28.09.2018 23:08, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 7:50 AM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
I think it might help this patch move along if it were split up a bit,
for example 1) suffix truncation, 2) tid stuff, 3) new split strategies.
That way, it would also be easier to test out each pie
> "Mark" == Mark Wong writes:
Mark> What should I try next?
What is the size of a C "int" on this platform?
--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
Hi,
> I think it's better to stay closer to what explain.c itself is doing - it's
> not like that if statement costs us anything really...
Oh, I understood.
Thank you.
-Original Message-
From: Andres Freund [mailto:and...@anarazel.de]
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 2:11 PM
To: Shi
Hi,
On 2018-09-29 05:04:25 +, Shinoda, Noriyoshi (PN Japan GCS Delivery) wrote:
> I tried this feature.
> I think that 'if (es->costs)' of the source code auto_explain.c will always
> be ‘true’.
>
> Because it is not changed after 'es-> cost = true' in NewExplainState ()
> function several
Hi,
I tried this feature.
I think that 'if (es->costs)' of the source code auto_explain.c will always be
‘true’.
Because it is not changed after 'es-> cost = true' in NewExplainState ()
function several rows ago.
So I attached a patch to delete this if statement.
Regards,
Noriyoshi Shinoda
Fr
Andres Freund writes:
> Here's a refreshed version of this patch. First patch removes
> contrib/spi/timetravel, second patch removes abstime, reltime, tinterval
> together with timeofday().
I'd kind of like to keep timeofday(); it's the only simple way to
get a time display that includes "native
Hi,
How come those two functions return oids, even though, as far as I
understand, the underlying relation is BKI_WITHOUT_OIDS. I assume
that's just an oversight?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
Hi Andres,
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 03:41:27PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-09-28 15:22:23 -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:52:15AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > Mark, is there anything odd for specific branches?
> >
> > No... I don't have anything in the config
Thanks for all the guidance!
Don.
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 18:12 Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> * Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
> > * Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
> > > I still don't see that as a reason for tools to be suseptible to
> serious
> > > issues if a funk
Greetings,
* Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 02:36:19PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Is there an issue with making the archiver able to understand that
> > situation instead of being confused by it..? Seems like that'd probably
> > be a good thing to do r
Greetings,
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
> * Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
> > I still don't see that as a reason for tools to be suseptible to serious
> > issues if a funky user gets created and I'd be surprised if there
> > weren't other ways to get funky characters int
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 02:36:19PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Is there an issue with making the archiver able to understand that
> situation instead of being confused by it..? Seems like that'd probably
> be a good thing to do regardless of this, but that would then remove the
> need for this k
Hi,
On 2018-09-28 15:22:23 -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:52:15AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Mark, is there anything odd for specific branches?
>
> No... I don't have anything in the config that would be applied to
> specific branches...
Could you perhaps do some manua
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:52:15AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Mark, is there anything odd for specific branches?
No... I don't have anything in the config that would be applied to
specific branches...
Regards,
Mark
--
Mark Wonghttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
Postg
On 21/08/2018 17:24, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Attached is a patch that instead moves those special cases into
>> needs_toast_table(), which was one of the options suggested by Andres.
>> There were already similar checks there, so I guess this makes a bit of
>> sense.
> The big difference is that th
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2018-09-28 16:36:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> No, they MUST be independently verifiable. The interactions between
>> the check_xxx functions in this patch are utterly unsafe. We've
>> learned that lesson before.
> I'm not sure those concerns apply quite the same way h
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 09/28/2018 01:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> - I don't think this should be moved to a separate file. Yes, func.sgml
>> is pretty big, but if we're going to split it up, we should do it in a
>> systematic way, not just one section.
> I'm in favor of doing that. It'
Hi,
On 2018-09-28 16:36:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > I think this was the major point of contention. I reread the old
> > thread, and it's still not clear why we need to change this. _type and
> > _value look like an EAV system to me. GUC variables should be
> > ver
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> I think this was the major point of contention. I reread the old
> thread, and it's still not clear why we need to change this. _type and
> _value look like an EAV system to me. GUC variables should be
> verifiable independent of another variable.
No, they MUST be in
On 09/28/2018 01:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 28/06/2018 01:36, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
Attached patch with draft of SQL/JSON documentation written by
Liudmila Mantrova, Oleg Bartunov and me.
