On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 17:20, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
> bms_member_index seems working differently than maybe expected.
>
> bms_member_index((2, 4), 0) => 0, (I think) should be -1
> bms_member_index((2, 4), 1) => 0, should be -1
> bms_member_index((2, 4), 2) => 0, should be 0
> bms_member_in
Hallo Michael,
I would bother rounding down < 100% to 100, because then you would get
1560/1492 MB (100\%, X MB/s)
which is kind of silly.
No, we cap the total_size to current_size so you won't see that (but
total_size will potentially gradually increase). pg_basebackup has the
same beha
On 2019-03-13 14:55:59 +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> (2019/03/13 14:02), Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 01:37:04AM +, Zhang, Jie wrote:
> > > Here is a tiny patch removing repetitive characters [if] in
> > > fdwhandler.sgml.
> >
> >
> > - This function should st
Bonjour Michaël,
Yes, that would be nice, for now I have focused. For pg_resetwal yes
we could do it easily. Would you like to send a patch?
I probably can do that before next Monday. I'll prioritize reviewing the
latest instance of this patch, though.
This seem contradictory to me: you
On 2019/03/13 14:15, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2019/03/11 16:21, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 03:44:39PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> We could make the error message more meaningful depending on the context,
>>> but maybe it'd better be pursue it as a separate project.
>>
>> Y
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 4:54 PM Pavan Deolasee wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 1:37 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I might be missing something but why do we need to recheck whether
>> each pages is all-frozen after insertion? I wonder if we can set
>> all-frozen without checking all
Hello Robert,
wrote:
The main purpose of this parameter is to avoid client's waiting for DB server
infinitely, not reducing the server's burden.
This results in not waiting end-user, which is most important.
+1. If the server fails to detect that the client has gone away,
that's the serv
On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 12:22 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 10:58 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > Why make it a Node? I mean I think a struct makes sense, but what's
> > > the point of giving it a NodeTag?
> >
> > Well, the main point is consistency with other nodes and keep th
(2019/03/13 14:02), Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 01:37:04AM +, Zhang, Jie wrote:
Here is a tiny patch removing repetitive characters [if] in fdwhandler.sgml.
- This function should store the tuple into the provided, or clear it if if
+ This function should
On 2019/03/11 16:21, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 03:44:39PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>> We could make the error message more meaningful depending on the context,
>> but maybe it'd better be pursue it as a separate project.
>
> Yeah, I noticed that stuff when working on it th
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:16:42PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah. I warned Laetitia about not testing corner cases, but
> it hadn't occurred to me that zero might be a corner case :-(
I was honestly expecting more failures than that when I saw the patch
landing. This stuff is tricky :)
> I'm in
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 01:37:04AM +, Zhang, Jie wrote:
> Here is a tiny patch removing repetitive characters [if] in fdwhandler.sgml.
- This function should store the tuple into the provided, or clear it if if
+ This function should store the tuple into the provided, or clear it
Hi Kurokawa-san
I reviewd it. It's ok.
I also confirm there is no same bug.
Regards
Ryo Matsumura
but I don't want block review of
> other parts of the patch unnecessarily.
I briefly looked it and have some comments.
0001-multivariate-MCV-lists-20190312.patch
+/*
+ * bms_member_index
+ * determine 0-based index of the varattno in the bitmap
+ *
+ * Returns (-1) when th
On 2019/03/13 1:35, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 2:45 AM Amit Langote
>> wrote:
>>> I noticed another issue with the code -- it's using strcmp() to compare
>>> specified string against "minvalue" and "maxvalue", which causes the
>>> following silly error:
>>>
>
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 07:55:14PM +, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Add support for hyperbolic functions, as well as log10().
> jacana is not a fan of this commit, and failed on float8:
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=jacana&dt=2019-03-13%2000%3A00%3A2
Dear Matsumura-san,
> I think that the 2nd argument of following ecpg_init() must be
> real_connection_name.
