Hi,
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I would like to see if we can get a combination of JIT and LTO to work
>> together to specialize generic code at runtime.
>
> Well, LTO can't quite work. It relies on being able to mark code in
> modules linked together as externally vi
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:53:33PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>
> On 01/26/2018 02:56 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Yes, that is the hard part, making sure you have 4k granularity of
> > write, and matching write alignment. pg_test_fsync and diskchecker.pl
> > (which we mention in our docs) wil
Hi,
On 2018-01-26 18:26:03 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:02 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Not entirely sure what you mean. You mean why I don't inline
> > slot_getsomeattrs() etc and instead generate code manually? The reason
> > is that the generated code is a *lot* smart
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:02 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Not entirely sure what you mean. You mean why I don't inline
> slot_getsomeattrs() etc and instead generate code manually? The reason
> is that the generated code is a *lot* smarter due to knowing the
> specific tupledesc.
I would like to
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> Thanks for looking into this. Yeah. I think you're right that it
> could add a bit of overhead in some cases (ie if you receive a lot of
> signals that AREN'T caused by fork failure, then you'll enter
> HandleParallelMessage() every time unn
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 12:30:12PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> And done. I failed to resist the temptation to rename
> compute_attributes_sql_style, since the "sql_style" bit no longer
> conveys anything. I'd always found compute_attributes_with_style
> to be confusingly named --- seemed like it sho
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 7:30 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> However, now I see that you and Thomas are trying to find a different
>> way to overcome this problem differently, so not sure if I should go
>> ahead or not. I have seen that you to
Hi,
On 2018-01-27 00:28:07 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> But does that make the internal page size relevant to the atomicity
> question? For example, let's say we write 4kB on a drive with 2kB
> internal pages, and the power goes out after writing the first 2kB of
> data (so losing the second 2kB g
I've pushed this mostly as-is. I fixed the missed places in reloptions
code as we discussed. I also took out the parser changes related to
allowing unquoted PARALLEL in old-style CREATE AGGREGATE, because that
is not a goal I consider worthy of adding extra grammar complexity.
We don't document t
On 01/27/2018 12:06 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-01-26 23:53:33 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> But more importantly, I don't see why the size of the internal page
>> would matter here at all? SSDs have non-volatile write cache (DRAM with
>> battery), protecting all the internal writ
> On 26 Jan 2018, at 23:58, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>>> On 26 Jan 2018, at 22:32, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I notice that there are two reloptions-related
>>> "pg_strncasecmp" calls that did not get converted to "strncmp":
>>> reloptions.c:804
>
>> The way I read transformRelOp
Hi,
On 2018-01-26 23:53:33 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> But more importantly, I don't see why the size of the internal page
> would matter here at all? SSDs have non-volatile write cache (DRAM with
> battery), protecting all the internal writes to pages. If your SSD does
> not do that correctly, i
Hello Doug,
Patch applies, compiles, tests ok.
> [...] Replaced USE_PPOLL with HAVE_PPOLL as having both seems redundant.
I'm okay with that. I'm wondering whether there should be a way to force
using one or the other when both are available. Not sure.
Added option to force use of s
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> On 26 Jan 2018, at 22:32, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I notice that there are two reloptions-related
>> "pg_strncasecmp" calls that did not get converted to "strncmp":
>> reloptions.c:804
> The way I read transformRelOptions(), oldOptions is not guaranteed to
> come from the
On 01/26/2018 02:56 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 02:10:10PM +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>>> What are the cons of setting BLCKSZ as 4kB? When saw the results published
>>> on [...].
>>
>> There were other posts and publications which points to the same directi
> On 26 Jan 2018, at 22:32, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Michael Paquier writes:
>> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 09:47:50AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> Attached is a rebased v7 patch which has your amendments (minus
>>> propname) which passes make check without errors.
>
>> Confirmed. I am switching
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 09:47:50AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Attached is a rebased v7 patch which has your amendments (minus
>> propname) which passes make check without errors.
> Confirmed. I am switching the status as ready for committer for
> volatility-v7.pa
On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 6:38 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> [ new patch ]
I think that grouping_planner() could benefit from a slightly more
extensive rearrangement. With your patch applied, the order of
operations is:
1. compute the scan/join target
2. apply the scan/join target to all paths in curr
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Jeevan Chalke
wrote:
> Attached patch with other review points fixed.
