Re: Conflict handling for COPY FROM

Hi Surafel, Andrew and I began reviewing your patch. It applied cleanly and seems to mostly have the functionality you describe. We did have some comments/questions. 1. It sounded like you added the copy_max_error_limit GUC as part of this patch to allow users to specify how many errors they wa

Re: Fix help option of contrib/oid2name

On August 18, 2018 10:52:33 AM GMT+09:00, Tom Lane wrote: > I think it probably needs to stay documented, but we could mark it as > deprecated ... Okay, no issues with doing so. -- Michael

Re: Fix help option of contrib/oid2name

Michael Paquier writes: > On August 17, 2018 10:53:48 PM GMT+09:00, Tom Lane wrote: >> Well, we can't remove the -H option, for that reason. But I think >> we could get away with repurposing -h to also mean "--host", rather >> than "--help" as it is now. Seems unlikely that any scripts are >> d

Re: Fix help option of contrib/oid2name

On August 17, 2018 10:53:48 PM GMT+09:00, Tom Lane wrote: > Well, we can't remove the -H option, for that reason. But I think > we could get away with repurposing -h to also mean "--host", rather > than "--help" as it is now. Seems unlikely that any scripts are > depending on it to mean --hel

Re: Getting NOT NULL constraint from pg_attribute

Wu Ivy writes: > I’m currently building a Postgres C extension that fetch data from a Postgres > table. > Since the table can be large, in order to prevent memory overrun, I use > SPI_cursor_fetch to fetch chunks of data. The result rows are saved in > SPITupleTable* SPI_tuptable and attributes

Re: Fix for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW ownership error message

On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 at 19:35, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2018-Aug-17, Dave Cramer wrote: > > > The only place this is used is in aclcheck_error > > case OBJECT_MATVIEW: > > msg = gettext_noop("permission denied for materialized view %s"); > > break; > > Yes, but do we pass RefreshMatViewStmt->rel

Re: Fix for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW ownership error message

On 2018-Aug-17, Dave Cramer wrote: > The only place this is used is in aclcheck_error > case OBJECT_MATVIEW: > msg = gettext_noop("permission denied for materialized view %s"); > break; Yes, but do we pass RefreshMatViewStmt->relkind to that routine? I don't see that we do. Maybe I misread the

Re: Fix for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW ownership error message

Dave Cramer da...@postgresintl.com www.postgresintl.com On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 at 18:30, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2018-Aug-17, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I Initially pointed out here[1] that running REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW > as a > > non-superuser or table owner yields the foll

Getting NOT NULL constraint from pg_attribute

Hi developers, I’m currently building a Postgres C extension that fetch data from a Postgres table. Since the table can be large, in order to prevent memory overrun, I use SPI_cursor_fetch to fetch chunks of data. The result rows are saved in SPITupleTable* SPI_tuptable and attributes are saved

Re: Fix for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW ownership error message

On 2018-Aug-17, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > Hi, > > I Initially pointed out here[1] that running REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW as a > non-superuser or table owner yields the following message: > > test=> REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW blah; > ERROR: must be owner of relation blah > > The error mes

Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types

Tomas Vondra writes: > Hmm, yeah. Based on past experience, the powerpc machines are likely to > stumble on this. > FWIW my understanding is that these failures actually happen in new > tests, it's not an issue introduced by this patch series. Yeah, we've definitely hit such problems before. Th

Fix for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW ownership error message

Hi,I Initially pointed out here[1] that running REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW as anon-superuser or table owner yields the following message:    test=> REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW blah;    ERROR: must be owner of relation blahThe error message should say "...owner of materialized view..."The attached patc

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

Alexander Korotkov writes: > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 9:55 PM Tom Lane wrote: >> Another point is that the truncation code attempts to remove all >> to-be-truncated-away pages from the shared buffer arena, but that only >> works if nobody else is loading such pages into shared buffers >> concurren

Re: docs: note ownership requirement for refreshing materialized views

> On Aug 17, 2018, at 9:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Dave Cramer writes: >> So it seems this patch is being ignored in this thread. > > Well, Jonathan did kind of hijack what appears to be a thread about > documentation (with an already-committed fix). I apologize if it was interpreted as hijac

Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types

On 08/17/2018 08:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Emre Hasegeli writes: >>> BTW how did we end up with the regression differences? Presumably you've >>> tried that on your machine and it passed. So if we adjust the expected >>> file, won't it fail on some other machines? > >> I had another patch to check

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 9:55 PM Tom Lane wrote: > Alexander Korotkov writes: > > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 8:38 PM Tom Lane wrote: > >> Alexander Korotkov writes: > >>> Yes, that's correct. On standby read-only queries can tolerate > >>> concurrent heap truncation. > > >> Uh, what??? > > > VACUU

Re: InsertPgAttributeTuple() and attcacheoff

On 14/08/2018 17:52, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 3:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Peter Eisentraut writes: >>> It seems to me that it would make sense if InsertPgAttributeTuple() were >>> to set attcacheoff to -1 instead of taking it from the caller. >> >> Looked this over, no objecti

