> "Rajkumar" == Rajkumar Raghuwanshi
> writes:
Rajkumar> Hi
Rajkumar> ntile() throws ERROR when hashagg is false, test case given
Rajkumar> below.
Rajkumar> postgres=# create table foo (a int, b int, c text);
Rajkumar> CREATE TABLE
Rajkumar> postgres=# insert into foo select i%2
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 1:09 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik
wrote:
> pg_wal_prefetch function will infinitely traverse WAL and prefetch block
> references in WAL records
> using posix_fadvise(WILLNEED) system call.
Hi Konstantin,
Why stop at the page cache... what about shared buffers?
--
Thomas Mun
Hi
ntile() throws ERROR when hashagg is false, test case given below.
postgres=# create table foo (a int, b int, c text);
CREATE TABLE
postgres=# insert into foo select i%20, i%30, to_char(i%12, 'FM') from
generate_series(0, 36) i;
INSERT 0 37
postgres=# explain select ntile(a) OVER () from f
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> [patches]
Hi Andres,
Obviously there is more work to be done here but the basic idea in
your clone-fd-checkpointer branch as of today seems OK to me. I think
Craig and I both had similar ideas (sending file descriptors that have
an old eno
On 2018/06/13 21:06, David Rowley wrote:
> There's also something pretty weird around the removal of the temp
> relation from the partition bound. I've had cases where the session
> that attached the temp table is long gone, but \d+ shows the table is
> still there and I can't attach another partit
On Wednesday, June 13, 2018, Yinjie Lin wrote:
>
> Why are there two such progresses forked? I think one round should be
> enough, like when using pgAdmin.
>
You can use the --password option to prevent it.
"""
This option is never essential, since psql will automatically prompt for a
password i
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 7:12 AM, Yinjie Lin wrote:
> Currently I am reading and testing code about Client Authentication, but I
> find that there are two progresses forked if I login using psql, while only
> one progress is forked if using pgAdmin.
>
If psql finds the server asks for a password,
On 2018/06/14 11:09, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:25:23PM +0530, amul sul wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018, 8:34 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Even if you want to argue that there's a use case for these situations,
>>> it seems far too late in the release cycle to be trying to fix al
Hello everyone.
I am a newcomer to PostgreSQL, and I don't know if it is proper to post my
question here, but I really need some help.
Currently I am reading and testing code about Client Authentication, but I
find that there are two progresses forked if I login using psql, while only
one progres
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 6:39 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik
wrote:
> There was very interesting presentation at pgconf about pg_prefaulter:
>
> http://www.pgcon.org/2018/schedule/events/1204.en.html
>
> But it is implemented in GO and using pg_waldump.
> I tried to do the same but using built-on Postgres
Hi mentors and hackers,
The first evaluation is coming. Here is my progress so far. During the
first stage of work, I have implemented the thrift binary protocol as the
format of postgresql plugin. Currently, the main interface is byte. Users
who use this plugin need to provide thrift bytes to
Hi,
Several features in various discussed access methods would benefit from
being able to perform actions when writing out a buffer. As an example,
because it doesn't require understanding any of the new proposed storage
formats, it'd be good for performance if we could eagerly set hint bits
/ per
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 1:50 AM, Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 4:44 PM Haribabu Kommi
> wrote:
>
> VACUUM:
> Not much changes are done in this apart moving the Vacuum visibility
> functions as part of the
> storage. But idea for the Vacuum was with each access method can defin
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> On 06/11/2018 11:22 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 8:41 PM, Moon, Insung
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Hackers,
>>>
>>> This propose a way to develop "Table-level" Transparent Data Encryption
>>> (TDE) and Key Management
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 02:06:57AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 13 June 2018 at 15:51, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> I guess you could go either way ... we're just changing one unhelpful
>>> error with a better one: there is no change in b
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:25:23PM +0530, amul sul wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018, 8:34 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Even if you want to argue that there's a use case for these situations,
>> it seems far too late in the release cycle to be trying to fix all these
>> issues. I think we need to forbid the
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 08:55:46PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I installed 1.1.0h and got errors you can see on the buildfarm. I've now
> installed 1.0.2o and everything is good.
