Hi all,
Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with
the expanded display mode, and it may not matter adding more
information.
Thoughts abo
On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with
> the expanded display mode
2016-07-08 9:00 GMT+02:00 Michael Paquier :
> Hi all,
>
> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with
> the expanded display mode, and
On 8 July 2016 at 03:50, Pete Stevenson wrote:
> Hi Simon -
>
> Thanks for the note. I think it's fair to say that I didn't provide enough
> context, so let me try and elaborate on my question.
>
Please reply in-line in posts to make it easier to follow conversations
with multiple people.
> It
On 8 July 2016 at 03:55, Tom Lane wrote:
> > One of my examples was full text search and it does have
> > DDL, but that was an anti-example; all the feedback I have is that it was
> > much easier to use before it had DDL and that forcing it to use DDL
> pretty
> > much killed it for most users.
On 07/07/16 08:38, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:57 AM, Marco Nenciarini
> wrote:
>> After further analysis, the issue is that we retrieve the starttli from
>> the ControlFile structure, but it was using ThisTimeLineID when writing
>> the backup label.
>>
>> I've attached a ve
On 08/07/16 10:59, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 8 July 2016 at 03:55, Tom Lane mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote:
> One of my examples was full text search and it does have
> DDL, but that was an anti-example; all the feedback I have is that it was
> much easier to use before it had DDL and
On 8 July 2016 at 11:09, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>
> One interesting thing will be making sure we can replicate from physical
> standby in the future as you mentioned elsewhere in the thread but I think
> that should be possible as long as you define the catalogs on master (not
> really sure yet if t
Hi,
I noticed that the return type of IsForeignScanParallelSafe described in
fdwhandler.sgml isn't correct; that should be bool, not Size. Please
find attached a small patch for that.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml
index
On 8 July 2016 at 09:41, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> > Personally, I'm in the group of people that don't see the need for DDL.
> > There are already many successful features that don't utilize DDL, such
> as
> > backup, advisory locks and some features that use DDL that don't really
> need
> > to suc
On 8 July 2016 at 11:18, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Simon Riggs writes:
>
> > > pg_am has existed for decades without supporting DDL
> >
> > That argument has been obsoleted by events ;-) ... and in any case, the
> > reason we went without CREATE ACCESS METHOD for so long was no
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Marco Nenciarini
wrote:
> The resulting backup is working perfectly, because Postgres has no use
> for pg_stop_backup LSN, but this can confuse any tool that uses the stop
> LSN to figure out which WAL files are needed by the backup (in this case
> the only file nee
On 08/07/16 12:47, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 8 July 2016 at 09:41, Robert Haas mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
If you want to add a column to a table, you
say ALTER TABLE .. ADD COLUMN. If you want to add a column to an
extension, you say ALTER EXTENSION .. ADD TABLE. If you wa
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
>> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
>> large, so I guess that any peo
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>>> Regarding the first hunk, I don't like these INTERFACE sections too
>>> much; they get seriously outdated over the time and aren't all that
>>> helpful anyway.
On 08/07/16 13:10, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Marco Nenciarini
> wrote:
>> The resulting backup is working perfectly, because Postgres has no use
>> for pg_stop_backup LSN, but this can confuse any tool that uses the stop
>> LSN to figure out which WAL files are neede
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
>>> parallel status of a function. The
Good info, thanks for the note. Agreed that it is difficult to pull things
apart to isolate these features for offload — so actually running experiments
with offload is not possible, as you point out (and for other reasons).
Maybe I could figure out the lines of code that add versions into a tab
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Than you for reviewing!
>
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2016-07-05 23:37:59 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> diff --git a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c
>>> b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c
>>> index 57
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 4:46 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Based on what I'm seeing so far, really 100K ought to be more than plenty
> of slop for most architectures, but I'm afraid to go there for IA64.