Also it can be found in our sqljson repository on sqljson_doc branch:
https://github.com/postgres
On 29/08/2018 17:43, Sergei Kornilov wrote:
> Current patch moves recovery.conf settings into GUC system:
> - if startup process found recovery.conf - it throw error
OK
> - recovery mode is turned on if new special file recovery.signal found
OK
> - standby_mode setting was removed. Standby mode
James Robinson writes:
> Per Tom's suggestion on bug #15396, here's a patch to have platforms such as
> OSX give a more descriptive message when rejecting a nonzero value for
> effective_io_concurrency.
Pushed with minor editorialization.
regards, tom lane
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 8:00 AM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 21/09/2018 01:18, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > * This means that there is a compatibility issue for anyone that is
> > already right on the threshold -- we *really* don't want to see a
> > REINDEX fail, but that seems like a possibility th
Andres Freund writes:
> It seems Mark started a new buildfarm animal on s390x. It shows a pretty
> odd failure on 9.3 and 9.4, but *not* on newer animals:
No, lumpsucker is showing the same failure on 9.5 as well. I suspect
that the reason 9.6 and up are OK is that 9.6 is where we introduced
the
On 2018-Sep-28, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-09-28 16:06:30 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2018-Aug-21, Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > > I still think it's wrong to work around this than to actually fix the
> > > issue with pg_attribute not having a toast table.
> >
> > FWIW I'm still bothe
On 2018-Sep-28, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> The psql commands seem out of place here. If you want to learn about
> how to use psql, you can go to the psql documentation.
There is a legitimate point in doing this, though, since the GRANT page
is already explaining how does psql display privileges.
On 2018-09-28 16:06:30 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2018-Aug-21, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > On 2018-08-21 17:04:41 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >
> > > That doesn't solve the original problem, which is being able to set
> > > reloptions on pg_attribute, because pg_attribute doesn't have a
On 06/09/2018 02:16, Yotsunaga, Naoki wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Yotsunaga, Naoki [mailto:yotsunaga.na...@jp.fujitsu.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 10:18 AM
> To: Postgres hackers
> Subject: automatic restore point
>
>> Hi, I attached a patch to output the LSN before execut
On 2018-Aug-21, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-08-21 17:04:41 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> > That doesn't solve the original problem, which is being able to set
> > reloptions on pg_attribute, because pg_attribute doesn't have a toast
> > table but would need one according to existing rules.
Some thoughts:
We should keep the GRANT reference page about GRANT. There is a section
about Privileges in the Data Definition chapter, which we could use to
expand on general concepts.
The ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES reference page would be another place this
could be put.
The Owner column is red
I wrote:
> Now, if we go forward with that solution, there will be issues with
> some other things that libpq exports without having defined itself:
> src/backend/utils/mb/wchar.c:
> pg_utf_mblen
> src/backend/utils/mb/encnames.c:
> pg_encoding_to_char
> pg_char_to_encoding
> pg_valid_server_encodi
Hi,
It seems Mark started a new buildfarm animal on s390x. It shows a pretty
odd failure on 9.3 and 9.4, but *not* on newer animals:
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=lumpsucker&dt=2018-09-26%2020%3A30%3A58
== pgsql.build/src/test/regress/regression.diffs
=
Per Tom's suggestion on bug #15396, here's a patch to have platforms such as
OSX give a more descriptive message when rejecting a nonzero value for
effective_io_concurrency.
I had to adjust the GUC's wiring in the #ifndef case so that
check_effective_io_concurrency() would be called when a nonz
Greetings,
* Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote:
> While reviewing the archiving code, I have bumped into the fact that
> XLogArchiveCleanup() thinks that it is safe to do only a plain unlink()
> for .ready and .done files when removing a past segment. I don't think
> that it is a smart
On 25/09/2018 13:55, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 4:51 AM Bradley DeJong wrote:
>>
>> On 2018-09-22, Amit Kapila wrote ...
>> > ... duplicate the same information in different words at three
>> different places ...
>>
>> I count 7 different places. In the protocol docs, there is t
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 7:50 AM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> So. I don't know much about the btree code, so don't believe anything I
> say.
I think that showing up and reviewing this patch makes you somewhat of
an expert, by default. There just isn't enough expertise in this area.
> I was very int
On 28/06/2018 01:36, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> Attached patch with draft of SQL/JSON documentation written by
> Liudmila Mantrova, Oleg Bartunov and me.