Good thing you tested that. I have just used the LTS 1.0.2 for my
tests. And there are a couple of problems here.
> From: Tomas Vondra [mailto:tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com]
> On 05/25/2018 01:41 PM, Moon, Insung wrote:
> > BTW, I want to support CBC mode encryption[3]. However, I'm not sure
> > how to use the IV in CBC mode for this proposal. I'd like to hear
> > opinions by security engineer.
> >
>
> I'm not
On 06/12/2018 08:07 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 04:51:59PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 06/12/2018 10:51 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
meanwhile, Bowerbird (MSVC) is on 1.0.1d, lorikeet (Cygwin64) is on
1.0.2d and jacana (Mingw) doesn't build with openssl.
I will look
From: Tomas Vondra [mailto:tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com]
> Let me share some of the issues mentioned as possibly addressed by TDE
> (I'm not entirely sure TDE actually solves them, I'm just saying those
> were mentioned in previous discussions):
FYI, our product provides TDE like Oracle and SQL Se
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 10:34:55AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-06-11 11:50:55 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> So, we have confirmation from the RTM that there will be a 2018-07. And
>> there is visibly consensus that renaming 2018-09 to 2018-07 makes the
>> most sense. Any objections i
13.06.2018 12:40, Maksim Milyutin wrote:
On 09.06.2018 22:49, Tom Lane wrote:
Maksim Milyutin writes:
On hot standby I faced with the similar problem.
...
is planned 4.940 ms on master and *254.741* ms on standby.
(I wonder though why, if you executed the same query on the master,
its setti
Hi,
On 2018-06-14 00:34:54 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote:
> I just noticed a problem with log_statement = 'ddl' and log_line_prefix
> containing '%x'. If the statement is the first in the transaction, it
> will be logged before it is executed, and more importantly, before a
> transaction ID is assigne
I just noticed a problem with log_statement = 'ddl' and log_line_prefix
containing '%x'. If the statement is the first in the transaction, it
will be logged before it is executed, and more importantly, before a
transaction ID is assigned. That means that %x will be 0.
If the administrator has co
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 11:53:21AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-06-13 14:10:37 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 02:25:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> On top of that it seems to me that we'd want to rename any new
>>> routines to include "uint" in their name i
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 1:06 PM Simon Riggs wrote:
>> It's a good idea. How does it perform with many duplicate entries?
I agree that this is a good idea. It independently occurred to me to
do this. The L&Y algorithm doesn't take a pos
Hi,
On 2018-06-13 22:02:13 +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> > "Andres" == Andres Freund writes:
>
> >> unsigned char x = 128;
> >> pq_sendbyte(&buf, x);
> >>
> >> which I believe is not well-defined since pq_sendbyte takes an int8,
> >> and conversions of unrepresentable values to _signed
> "Andres" == Andres Freund writes:
>> unsigned char x = 128;
>> pq_sendbyte(&buf, x);
>>
>> which I believe is not well-defined since pq_sendbyte takes an int8,
>> and conversions of unrepresentable values to _signed_ integer types
>> are (iirc) implementation-dependent.
Andres> It'
On 2018-Jun-13, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> > > > With that, is there a need for elog()? In the backend we have
> > > > it because $HISTORY but there's no need for that here -- I
> > > > propose to lose elog() and use only ereport everywhere.
>
> See commit 8a07ebb3c172 which turns some ereport into
On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 11:50 -0300, Claudio Freire wrote:
> In essence, the technique I've been using always uses a fixed-size
> hash table to do partial grouping. The table is never grown, when
> collisions do happen, the existing entry in the hash table is flushed
> to disk and the aggregate state
Hello Marina,
I suppose that this is related; because of my patch there may be a lot of
such code (see v7 in [1]):
- fprintf(stderr,
- "malformed variable \"%s\" value:
\"%s\"\n",
- var->name, var->svalue);
+
On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 10:08 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I wasn't using the term "average" in a mathematical sense. I suppose
> I really meant "typical". I agree that thinking about cases where
> the
> group size is nonuniform is a good idea, but I don't think I agree
> that all uniform distributi
Hi,
Onder, I CCed you because it seems worthwhile to ensure that the
relevant Citus code could use this instead of the gross hack you and I
committed...