Committed 0001 and 0002 together, with some cosmetic changes,
including fixing pgindent damage. Please pgindent your patches before
submitting.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterpr
Hi,
On 2018-01-26 13:06:27 +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> One more question: do you have any idea how to profile JITed code?
Yes ;). It depends a bit on what exactly you want to do. Is it
sufficient to get time associated with the parent caller, or do you need
instruction-level access.
> T
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:17 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Hmm, I like the idea of making it a #define instead of having it
> depend on parallel_leader_participation. Let's do that. If the
> consensus is later that it was the wrong decision, it'll be easy to
> change it back.
WFM.
--
Peter Geoghe
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 2:04 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:33 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I'm busy with other things, so no rush.
>
> Got it.
>
> There is one question that I should probably get clarity on ahead of
> the next revision, which is: Should I rip out the code t
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:33 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I'm busy with other things, so no rush.
Got it.
There is one question that I should probably get clarity on ahead of
the next revision, which is: Should I rip out the code that disallows
a "degenerate parallel CREATE INDEX" when
parallel_lea
>
> It would be about as hard to memorize \describe-schemas as it is to
> memorize \dn:
> You'd have to remember that it is "-" and not "_", that it is "describe",
> not "desc"
> and that it is "schemas", not "schema".
>
You wouldn't memorize them. You'd discover them with tab completion.
Type "
On 1/22/18 17:55, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Version 4 of this patch, rebased on today's master.
+ if (key->partattrs[i] == 0)
+ ereport(ERROR,
+ (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
+errmsg("unsupporte
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> I think you've chosen a terrible design and ought to throw the whole
> >> thing away and start over.
> >
> > I'll all for throwing away the existing test once we've got something
> >
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 1:17 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 1:30 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>>> I had imagined that WaitForParallelWorkersToAttach() would give me an
>>> error in the style of WaitForParallelWorkersToFi
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 7:45 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> There could be value in having a version dedicated to inheritance trees
> as well, true enough. As well as value in having something that shows
> both. Still let's not forget that partition sets are structured so as
> the parents have no
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 1:30 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> I had imagined that WaitForParallelWorkersToAttach() would give me an
>> error in the style of WaitForParallelWorkersToFinish(), without
>> actually waiting for the parallel workers t
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 1:30 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I had imagined that WaitForParallelWorkersToAttach() would give me an
> error in the style of WaitForParallelWorkersToFinish(), without
> actually waiting for the parallel workers to finish.
+1. If we're going to go that route, and that s
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 10:26 PM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
>> Does the SQL spec mention the matter? How do other systems
>> handle such cases?
>
> In Oracle you get the same overflow error.
That seems awful. If a user says "SELECT * FROM tab" and it fails,
how are they supposed to recover, or eve
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
>> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 06:30:04PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> In short, I'm on board with removing the WITH clause. I've not
>>> reviewed the patch in detail, but will do so and push it if there's
>>> not objections p
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 06:30:04PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In short, I'm on board with removing the WITH clause. I've not
>> reviewed the patch in detail, but will do so and push it if there's
>> not objections pretty soon.
> Glad to hear that, thanks!
And done. I f
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I think you've chosen a terrible design and ought to throw the whole
>> thing away and start over.
>
> I'll all for throwing away the existing test once we've got something
> that covers at least what it does (ideally more, of course).
I'm
Robert Haas writes:
> I figured you would, but it's still my opinion. I guess my basic
> objection here is to the idea that we somehow know that the 6000+ line
> test case file actually contains only correct tests. That vastly
> exceeds the ability of any normal human being to verify correctness
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> >> wrote:
> >> > My proposal is that instead of looking at three hundred lines, y
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> wrote:
>> > My proposal is that instead of looking at three hundred lines, you'd
>> > look for 50 lines of `pg_restore -l` output -- is elem
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I've already had two people mention that it'd be neat to have PG support
>> it, so I don't believe it'd go unused. As for if we should force people
>> to use quotes, my vote would be no because we don't require that
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I've already had two people mention that it'd be neat to have PG support
> it, so I don't believe it'd go unused. As for if we should force people
> to use quotes, my vote would be no because we don't require that for
> other usage of true/
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > My proposal is that instead of looking at three hundred lines, you'd
> > look for 50 lines of `pg_restore -l` output -- is element XYZ in there
> > or not. Quite a bit simpler for
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 8:44 PM, Amit Langote
> wrote:
> > Attached updated patch.