>
> Also it can be found in our sqljson repository on sqljson_doc branch:
> https://github.com/postgrespro/sqljson/tree/sqljson_doc
>
> We continu
On 2018-Sep-28, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2018/09/28 17:48, David Rowley wrote:
> > Meh, I just noticed that the WARNING text claims "InitPlan" is the
> > function name. I think it's best to get rid of that. It's pretty much
> > redundant anyway if you do: \set VERBOSITY verbose
>
> Oops, good cat
Hi,
On 2018-09-10 09:50:15 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-09-10 12:39:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > > In a recent commit [1] I added a static inline which castoroides
> > > dislikes: ...
> > > It's obviously trivial to fix this case with by adding an #ifndef
> > >
Hi,
On 2018-08-25 13:08:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2018-08-16 11:41:30 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Andres Freund writes:
> >>> While I'd personally have no problem kicking gcc 3.4 to the curb, I'm
> >>> still confused what causes this error mode. Kinda looks like
>
On 21/09/2018 01:18, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> * This means that there is a compatibility issue for anyone that is
> already right on the threshold -- we *really* don't want to see a
> REINDEX fail, but that seems like a possibility that we need to talk
> about now.
When would the REINDEX need to h
On 19/09/2018 20:23, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Attached is v5,
So. I don't know much about the btree code, so don't believe anything I
say.
I was very interested in the bloat test case that you posted on
2018-07-09 and I tried to understand it more. The current method for
inserting a duplicate v
On 09/28/2018 06:02 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2018/09/28 12:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 02:46:30PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
>>> I don't agree that we can skip explaining why one of the optimisations
>>> can't be applied just because we've explained why a similar
>>
On 09/27/2018 03:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
Here's a partial patch for that: it adds the third build variant
to src/port/ and teaches libpq to use it. We'd want to likewise
modify src/common/ and fix up other callers such as ecpg, but this
seems to be enough to test whether the idea wor
On 09/27/2018 11:32 AM, Alexander Kuzmenkov wrote:
Hi Andrew,
I have a question about how buildfarm works with git, could you please
help? We use buildfarm locally at PGPro to test our branches, and it
breaks when I rebase and force push to the repository. To get the
remote changes, buildf
Hi,
On 9/28/18 4:58 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
Okay, I've revised the text in the attached updated patch.
Meh, I just noticed that the WARNING text claims "InitPlan" is the
function name. I think it's best to get rid of that. It's pretty much
redundant anyway if you do: \set VERBOSITY verbose
O
Christoph Berg writes:
> Re: Tom Lane 2018-09-28 <19404.1538140...@sss.pgh.pa.us>
>> I proposed in
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/19581.1538077...@sss.pgh.pa.us
>>
>> that we should remove pqsignal, as well as
>> pg_utf_mblen
>> pg_encoding_to_char
>> pg_char_to_encoding
>> pg_valid_ser
Re: Tom Lane 2018-09-28 <19404.1538140...@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> > Is this is a problem for libpq5 users?
>
> I proposed in
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/19581.1538077...@sss.pgh.pa.us
>
> that we should remove pqsignal, as well as
> pg_utf_mblen
> pg_encoding_to_char
> pg_char_to_encoding
>
Christoph Berg writes:
> Re: Tom Lane 2018-09-27
>> Build src/port files as a library with -fPIC, and use that in libpq.
> This made the "pqsignal" symbol disappear from libpq5.so:
Oh, interesting. I'd seen an actual error on prairiedog, but apparently
some other linkers just silently omit the
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 10:46:06AM +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> The xml documentation should be updated! (It is kind of hard to notice what
> is not there:-)
>
> See "doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_verify_checksums.sgml".
Right, I've added a paragraph.
> >>The time() granularity to the second makes
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:09 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-09-28 10:55:13 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > Matteo Beccati reported a 5-10% performance drop on a
> > low-end Celeron NetBSD box which we have no explanation for, and we
> > have no reports from server-class machines on that OS -- s
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:17 AM Chapman Flack wrote:
>
> I did not notice until today that there is some ambiguity in
> this paragraph:
>
> bgw_restart_time is the interval, in seconds, that postgres should
> wait before restarting the process, in case it crashes. It can be
> any positive va
Re: Tom Lane 2018-09-27
> Build src/port files as a library with -fPIC, and use that in libpq.
