2018-03-12 7:49 GMT+01:00 Pavel Luzanov :
> Hi,
>
> I plan to make usability and feature test review in several days.
>
> Is there any chances that it will work on replicas?
> Such possibility is very helpful in generating reports.
> Now, LET command produces an error:
>
> ERROR: cannot execute L
Hi,
I plan to make usability and feature test review in several days.
Is there any chances that it will work on replicas?
Such possibility is very helpful in generating reports.
Now, LET command produces an error:
ERROR: cannot execute LET in a read-only transaction
But if we say that variabl
> 12 марта 2018 г., в 1:54, Alexander Korotkov
> написал(а):
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 8:30 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> I suggest to create a new function GinPredicateLockPage() that checks
> whether fast update is enabled for the index. The current arrangement
> looks too repetitive and
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 7:52 PM, Kuntal Ghosh
wrote:
> Hello hackers,
>
> While working on serializable transaction isolation, I've noticed some
> strange behavior in the first permutation mentioned in
> isolation/specs/read-only-anomaly-2.spec file.
>
> setup
> {
> CREATE TABLE bank_account (
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 3:18 PM, amul sul wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 11:04 AM, Pavan Deolasee
>>>
This is just one example. I am almost certain there are many such cases
If i run:
pgbench -i -s30
And then create the function:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION foobar(text)
RETURNS text
LANGUAGE plperl
IMMUTABLE PARALLEL SAFE STRICT COST 1
AS $function$
return scalar reverse($_[0]);
$function$;
Then when I create in index, I get a warning:
jjanes=# create inde
(2018/03/09 20:18), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
Here are updated patches for PG10 and HEAD.
Other changes:
* Add regression tests based on your test cases shown upthread
I added a little bit more regression tests and revised comments. Please
find attached an updated patch.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fu
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 03:13:09PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> ... and substring() ...
substring(A from B for C) gets parsed.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
[ Resending an email from yesterday. Something is going very wrong with
my outgoing mail provider :-( ]
Rebase of the prior code, on top of the improved row triggers posted
elsewhere. I added some more tests too, and fixed a couple of small
bugs.
(This includes the patches I just posted in the
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 7:06 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Thomas Munro wrote:
>> +create trigger failed after update on parted_trig
>> + referencing old table as old_table
>> + for each statement execute procedure trigger_nothing();
>>
>> It doesn't fail as you apparently expected. Perhaps it was
On 0002:
In terms of docs, I think it's better not to have anything user-facing
in the README. Consider that users are going to be reading the HTML
docs only, and many of them may not have the README available at all.
So anything that could be useful to users must be in the XML docs only;
keep in
Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 04:55:38PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > --- a/src/backend/catalog/information_schema.sql
> > +++ b/src/backend/catalog/information_schema.sql
> > @@ -186,7 +186,7 @@ CREATE FUNCTION _pg_interval_type(typid oid, mod int4)
> > RETURNS text
> > AS
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 3/7/18 20:57, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > So, unless someone has a brilliant idea on how to construct a column
> > mapping from partitioned table to partition, I'm going back to the
> > design I was proposing earlier, ie., creating individual pg_trigger rows
> > for each
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 09:56:33AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Hopefully a set of CHUNKS not JUNKS ?
Yes. (laugh)
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 8:30 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> I suggest to create a new function GinPredicateLockPage() that checks
> whether fast update is enabled for the index. The current arrangement
> looks too repetitive and it seems easy to make a mistake.
>
BTW, should we also skip CheckForSe
On 2018-03-11 12:38:54 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>
>
> On March 11, 2018 12:31:33 PM PDT, Pavel Stehule
> wrote:
> >Hi
> >
> >Today, these task can be CPU limited . Do you think, so JIT can be used
> >there too?