> Is it right?
Yes, I think it should be real_connection_name for raising correct error
message.
This is also an leak of my code and I attached a patch.
Best Regards,
Hayato Kuroda
Fu
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 7:47 PM John Naylor wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 7:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > Have you done any performance testing of this patch? I mean to say
> > now that we added a new stat call for each table, we should see if
> > that has any impact. Ideally, that should
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 2:58 AM David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 10:06:27PM +0800, Paul Guo wrote:
> > Hello, Postgres hackers,
> >
> > The copy code has used batch insert with function heap_multi_insert() to
> > speed up. It seems that Create Table As or Materialized View could
> le
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 07:55:14PM +, Tom Lane wrote:
> Add support for hyperbolic functions, as well as log10().
>
> The SQL:2016 standard adds support for the hyperbolic functions
> sinh(), cosh(), and tanh(). POSIX has long required libm to
> provide those functions as well as their invers
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 07:01:17PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> I don't think this is even close to popular enough to incur the
> maybe of a separate function / more complicated interface. By this
> logic we can change basically no APIs anymore.
Well, if folks here think that it is not worth wor
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 09:44:03PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Yes, it does not matter much in practice, but other tools just don't
> do that. Note that changing it can be actually annoying for a
> backpatch if we don't have the --enable/--disable part, because git is
> actually smart enough t
On March 12, 2019 6:58:12 PM PDT, Michael Paquier wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:08:15AM -0700, Paul Ramsey wrote:
>>> On Mar 12, 2019, at 9:45 AM, Paul Ramsey
>wrote:
>>> I was going to say that the function is only used twice in the code
>>> base, but I see it’s now used four times. So m
On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 14:55, Amit Langote
wrote:
> Did you miss ri_RangeTableIndex? It's the range table index of the result
> relation for which a given ResultRelInfo is created.
I did indeed. I'll hold off modifying the patch in favour of seeing
what other people think about what should be do
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:08:15AM -0700, Paul Ramsey wrote:
>> On Mar 12, 2019, at 9:45 AM, Paul Ramsey wrote:
>> I was going to say that the function is only used twice in the code
>> base, but I see it’s now used four times. So maybe leave the old
>> signature in place and add the new one for m
Hi Kuroda-san
I think that the 2nd argument of following ecpg_init() must be
real_connection_name.
Is it right?
ECPGdeallocate(int lineno, int c, const char *connection_name, const char *name)
:
con = ecpg_get_connection(real_connection_name);
if (!ecpg_init(con, connection_name, lineno)
(this is not a reply to your full proposal, just something I thought to
point out)
On 2019/03/13 10:38, David Rowley wrote:
> i.e don't open the indexes for DELETEs. I had ideas that maybe this
> could be changed to check the idxlockmode and open the indexes if it's
> above AccessSharedLock. The
Hi Jesper,
> Thanks Kirk !
>
> > On 3/12/19 2:20 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > The words 'by default' should be removed here, because there is also
> > no non-default way to get that behavior, either.
> >
>
> Here is v9 based on Kirk's and your input.
Thanks! Although there were trailing whitespa
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:08:19PM +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> This refactoring patch is ok for me: applies, compiles, check is ok.
> However, Am I right in thinking that the change should propagate to other
> tools which manipulate the control file, eg pg_resetwal, postmaster… So that
> there wo
On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 12:13, David Rowley wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 09:58, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 5:32 AM David Rowley
> > wrote:
> > > 1. Adding a new field to RangeTblEntry to indicate the operation type
> > > that's being performed on the relation; or
>
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 10:15 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I made a copy of the _bt_binsrch, _bt_binsrch_insert. It does the binary
> search like _bt_binsrch does, but the bounds caching is only done in
> _bt_binsrch_insert. Seems more clear to have separate functions for them
> now, even though
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 2:00 PM Shawn Debnath wrote:
> So ... wondering if there are any other left over items for this patch
> or is it good to go? I imagine there's at least a couple of us who would
> love to see this get in for PG12.