This made the "pqsignal" symbol disappear from libpq5.so:
13:27:55 dpkg-gensymbols: error: some symbols or patterns disappeared in the
symbols file: see diff output below
13:27:55 dpkg-gensymbols: war
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 4:23 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 07:38:31PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Okay, I am planning to commit the attached patch tomorrow unless you
> > or anybody else has any objections to it.
>
> None from here. Thanks for taking care of it.
>
Thank
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:21:16AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2018/09/27 23:24, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2018-Sep-27, Amit Langote wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry I couldn't reply sooner, but the following of your proposed text
> >> needs to be updated a bit:
> >>
> >> +
> >> +
> >>
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 09:23:58PM +0200, Daniel Verite wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > I agree that it would be surprising for transaction timestamp to be newer
> > than statement timestamp.
>
> To me it's more surprising to start a new transaction and having
> transaction_timestamp() stil
On 2018/09/28 19:06, Amit Khandekar wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 at 03:33, Andres Freund wrote:
>>
>> Hi Amit,
>>
>> Could you rebase this patch, it doesn't apply anymore.
>
> Thanks for informing. Attached are both mine and Amit Langote's patch
> rebased and attached ...
Thanks Amit for also ta
On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 at 03:33, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi Amit,
>
> Could you rebase this patch, it doesn't apply anymore.
Thanks for informing. Attached are both mine and Amit Langote's patch
rebased and attached ...
--
Thanks,
-Amit Khandekar
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Co
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:37 PM Thomas Munro
wrote:
> The 0013 patch also fixes a mistake in the 0010 patch: it is not
> appropriate to call CFI() while waiting to notify the checkpointer of
> a dirty segment, because then ^C could cause the following checkpoint
> not to flush dirty data.
(Though
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 2:44 PM Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 15 August 2018 at 07:32, Thomas Munro
> wrote:
>> I will soon post some more fix-up patches that add EXEC_BACKEND
>> support, Windows support, and a counting scheme to fix the timing
>> issue that I mentioned in my first review. I will pr
On 28 September 2018 at 20:28, Amit Langote
wrote:
> On 2018/09/28 17:21, David Rowley wrote:
>> I think we maybe should switch the word "assert" for "verifies". The
>> Assert is just checking we didn't get a NoLock and I don't think
>> you're using "assert" meaning the Assert() marco, so likely s
On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 0:36 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> I have registered the patch for next commitfest.
> For some reasons it doesn't find the latest autoprepare-10.patch and still
> refer to autoprepare-6.patch as the latest attachement.
I'm sorry for the late reply. I'm currently r
On 18 September 2018 at 20:02, Antonin Houska wrote:
> Following are the findings from my review.
Thanks for reviewing this. Time is short in this commitfest to make
any changes, so I'm going to return this with feedback with the
intention of addressing the items from your review for the next 'f
On 28 September 2018 at 20:00, Amit Langote
wrote:
> I've made minor tweaks, which find in
> the attached updated patches (a .diff file containing changes from v6 to
> v7 is also attached).
Thanks for looking over the changes.
I've looked at the v6 to v7 diff and it seems all good, apart from:
On 26/09/2018 23:48, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 26/09/2018 17:54, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> What could be the use for the transaction timestamp? I think one of the
>> most important uses (at least in pg_stat_activity) is to verify that
>> transactions are not taking excessively long time to compl
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:59 PM Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:53 PM Robert Haas
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Laurenz Albe
>> wrote:
>> > What about keeping the first successful connection open and storing
>> it in a
>> > variable if we are in "prefer
Re: Thomas Munro 2018-09-27
> > > 4. After creating a new database, update that row as appropriate in
> > > the new database (!). Or find some other way to write a new table out
> > > and switch it around, or something like that.
> >
> > I've been hatching this exact scheme since the very begin
On 28 September 2018 at 15:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 02:46:30PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
>> I don't agree that we can skip explaining why one of the optimisations
>> can't be applied just because we've explained why a similar
>> optimisation cannot be applied somewhere
Hi Thomas,
On 28/09/2018 00:55, Thomas Munro wrote:
> I would like to commit this patch for PostgreSQL 12, based on this
> report. We know it helps performance on macOS developer machines and
> big FreeBSD servers, and it is the right kernel interface for the job
> on principle. Matteo Beccati r
69 matches
Mail list logo