>
> I wonder if this patch is just parser bloat without any real benefit.
> It can't be very common to want to partition on a Boolean column, and
> if you do,
Hello Ildus,
I continue reviewing your patch. Here are some thoughts.
1. When I set column storage to EXTERNAL then I cannot set compression.
Seems reasonable:
create table test(id serial, msg text);
alter table test alter column msg set storage external;
alter table test alter column msg set co
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 8:19 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 12:33:41PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> I noticed that the documentation for encrypt()/decrypt() says "aes —
>> AES (Rijndael-128)", but in fact 192 and 256 bit keys are also
>> supported, whether you build --with-o
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> My proposal is that instead of looking at three hundred lines, you'd
> look for 50 lines of `pg_restore -l` output -- is element XYZ in there
> or not. Quite a bit simpler for the guy adding a new test. This tests
> combinations of pg_dump
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 8:44 PM, Amit Langote
wrote:
> Attached updated patch.
I wonder if this patch is just parser bloat without any real benefit.
It can't be very common to want to partition on a Boolean column, and
if you do, all this patch does is let you drop the quotes. That's not
really
On 01/26/2018 03:49 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> I propose that we do what at least MySQL, Oracle, and DB2 do and
> implement DESCRIBE as its own command.
Hard pass.
--
Vik Fearing +33 6 46 75 15 36
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation e
Emre Hasegeli writes:
>> port.h declares inet_net_ntop and we always compile our own from
>> port/inet_net_ntop.c .
> There is another copy of it under backend/utils/adt/inet_cidr_ntop.c.
> The code looks different but does 90% the same thing. Their naming
> and usage is confusing.
> I recently
Michael Paquier writes:
> I have just bumped into tzdata (https://www.iana.org/time-zones), to
> notice that 2018c has been released. Surely, there will be a refresh for
> the next release?
Yeah, it's on my to-do list for next week.
> At the same time I have played with the instructions in
> src
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:50 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> This appears at PostgreSQL 10 and current HEAD. The cause of this
> seems that hash_page_items allocates the memory space for the page
> before switching memory context. AFAICS there is no similar problem in
> pageinspect contrib module. At
On 01/26/2018 03:49 PM, David Fetter wrote:> They are indeed terse and
cryptic, and what's worse, they're not
available to clients other than psql, so I propose that we do what at
least MySQL, Oracle, and DB2 do and implement DESCRIBE as its own
command.
Especially handy would be a variant DESCR
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 11:20:28AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-01-25 18:40:53 +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> > Another question is whether it is sensible to redundantly do
> > expensive work (llvm compilation) in all backends.
>
> Right now we kinda have to, but I really want to get
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 08:11:00PM -0500, Corey Huinker wrote:
> Some of the discussions about making psql more user friendly (more
> tab completions help, exit, etc) got me thinking about other ways
> that psql could be more friendly, and the one that comes to mind is
> our terse but cryptic \d* c
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 6:51 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> I don't plan to work on this anytime soon, but I though it's interesting
> enough to put out there and see what others think.
I mean, if it buys enough performance, it's probably worth doing.
Sort of annoying to have to introduce more syntax
Hi all,
I have just bumped into tzdata (https://www.iana.org/time-zones), to
notice that 2018c has been released. Surely, there will be a refresh for
the next release?
At the same time I have played with the instructions in
src/timezone/README to generate the attached. That's always an
experience
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:25 PM, David Steele wrote:
> I think you mean DEBUG1? It's already at DEBUG2.
>
> I considered using DEBUG1 but decided against it. The other exclusions
> will produce a limited amount of output because there are only a few of
> them. In the case of unlogged tables the
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:04 AM, Antonin Houska wrote:
> So one problem is that the grouping expression can be inappropriate for
> partial aggregation even if there's no type change during the
> translation. What I consider typical for this case is that the equality
> operator used to identify gro
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 02:10:10PM +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> >What are the cons of setting BLCKSZ as 4kB? When saw the results published
> >on [...].