Searching for info on ia64 turned up this interesting thread:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2
Greg Stark writes:
> Searching for info on ia64 turned up this interesting thread:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/21563.1289064886%40sss.pgh.pa.us
Yeah, that's the same one I referenced upthread ;-)
> From that discussion it seems we should probably run these tests with
> -O0 because th
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
>> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
>> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with
>> the exp
Amit Kapila writes:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> Okay. Here we go. I named the column for the parallel information
>> "Parallelism".
> Another option could be to name it as Parallel Mode.
I'd go with just "Parallel", to keep it from being noticeably wider than
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Amit Kapila writes:
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Michael Paquier
> > wrote:
> >> Okay. Here we go. I named the column for the parallel information
> >> "Parallelism".
>
> > Another option could be to name it as Parallel Mode.
>
> I'd go with just
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
> >> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
> >> large, so I guess that any pe
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> So I don't think that approach still allows old snapshot related
> cleanups for toast triggered vacuums? Is that an acceptable
> restriction?
What I would rather see is that if the heap is vacuumed (whether or
not by autovacuum) then the re
Etsuro Fujita writes:
> I noticed that the return type of IsForeignScanParallelSafe described in
> fdwhandler.sgml isn't correct; that should be bool, not Size. Please
> find attached a small patch for that.
Pushed, thanks!
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hack
Fabien COELHO writes:
> The very minor patch attached improves the PL/pgSQL documentation about
> trigger functions. It moves the description common to both data change &
> database event triggers out of the first section and into a common header.
> It adds a link at the beginning of the sectio
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
> >> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
> >> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane alre
The very minor patch attached improves the PL/pgSQL documentation about
trigger functions. It moves the description common to both data change &
database event triggers out of the first section and into a common header.
It adds a link at the beginning of the sections to their corresponding
gener
Pete Stevenson wrote:
> Maybe I could figure out the lines of code that add versions into a
> table and then those that collect old versions (they do get collected,
> right?). Anyway, thought being I could profile while running TPC-C or
> similar. I was hoping that someone might be able to jump on
On 2016-07-08 11:00:50 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > So I don't think that approach still allows old snapshot related
> > cleanups for toast triggered vacuums? Is that an acceptable
> > restriction?
>
> What I would rather see is that
Hi,
I have a question about logical decoding of Postgres.
where are the entry points to logical decoding?
Specifically, we want to know whether logical decoding happens immediately
after commit, or whether there is a polling thread that scans the Write
Ahead Log and then dumps to the special t
Hello,
Attached is a patch for xlogreader.c for a more informative error message
for allocate_recordbuf() failure.
The patch details are:
- Project name.: None
- Uniquely identifiable file name, so we can tell difference between
your v1 and v24.: src/backend/access/transam/xlogread
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:29 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> When I tested some queries, I found strange plan
>> postgres=# explain analyze select s.nazev, o.nazev, o.pocet_obyvatel from
>> (select nazev, array(select id from obce_pocet_obyvatel where okresy.id =
>> okres_id orde
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Pete Stevenson wrote:
>> Maybe I could figure out the lines of code that add versions into a
>> table and then those that collect old versions (they do get collected,
>> right?). Anyway, thought being I could profile while running TPC-C or
>> similar. I was hoping that som
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2016-07-08 11:00:50 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>
>> > So I don't think that approach still allows old snapshot related
>> > cleanups for toast triggered vacuums? Is that an accep
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > Pete Stevenson wrote:
> >> Maybe I could figure out the lines of code that add versions into a
> >> table and then those that collect old versions (they do get collected,
> >> right?). Anyway, thought being I could profile while running TPC-C or
> >> si
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> As a separate concern, IMO having the source code in a \df+ column is
> almost completely useless.
Good point. It works okay for C/internal functions, but in those cases
it's usually redundant with the proname. For PL functions it's a disaster
formatting-wise, because t
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> At Fri, 10 Jun 2016 17:39:59 +0900, Michael Paquier
> wrote in
>
> > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> > wrote:
> > Indeed, and you could just do the following to reproduce the failure
> > with the recovery test suite, so I would suggest adding th
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> VACUUM in itself is an offloading optimization; the whole point of it
>> is to do maintenance in a background process not foreground queries.