On 2018-06-13 20:54:03 +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 9 Apr 2018, at 23:55, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2017-06-20 13:01:35 -0700, Andr
> On 9 Apr 2018, at 23:55, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-06-20 13:01:35 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> For extensions it'd also be useful if it'd be possible to overwrite the
>> error code. E.g. for citus there's a distributed deadlock detector,
>> running out of process because there's no way t
On 2018-06-13 14:10:37 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 02:25:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 12:27:58PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> Do you have an answer to this question? Does anybody else?
> >>
> >> (My guts tell me it'd be better to
Hi,
On 2018-05-24 18:13:23 +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> In PG11, pq_sendbyte got changed from taking an int parameter to taking
> an int8.
>
> While that seems to work in general, it does mean that there are now
> several places in the code that do the equivalent of:
>
> unsigned char x = 1
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 13 June 2018 at 15:51, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> On 2018-Jun-13, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 12:48 PM Kuntal Ghosh
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 2:28 PM, Masahiko Sawada
>>> > wrote:
>>> > > Hi,
>>
I.e. we already do reorder the group clauses to match ORDER BY, to only
require a single sort. This happens in preprocess_groupclause(), which
also explains the reasoning behind that.
Huh. I missed that. That means group_keys_reorder_by_pathkeys() call inside
get_cheapest_group_keys_order() dupli
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018, 8:34 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Ashutosh Bapat writes:
> > [ lots o' problems with $subject ]
>
> > But a larger question is what use such temporary partitions are?
> > Should we just prohibit adding temporary partitions to a permanant
> > partitioned table? We should allow addin
I see v9 is now calling estimate_num_groups(), so it already benefits
from extended statistics. Nice! I think the algorithm is more or less
the greedy option I proposed in one of the earlier messages - I don't
know if it's sufficient or not, but the only other idea I have is
essentially an exhaust
David Rowley writes:
> On 13 June 2018 at 16:15, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It seems not to be that bad: we just need a shutdown call for the
>> PartitionPruneState, and then we can remember the open relation there.
>> The attached is based on David's patch from yesterday.
> I've looked over this and it
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 11:40 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Masahiko Sawada
>> > wrote:
>> >> FWIW, I've looked at this again. I thi
On 13 June 2018 at 15:51, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2018-Jun-13, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 12:48 PM Kuntal Ghosh
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 2:28 PM, Masahiko Sawada
>> > wrote:
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > Three functions: brin_summarize_new_values, brin_su
Ashutosh Bapat writes:
> [ lots o' problems with $subject ]
> But a larger question is what use such temporary partitions are?
> Should we just prohibit adding temporary partitions to a permanant
> partitioned table? We should allow adding temporary partitions to a
> temporary partitioned table i
On 2018-Jun-13, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 12:48 PM Kuntal Ghosh
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 2:28 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Three functions: brin_summarize_new_values, brin_summarize_range and
> > > brin_desummarize_range can be calle
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 5:05 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> On 06/05/2018 07:46 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 07:04 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >> I expect the eviction strategy to be the primary design challenge of
> >> this patch. The other bits will be mostly determined by this on
On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Gierth writes:
>> I beat at the grammar a bit to see what it would take to fix it at least
>> to the extent of allowing a_expr ColId in a select list after removing
>> postfix ops. It looked like it was doable by making these keywords mor
Robert Haas writes:
> Seems reasonable. Really, I think we should look for a way to hang
> onto the relation at the point where it's originally opened and locked
> instead of reopening it here. But that's probably more invasive than
> we can really justify right at the moment, and I think this i
On 11 June 2018 at 17:56, Andres Freund wrote:
> I don't think this is a good idea. We shouldn't continue down the path
> of having running xacts not actually running xacts, but rather go back
> to including everything. The case presented in the thread didn't
> actually do what it claimed origina
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> I think average group size is the wrong way to look at it, because
> averages are only useful for a normal distribution. The two most
> interesting cases are:
>
> 1. Fairly uniform group size (e.g. normal dist)
> 2. Skew values, power law distri
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 5:36 PM, David Rowley
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems temp tables with partitioned tables is not working correctly.
