> > version. If it fails (say because we're in an aborted transaction),
> > just omit that row from the output.
>
> v
On 21/02/2025 23:33, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
There have been a few complaints lately about the fact that we
cavalierly allow clear text passwords to be sent when doing CREATE USER
or ALTER USER. These, of course, can end up in many places, such as
pg_stat_activity, pg_stat_statements, .psql_
Some review comments for patch v2-0001.
==
Commit message
1.
Currently we can copy an invalidated logical and physical replication slot
using functions 'pg_copy_logical_replication_slot' and
'pg_copy_physical_replication_slot' respectively.
With this patch we will throw an error in such cases
On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 4:16 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> We do count the number of lwlock share lockers and the number of buffer
> refcounts within those bits. And obviously 0 lockers/refcounts has to be
> valid. So I think the limit is correct?
Ah, right. That makes perfect sense. The 18 bits ne
On 2025-Feb-18, Evgeny Voropaev wrote:
> Created functions BootStrapSlruPage,SimpleLruZeroAndLogPage,
> WriteSlruZeroPageXlogRec. Using of these functions allows to delete
> ZeroXYZPage functions, WriteXYZZeroPageXlogRec functions and eliminate code
> repetitions.
I think the overall idea here is
On 2025-Feb-21, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Any chance to push this forward?
> Is it worth creating a committfest entry?
Yeah, I'll have a look.
--
Álvaro HerreraBreisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Entristecido, Wutra (canción de Las Barreras)
echa a
Hi,
On 2025-02-22 18:54:08 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2025 at 7:27 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> +#define MAX_BACKENDS_BITS18
> +#define MAX_BACKENDS((1 << MAX_BACKENDS_BITS)-1)
>
> +1 for working forwards from the bits. But why not call it
> PROC_NUMBER_BITS?
hi.
v20-0001
in src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dumpall.c, we have:
static const char *connstr = "";
case 'd':
connstr = pg_strdup(optarg);
break;
i am not sure you can declare it as "const" for connstr.
since connstr value can be changed.
``#include "pg_backup.h"`
On Mon, 9 Sept 2024 at 17:58, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 11:29 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > > I'll split this patch like that, to make it easier to compare and merge
> > > with Jelte's corresponding patches.
> >
> > That sounds great. IMHO, comparing and merging the patches is th
On 2/21/25 09:09, Benoit Lobréau wrote:
On 2/20/25 4:40 PM, David Steele wrote:
Benoit -- this was your idea. Did you want to submit a patch yourself?
Here is an attempt at that. I kept the wording I used above. Is it fine
to repeat the whole ereport block twice?
I think for translation pur
On 22/02/2025 09:07, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
On 21/02/2025 23:33, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
There have been a few complaints lately about the fact that we
cavalierly allow clear text passwords to be sent when doing CREATE
USER or ALTER USER. These, of course, can end up in many places, such
On Sat, Feb 22, 2025 at 11:55 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> Attached are the updated patches to fix all the mentioned issues. I
> plan to push them early next week after staring at the code for a bit
> longer, barring any objections.
Sign... I neglected to make the change in 0001 that a Var newnode
co
Alexander Lakhin 于2025年2月22日周六 23:00写道：
> Hello Amit,
>
> 21.02.2025 05:40, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> I pushed the final piece yesterday.
>
>
> Please look at new error, produced by the following script,
> starting from 525392d57:
> CREATE TABLE t(id int) PARTITION BY RANGE (id);
> CREATE INDEX idx
On Sat, Feb 22, 2025 at 2:35 AM Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 at 06:16, Richard Guo wrote:
> > * The expansion of virtual generated columns occurs after subquery
> > pullup, which can lead to issues. This was an oversight on my part.
> > Initially, I believed it wasn't possible for a
Hello Amit,
21.02.2025 05:40, Amit Langote wrote:
I pushed the final piece yesterday.
Please look at new error, produced by the following script,
starting from 525392d57:
CREATE TABLE t(id int) PARTITION BY RANGE (id);
CREATE INDEX idx on t(id);
CREATE TABLE tp_1 PARTITION OF t FOR VALUES FROM
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 at 09:51, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> Rebased it, and moved some of the new header definitions around to
> hopefully not have to rebase again.
This required another rebase, but I've decided that I think it'll be
most fruitful to continue the discussion on protocol changes in th
On 2025-02-22 04:11, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 2025-02-21 Fr 11:49 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Pushed.
Thanks
Thank you very much!
Best regards, Roman Zharkov
On Fri, 2025-02-21 at 07:24 +, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
> I hope I'm in the correct thread. I found the commit 1fd1bd8 - it is
> so cool.
Yes, documentation corrections are appreciated, thank you.
> But pgupgrade.sgml [2] and source code [3] said that statistics must
> be updated.
Chan
Hi Ajin,
Some review comments for v14-0002.
==
src/backend/replication/logical/decode.c
1.
There is lots of nearly duplicate code checking to see if a change is filterable
DecodeInsert:
+ /*
+ * When filtering changes, determine if the relation associated with the change
+ * can be skipped.
Hi!
On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 at 13:28, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> That being said, there is
> value in doing the right thing and setting good examples in our own code as
> many do read it and reference it.
> We call PQclear on such a
> case elsewhere in the file so it's not entirely consistent, but
21 matches
Mail list logo