Re: Pre-v11 appearances of the word "procedure" in v11 docs

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 7:15 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Attached are my proposed patches. I take it that you propose all 3 for backpatch to v11? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types

Emre Hasegeli writes: >> BTW how did we end up with the regression differences? Presumably you've >> tried that on your machine and it passed. So if we adjust the expected >> file, won't it fail on some other machines? > I had another patch to check for -0 inside float{4,8}_{div,mul}(). I > drop

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

Alexander Korotkov writes: > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 8:38 PM Tom Lane wrote: >> Alexander Korotkov writes: >>> Yes, that's correct. On standby read-only queries can tolerate >>> concurrent heap truncation. >> Uh, what??? > VACUUM truncates heap relation only after deletion of all the tuples >

Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types

On 08/17/2018 08:24 PM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: >> BTW how did we end up with the regression differences? Presumably you've >> tried that on your machine and it passed. So if we adjust the expected >> file, won't it fail on some other machines? > > I had another patch to check for -0 inside float{4

Performance improvements for src/port/snprintf.c

Over in the what-about-%m thread, we speculated about replacing the platform's *printf functions if they didn't support %m, which would basically mean using src/port/snprintf.c on all non-glibc platforms, rather than only on Windows as happens right now (ignoring some obsolete platforms with busted

Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types

> BTW how did we end up with the regression differences? Presumably you've > tried that on your machine and it passed. So if we adjust the expected > file, won't it fail on some other machines? I had another patch to check for -0 inside float{4,8}_{div,mul}(). I dropped it on the last set of patc

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 8:38 PM Tom Lane wrote: > Alexander Korotkov writes: > > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 6:41 PM Andres Freund wrote: > >> There's another patch, which I thought Alexander was referring to, that > >> does something a bit smarger. On a super short skim it seems to > >> introduce

Re: Index Skip Scan

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 4:10 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > Can you give an example of problematic ndistinct underestimation? Yes. See https://postgr.es/m/cakuk5j12qokfh88tqz-ojmsibg2qyjm7k7hlnbyi3ze+y5b...@mail.gmail.com, for example. That's a complaint about an underestimation specifically. This s

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

Alexander Korotkov writes: > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 6:41 PM Andres Freund wrote: >> There's another patch, which I thought Alexander was referring to, that >> does something a bit smarger. On a super short skim it seems to >> introduce a separate type of AEL lock that's not replicated, by my >>

Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types

On 08/17/2018 06:40 PM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: >> the buildfarm seems to be mostly happy so far, so I've taken a quick >> look at the remaining two parts. The patches still apply, but I'm >> getting plenty of failures in regression tests, due to 0.0 being >> replaced by -0.0. > > I think we are b

Re: Index Skip Scan

Hi Peter, On 08/16/2018 03:48 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 11:22 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: * groups and certain aggregates (MIN() and MAX() of suffix index columns within each group) * index scans where the scan key doesn't include the leading columns (but you expect there

Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types

> the buildfarm seems to be mostly happy so far, so I've taken a quick > look at the remaining two parts. The patches still apply, but I'm > getting plenty of failures in regression tests, due to 0.0 being > replaced by -0.0. I think we are better off fixing them locally at the moment like your pa

Re: partitioning - changing a slot's descriptor is expensive

On 29 June 2018 at 11:53, Amit Langote wrote: > Other issues that you mentioned, such as needless heap_tuple_deform/form > being invoked, seem less localized (to me) than this particular issue, so > I created a patch for just this, which is attached with this email. I'm > thinking about how to fi

Slotification of partition tuple conversion

Hi, In [1] , it was shown that the partition tuples are needlessly formed and deformed during tuple conversion (do_convert_tuple), when the same operation can be done using tuple slots. This is because the input slot might already have a deformed tuple. Attached is a patch tup_convert.patch that

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 6:41 PM Andres Freund wrote: > On 2018-08-17 11:35:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Andres Freund writes: > > > On 2018-08-17 18:00:20 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > >> So, do we have any objections to committing this? > > > > > I think this needs more review by other s

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

On 2018-08-17 11:35:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > On 2018-08-17 18:00:20 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > >> So, do we have any objections to committing this? > > > I think this needs more review by other senior hackers in the community. > > TBH it sounds like a horribl

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

Andres Freund writes: > On 2018-08-17 18:00:20 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: >> So, do we have any objections to committing this? > I think this needs more review by other senior hackers in the community. TBH it sounds like a horrible hack. Disable vacuum truncation? That can't be a good ide

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

Hi, On 2018-08-17 18:00:20 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > So, do we have any objections to committing this? I think this needs more review by other senior hackers in the community. Greetings, Andres Freund

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 2:16 PM Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:05 PM Masahiko Sawada > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:24 PM, Ivan Kartyshov > > wrote: > > > The main goal of my changes is to let long read-only transactions run on > > > replica if hot_standby_f

Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types

Hi, the buildfarm seems to be mostly happy so far, so I've taken a quick look at the remaining two parts. The patches still apply, but I'm getting plenty of failures in regression tests, due to 0.0 being replaced by -0.0. This reminds me 74294c7301, except that these patches don't seem to remove

Re: Memory leak with CALL to Procedure with COMMIT.