> Well, if VACUUM worked so great, we wouldn't get so many trouble reports
> with it. There's substantial impr
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Pete Stevenson
wrote:
> I would like to find some analysis (published work, blog posts)
> on the overheads affiliated with the guarantees provided by MVCC
> isolation.
There are three levels of isolation implemented[1]; the incremental
cost of SERIALIZABLE isolat
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Sure, but we could *also* do it separately, splitting VACUUMs tasks of
>> tuple freezing, page compaction, and index entry removal each into
>> separate tasks.
>
> Uh ... wouldn't that tend to make things worse? The knocks on VACUUM are
> too mu
On 2016-07-08 13:32:35 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2016-07-08 11:00:50 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >>
> >> > So I don't think that approach still allows old snapshot relate
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Pete Stevenson
wrote:
> Hi postgresql hackers -
>
> I would like to find some analysis (published work, blog posts) on the
> overheads affiliated with the guarantees provided by MVCC isolation. More
> specifically, assuming the current workload is CPU bound (as o
2016-07-08 20:39 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane :
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > As a separate concern, IMO having the source code in a \df+ column is
> > almost completely useless.
>
> Good point. It works okay for C/internal functions, but in those cases
> it's usually redundant with the proname. For PL fu
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hm, after reading the man page I don't quite see how that would help?
> You'd have to already know the mapped stack address range in order to
> call the function without getting ENOMEM.
I had assumed unmapped pages would just return a 0 in the bi
Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Has anyone ever done any kind of write-up of the "TED" design that was
> discussed during FOSDEM (I hope I recall the name it was given
> correctly)? Apparently that's something that's been discussed a few
> times among senior community members, and I think it has promise.
Greg Stark writes:
> Fwiw here's the pmap info from burbot (Linux Sparc64):
> 136 48 48 rw---[ stack ]
> 136 48 48 rw---[ stack ]
> 136 48 48 rw---[ stack ]
> 136 48 48 rw---[ stack ]
> 136 56 56 rw---[ stack ]
> 136 80
Please see comment at the bottom of this post.
On 08/07/16 10:48, Pete Stevenson wrote:
Good info, thanks for the note. Agreed that it is difficult to pull
things apart to isolate these features for offload — so actually
running experiments with offload is not possible, as you point out
(and f
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> How do you feel about adding testing to tuplesort.c not limited to
>> hitting this bug (when Valgrind memcheck is used)?
>
> Sounds great, but again, not in the patch fixing this bug.
Attached patch adds a CLUSTER external sort test case to th
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 4:02 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>
> 2016-07-08 20:39 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane :
>>
>> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>> > As a separate concern, IMO having the source code in a \df+ column is
>> > almost completely useless.
>>
>> Good point. It works okay for C/internal functions, but i
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 03:38:26PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:57 AM, Marco Nenciarini
> wrote:
> > After further analysis, the issue is that we retrieve the starttli from
> > the ControlFile structure, but it was using ThisTimeLineID when writing
> > the backup label
On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 07:03:33PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 11:50:17AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > * Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> > > > Do this:
> > > >
> > > > CREATE DATABASE test1;
> >
On 30 June 2016 at 03:49, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 3:44 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
>> On 06/24/2016 01:31 PM, David Rowley wrote:
>>> Seems there's a small error in the upgrade script for citext for 1.1
>>> to 1.2 which will cause min(citext) not to be parallel enabled.
>>>
>
* Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote:
> This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send
> a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status
> update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/201
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:57 AM, Marco Nenciarini
> wrote:
>> After further analysis, the issue is that we retrieve the starttli from
>> the ControlFile structure, but it was using ThisTimeLineID when writing
>> the backup label.
>>
>> I'v
Here is a simple patch which adds a bunch of operators (bitwise: & | ^ ~,
comparisons: =/== <>/!= < <= > >=, logical: and/&& or/|| xor/^^ not/!) and
functions (exp ln if) to pgbench. I've tried to be pg's SQL compatible where
appropriate.
Also attached is a simple test script.
Here is a si
58 matches
Mail list logo