>
> Copy definitely, with the others I'm much more doubtful. Don't see anything
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 3:22 AM, David Rowley
wrote:
> Due to the failure during the index build, it appears that the
> PG_TRY/PG_CATCH block in reindex_relation() causes the reindex_index()
> to abort and jump out to the catch block. Here there's a call to
> ResetReindexPending(), which complains
On March 11, 2018 12:31:33 PM PDT, Pavel Stehule
wrote:
>Hi
>
>Today, these task can be CPU limited . Do you think, so JIT can be used
>there too?
Copy definitely, with the others I'm much more doubtful. Don't see anything
around their bottlenecks that could be removed by JITing. Haven't look
I've often wanted something similar. But I've struggled to come up
with a good way to decide which parameters to keep. And as someone
mentioned, there's the question of how to deal with very large
constants.
The other day I was poking around with pg_stat_statements and jsonlog
and I thought of ano
> On 26 February 2018 at 11:03, Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 7:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:14 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
>> wrote:
>>> Appreciate you taking time for review.
>>>
>>> PFA updated version.
>>
>> Committed 0001.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Here's patchs
Hi
Today, these task can be CPU limited . Do you think, so JIT can be used
there too?
Regards
Pavel
On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Thomas Munro
> > If that is indeed a race, could it be fixed by
> > calling PredicateLockPageSplit() at the start of _hash_splitbucket()
> > instead?
> >
>
> Yes, but I think it would be better if we call this o
On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 6:57 AM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> My thought experiments about pseudo-pages and avoiding the split stuff
> were not intended to get the patch kicked out. I thought for a while
> that hash indexes were a special case and could benefit from
> dispensing with those trickier prob
Hi
Maybe I’m missing something (I’ve been offline a lot recently for
unavoidable reasons), but the perf farm project already has a Django
backend initialised and configured to work with community auth, on
community infrastructure.
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgperffarm.git;a=summary
On
On 2018-03-11 13:19:57 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 3/9/18 15:56, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I think that's largely that unnecessary trivial queries get JITed and
> > optimized, because the stats are entirely completely off.
>
> Right. I instrumented this a bit, and there are indeed two hand
> On Mar 3, 2018, at 2:40 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> An updated patch version, fixing the breakage caused by fd1a421fe6
> twiddling with pg_proc.
Hi Tomas!
Reviewing the sgml documentation, I think something like the following should
be added:
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml b/doc/s
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> The change in the Debian package I found was to build without zlib at
> all. So no amount of turning it back on will help. Whereas the
> upstream change was just to make the default to be off. But anyway,
> this feature is clearly dying, so we probably shouldn't be tr
Dean Rasheed writes:
> On 10 March 2018 at 20:21, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If we suppose that we only need to fix it in HEAD, the most attractive
>> answer is to add a parameter distinguishing WHERE and CHECK arguments
>> to canonicalize_qual.
> I agree that this looks like the best choice, but it fee
On 3/9/18 15:42, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> The default of jit_above_cost = 50 seems pretty good. I constructed
> a query that cost about 45 where the run time with and without JIT
> were about even. This is obviously very limited testing, but it's a
> good start.
Actually, the default in
On 3/9/18 15:56, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-03-09 15:28:19 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 3/6/18 15:16, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> 2) Don't load the JIT provider until fully needed. Right now
>>>jit_compile_expr() will load the jit provider even if not really
>>>needed. We should pr
Hi Aleksander,
I am currently preparing a proposal for pg_thrift project. I noticed
that there are several protocols supported by thrift, which ones do we have
higher priority? I mean which ones I need to implement during this project?
Thanks, Charles.
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 2:05 PM, Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 3/11/18 04:00, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > I am not talking about the OpenSSL disabling it. It was disabled on most
> > *distributions* years ago, long before that commit. Which is why I'm
> > still cu
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 2:27 AM, Pavan Deolasee
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 12:11 AM, Claudio Freire
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Pavan Deolasee
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>>
>> >
>> > So yes, the benefits of the patch go down with higher number of clients,
>> > but
>> > it d
Hello, mark
I initialized a Django project and imported the Django REST Framework. Its
github address is: https://github.com/PGPerfFarm/server-code
I created some model classes and also wrote scripts in the dbtools folder to
import simulation data for development. I am hesitant to use admin or xa
On 9 March 2018 at 02:11, David Rowley wrote:
> On 8 March 2018 at 18:40, Andrew Dunstan
> wrote:
>> select * from t;
>> fastdef tps = 107.145811
>> master tps = 150.207957
>>
>> "select * from t" used to be about a wash, but with this patch it's
>> got worse. The last two queries were worse
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 11:04:01PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 08:22:49AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> > Thanks for reviewing. All done.