>
> There were other posts and publications which points to the same direction
> consistently.
>
> This matches my deep belief i
Hello hackers,
As it mentioned in pg_locale.c, the variable LC_MESSAGES is ignored in
Windows(pg_locale.c:162). In other systems, this variable is
used to select a messages language. But in Windows, the language is
selected based on system locale and couldn't be changed via
configuration. Additio
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 8:54 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
wrote:
> Yes, that's pg_test_fsync output. Isn't pg_test_fsync the tool to determine
> the value for wal_sync_method? Is this manual misleading?
Hmm. I hadn't thought about it as misleading, but now that you
mention it, I'd say that it prob
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Antonin Houska wrote:
> > Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Antonin Houska wrote:
> >> > I'm not about to add any other features now. Implementation of the
> >> > missing
> >> > parts (see the TODO comments in t
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:56:06AM +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> >>Yeh, I suspected that just disabling autovacuum was not enough.
> >>I heard (but do no know too much) about microvacuum and hot updates.
> >>This is why I was a little bit surprised when me test didn't show lost of
> >>update
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 07:00:43PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> I wonder what pg_partition_tree_tables() should return when passed a table
> that doesn't have partitions under it? Return a 1-member set containing
> itself?
Yes. A table alone is itself part of a partition set, so the result
shoul
(2018/01/26 10:15), Amit Langote wrote:
On 2018/01/25 21:17, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Some minor comments:
+ /*
+* Construct an ArrayExpr for the non-null partition
+* values
+*/
+ arrexpr = makeNode(Arr
On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 20:51:41 +1300
Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 11:57 PM, Yugo Nagata wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 23:39:39 +0900 (JST)
> > Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> >> Your addition to the doc:
> >> + Automatically updatable views (see )
> >> + that do not have INSTEAD OF tr
Moin,
On Fri, January 26, 2018 2:30 am, David Rowley wrote:
> On 21 January 2018 at 19:21, David Rowley
> wrote:
>> On 20 January 2018 at 18:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Stephen Froehlich writes:
Are custom statistics in PG10 retained in LIKE (INCLUDING ALL) or do I
need to recreate the st
Corey Huinker wrote:
> Some of the discussions about making psql more user friendly (more tab
> completions help, exit, etc) got me thinking about other ways that psql could
> be more friendly, and the one that comes to mind is our terse but cryptic \d*
> commands.
>
> I think it would be helpf
> port.h declares inet_net_ntop and we always compile our own from
> port/inet_net_ntop.c .
There is another copy of it under backend/utils/adt/inet_cidr_ntop.c.
The code looks different but does 90% the same thing. Their naming
and usage is confusing.
I recently needed to format IP addresses as
On 26.01.2018 11:23, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for testing things out!
Thank you for this work.
One more question: do you have any idea how to profile JITed code?
There is no LLVMOrcRegisterPerf in LLVM 5, so jit_profiling_support
option does nothing.
And without it perf is not able
On 2018/01/22 11:44, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 07:16:38PM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
>> On 20 January 2018 at 23:14, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>>> If pg_partition_tree_tables() uses the top of the partition as input,
>>> all the tree should show up. If you use a leaf, anyth
Hi.
I noticed that relispartition isn't set for index's partitions.
create table p (a int) partition by list (a);
create table p12 partition of p for values in (1, 2);
create index on p (a);
select relname, relkind from pg_class where relnamespace =
'public'::regnamespace and relispartition is tr
Hi,
Thanks for testing things out!
On 2018-01-26 10:44:24 +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> Also I noticed that parallel execution didsables JIT.
Oh, oops, I broke that recently by moving where the decisition about
whether to jit or not is. There actually is JITing, but only in the
leader.
Hi all,
As promised on a recent thread, here is a second tentative to switch
pg_upgrade's test.sh into a TAP infrastructure.
This is a continuation of the following thread:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqRdaN1A1YNjxNL9T1jUEWct8ttqq29dNv8W_o37%2Be8wfA%40mail.gmail.com
To begin with,
72 matches
Mail list logo