On 16/08/2018 19:26, Tom Lane wrote: >> When a CALL has output parameters, the portal uses the strategy >> PORTAL_UTIL_SELECT instead of PORTAL_MULTI_QUERY. Using >> PORTAL_UTIL_SELECT causes the portal's snapshot to be registered with >> the current resource owner (portal->holdSnapshot). I'm not

Re: Pre-v11 appearances of the word "procedure" in v11 docs

Attached are my proposed patches. The first is the documentation change, which basically just substitutes the words, with some occasional rephrasing. And then patches to extend the syntaxes of CREATE OPERATOR, CREATE TRIGGER, and CREATE EVENT TRIGGER to accept FUNCTION in place of PROCEDURE. I d

Re: Fix help option of contrib/oid2name

Alvaro Herrera writes: > On 2018-Aug-17, Tatsuro Yamada wrote: >> only oid2name >> - Replace -H with -h > I think this one is a bad idea, as it'll break scripts. Well, we can't remove the -H option, for that reason. But I think we could get away with repurposing -h to also mean "--host", rather

Re: Facility for detecting insecure object naming

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:58:21PM -0400, Chapman Flack wrote: > On 08/16/18 21:31, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I understand you don't like that a search_path changed by a function is > > passed down to functions it calls, but what would you like the system to > > use as a search path for called fu

Re: docs: note ownership requirement for refreshing materialized views

Dave Cramer writes: > So it seems this patch is being ignored in this thread. Well, Jonathan did kind of hijack what appears to be a thread about documentation (with an already-committed fix). I'd suggest reposting that patch in its own thread and adding it to the next CF.

Re: Fix help option of contrib/oid2name

On 2018-Aug-17, Tatsuro Yamada wrote: > only oid2name > - Replace -H with -h I think this one is a bad idea, as it'll break scripts. -- Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Re: docs: note ownership requirement for refreshing materialized views

Jonathan's patch seems like a good idea to me from a user POV, but then I just showed up the other day so I don't really have anything of substance to add. On 8/17/18 9:08 AM, Dave Cramer wrote: Dave Cramer On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 18:27, Jonathan S. Katz

Re: docs: note ownership requirement for refreshing materialized views

Dave Cramer On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 18:27, Jonathan S. Katz < jonathan.k...@excoventures.com> wrote: > > On Aug 16, 2018, at 1:05 AM, Jonathan S. Katz < > jonathan.k...@excoventures.com> wrote: > > > On Aug 15, 2018, at 9:15 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 09:06:34PM -0400

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

On 17-08-2018 14:04, Fabien COELHO wrote: ... Or perhaps we can use a more detailed failure status so for each type of failure we always know the command name (argument "cmd") and whether the client is aborted. Something like this (but in comparison with the first variant ISTM overly complicat

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

commandFailed: I'm not thrilled by the added boolean, which is partially redundant with the second argument. Do you mean that it is partially redundant with the argument "cmd" and, for example, the meta commands errors always do not cause the abortions of the client? Yes. And also I'm not

libpq stricter integer parsing

Follow up on a patch and discussion with Tom, currently integer parsing on keywords in libpq is quite loose, resulting in trailing garbage being ignored and allowing to hide bugs, eg: sh> psql "connect_timeout=2,port=5433" The timeout is set to 2, and the port directive is silently ignored

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

On 17-08-2018 10:49, Fabien COELHO wrote: Hello Marina, Detailed -r report. I understand from the doc that the retry number on the detailed per-statement report is to identify at what point errors occur? Probably this is more or less always at the same point on a given script, so that the mos

Re: TupleTableSlot abstraction

Hi, On 2018-08-17 12:10:20 +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > We need to add LLVM code to fetch tts_flags and > perform bit operation on it to get or set slow property. I haven't > found any precedence for LLVM bit operations in postgresql's JIT code. There are several, look for the infomask accesses

Re: Doc patch: pg_upgrade page and checkpoint location consistency with replicas

I shared the pach in plain textin the email body and figured out that all other patches are submitted as an attachement. Sorry for that, here is the patch attached to this email. Thanks! Paul On 17/08/18 01:21, Paul Bonaud wrote: > Hello, > > Please find below a submission of a patch to the Post

Re: ToDo: show size of partitioned table

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 12:46 AM Pavel Stehule wrote: > čt 16. 8. 2018 v 5:52 odesílatel Mathias Brossard > napsal: > >> I do have a feedback on the implementation. The code tries to support >> older PostgreSQL server versions when declarative partitions were not >> supported before version 10 (

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

Hello Marina, Detailed -r report. I understand from the doc that the retry number on the detailed per-statement report is to identify at what point errors occur? Probably this is more or less always at the same point on a given script, so that the most interesting feature is to report the n

Re: Fix help option of contrib/oid2name

On 2018/08/17 12:42, Tatsuro Yamada wrote: On 2018/08/17 11:47, Michael Paquier wrote: On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 08:57:57PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: I agree on both points.  Any objections if I apply what's proposed here on HEAD? I have been looking at this patch.  And while consistency is