>
> Thanks. Please be careful with the indentation of the patch. Attached
> is a slightly-updated version with a small modi
Hello hackers,
While working on serializable transaction isolation, I've noticed some
strange behavior in the first permutation mentioned in
isolation/specs/read-only-anomaly-2.spec file.
setup
{
CREATE TABLE bank_account (id TEXT PRIMARY KEY, balance DECIMAL NOT NULL);
INSERT INTO bank_a
On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 08:22:49AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> Thanks for reviewing. All done.
Thanks. Please be careful with the indentation of the patch. Attached
is a slightly-updated version with a small modification in
remove_target_file to make the code cleaner, a proposal of comm
On 3/11/18 04:00, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I am not talking about the OpenSSL disabling it. It was disabled on most
> *distributions* years ago, long before that commit. Which is why I'm
> still curious as to what platform you actually got it enabled by default
> on...
Homebrew package
> So f
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
>
After recent commits, the patch doesn't get applied cleanly, so
rebased it and along the way addressed the comments raised by you.
> Here are some comments on the patch.
>
> +/*
> + * Except for the topmos
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 5:49 PM, Alexander Korotkov <
a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 9:40 PM, Alexander Korotkov <
> a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Masahiko Sawada
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Attached an updated patch
>>>
>> fixed these iss
On 03/11/2018 07:31 AM, David Rowley wrote:
> On 11 March 2018 at 12:11, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> On 03/05/2018 04:51 AM, David Rowley wrote:
>>> On 5 March 2018 at 04:54, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>> Consider the following slightly backward-looking case;
>>>
>>> select string_agg(',', x::text) from g
Hi,
I've just stumbled on a bug in the parallel reindexing code.
Example:
-- force parallel index creation
set parallel_tuple_cost = 0;
set parallel_setup_cost = 0;
set min_parallel_table_scan_size = '0MB';
set min_parallel_index_scan_size = '0kB';
-- example (from the regression tests)
CREATE
> 10 марта 2018 г., в 19:20, Michail Nikolaev
> написал(а):
>
> > Also, I think that this check could be removed from loop. We do not expect
> > that it's state will change during execution, do we?
>
> Removed.
Sorry, seems like I've incorrectly expressed what I wanted to say.
I mean this
On 6 March 2018 at 16:48, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On 6 March 2018 at 08:51, John Naylor wrote:
>> On 3/5/18, Dean Rasheed wrote:
>>> Attached is an updated patch.
>> Nice. The results look good.
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
So I was about ready to commit this, but decided to do more testing,
beca
On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 05:23:48PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> This seems like a useful test.
>
> On 3/5/18 12:35, David Steele wrote:
> > +mkdir($tablespaceDir)
> > + or die "unable to mkdir \"$tablespaceDir\"";
>
> Use BAIL_OUT instead of die in tests.
Would it be better to make this pr
On 10 March 2018 at 20:21, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Whilst fooling about with predtest.c, I noticed a rather embarrassing
>> error. Consider the following, rather silly, CHECK constraint:
>> ...
>> So, what to do? We have a few choices, none ideal:
>
> I'd been assuming that we need to back
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 08:23:39AM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I propose the attached patch, aligning the help message with the docs. Any
> reason not to?
+1 for doing what you are suggesting.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 12:36 AM, Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 3/9/18 09:06, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > What platform does that actually work out of the box on? I have
> > customers who actively want to use it (for compression, not security --
> > replication acro
49 matches
Mail list logo