> 9140cf8269b0c has not considered that in build_simple_rel() an
> AppendRelInfo could be missing due to it having been skipped in
> expand_partitioned_rtentry()
>
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> As for whether to change it at this point in the release cycle, I
>> guess that, to me, depends on how invasive the fix is.
>
> It seems not to be that bad: we just need a shutdown call for the
> PartitionPruneState, and then we can remember the
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 11:40 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> >> FWIW, I've looked at this again. I think that the situation Siva
> >> reported in the first mail can happen b
On 06/11/2018 05:22 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> As per discussion at PGCon unconference, I think that firstly we need
> to discuss what threats we want to defend database data against.
Exactly. While certainly there is demand for encryption for the sake of
"checking a box", different designs will
Hi,
On 05/25/2018 01:41 PM, Moon, Insung wrote:
Hello Hackers,
...
BTW, I want to support CBC mode encryption[3]. However, I'm not sure
how to use the IV in CBC mode for this proposal. I'd like to hear
opinions by security engineer.
I'm not a cryptographer either, but this is exactly wher
There was very interesting presentation at pgconf about pg_prefaulter:
http://www.pgcon.org/2018/schedule/events/1204.en.html
But it is implemented in GO and using pg_waldump.
I tried to do the same but using built-on Postgres WAL traverse functions.
I have implemented it as extension for simpli
On 06/11/2018 11:22 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 8:41 PM, Moon, Insung
wrote:
Hello Hackers,
This propose a way to develop "Table-level" Transparent Data
Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS) support in
PostgreSQL.
...
As per discussion at PGCon unconfer
Hi,
It seems temp tables with partitioned tables is not working correctly.
9140cf8269b0c has not considered that in build_simple_rel() an
AppendRelInfo could be missing due to it having been skipped in
expand_partitioned_rtentry()
Assert(cnt_parts == nparts); fails in build_simple_rel, and withou
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 12:48 PM Kuntal Ghosh
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 2:28 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Three functions: brin_summarize_new_values, brin_summarize_range and
> > brin_desummarize_range can be called during recovery as follows.
> >
> > =# select brin_summar
On 10-06-2018 10:38, Fabien COELHO wrote:
Hello Marina,
Hello!
v9-0003-Pgbench-errors-use-the-ereport-macro-to-report-de.patch
- a patch for the ereport() macro (this is used to report client
failures that do not cause an aborts and this depends on the level of
debugging).
ISTM that abort
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 2:28 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Three functions: brin_summarize_new_values, brin_summarize_range and
> brin_desummarize_range can be called during recovery as follows.
>
> =# select brin_summarize_new_values('a_idx');
> ERROR: cannot acquire lock mode ShareUpdate
On 09.06.2018 22:49, Tom Lane wrote:
Maksim Milyutin writes:
On hot standby I faced with the similar problem.
...
is planned 4.940 ms on master and *254.741* ms on standby.
(I wonder though why, if you executed the same query on the master,
its setting of the index-entry-is-dead bits didn't
Hi,
Three functions: brin_summarize_new_values, brin_summarize_range and
brin_desummarize_range can be called during recovery as follows.
=# select brin_summarize_new_values('a_idx');
ERROR: cannot acquire lock mode ShareUpdateExclusiveLock on database
objects while recovery is in progress
HINT:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>> FWIW, I've looked at this again. I think that the situation Siva
>> reported in the first mail can happen before we get commit 3b2787e.
>> That is, gin indexes had had a data c
Hi.
On 2018/06/13 14:55, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 11:08:38AM +0530, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi wrote:
>> postgres=# SELECT dense_rank(b) WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY a) FROM pagg_tab
>> GROUP BY b ORDER BY 1;
>> server closed the connection unexpectedly
>> This probably means the s
On 13 June 2018 at 17:55, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 11:08:38AM +0530, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi wrote:
>> postgres=# SELECT dense_rank(b) WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY a) FROM pagg_tab
>> GROUP BY b ORDER BY 1;
>> server closed the connection unexpectedly
>> This probably means the
66 matches
Mail list logo