I rebased my WIP undo stuff[1] (targeting 13) on top of this
Remote DBA, Training & Services
0001-multivariate-MCV-lists-20190312.patch.gz
Description: application/gzip
0002-multivariate-histograms-20190312.patch.gz
Description: application/gzip
> On 2018-08-08 16:55:22 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 8:10 PM, David Fetter wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 02:55:26PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 7:14 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>> >> > Please find attached the next version, which passes 'ma
On 2019/03/13 8:28, David Rowley wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 04:07, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I think it should be added to one of the existing sub-headings. I
>> suggest adding it to the end of 5.10.1 and rephrasing it so that it
>> makes clearer the distinction between what will happen with
>>
On 2018-12-19 14:21:29 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 11:17 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > The current pluggable table storage patchset [1] introduces the ability
> > to specify the access method of a table (CREATE TABLE ... USING
> > "ident"). The patchset currently names the cu
On 2019/03/13 1:04, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2019-Mar-09, Amit Langote wrote:
>
>> Attached find 3 patches -- for PG 10, 11, and HEAD. I also realizes
>> that a description of PARTITION OF clause was also missing in the
>> Parameters section of CREATE FOREIGN TABLE, which is fixed too.
>
> Tha
Hi Shawn,
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 12:25 PM Shawn Debnath wrote:
> Postgres today doesn't support waiting for a condition variable with a
> timeout, although the framework it relies upon, does. This change wraps
> the existing ConditionVariableSleep functionality and introduces a new
> API, Condit
On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 04:07, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think it should be added to one of the existing sub-headings. I
> suggest adding it to the end of 5.10.1 and rephrasing it so that it
> makes clearer the distinction between what will happen with
> inheritance and what will happen with table pa
Hi,
On 2019-03-13 11:56:19 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> A user complained about CREATE DATABASE taking > 200ms even with fsync
> set to off. Andres pointed out that that'd be the clunky poll/sleep
> loops in checkpointer.c.
>
> Here's a draft patch to use condition variables instead.
>
> Unpatc
Hello hackers,
A user complained about CREATE DATABASE taking > 200ms even with fsync
set to off. Andres pointed out that that'd be the clunky poll/sleep
loops in checkpointer.c.
Here's a draft patch to use condition variables instead.
Unpatched:
postgres=# checkpoint;
CHECKPOINT
Time: 101.848
On 3/10/19 9:09 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2019-Feb-07, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>> Attached is a WIP patch removing the optimization from DropRelationFiles
>> and adding it to smgrDoPendingDeletes. This resolves the issue, at least
>> in the cases I've been able to reproduce. But maybe we shou
As the original reporter, thanks a ton for all the hard work you're putting
into the documentation!
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019, 12:04 PM Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2019-Mar-09, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > Attached find 3 patches -- for PG 10, 11, and HEAD. I also realizes
> > that a description of PART
Hello Nagaura-san.
Thank you for your response.
The main idea of my comment was to avoid handling logical errors (
"client-side timeout") in advance to the detection of network problems
Therefore, I suggested setting "client-side timeout" greater of equal to
the TCP_USER_TIMEOUT or note abo
Sir/Madam
I am Pavan_Gudivada.I have good knowledge in HTML, CSS,JAVASCRIPT,PYTHON
and SQL.After i know about PostgreSQL and its contributions through open
source .i am also intersted to take part in Read/write transaction-level
routing in Odyssey (2019).
Looking forward for quick response from
Hi,
you are right in saying that my comment didn't offer much of a constructive
explanation.
Apologies for that.
To the issue at hand. Tests were run in the same manner as in all other cases
and the test
in question was the only one to fail in the whole tree.
By looking a bit closer to the err
Hi all,
Here is a tiny patch removing repetitive characters [if] in fdwhandler.sgml.
Page:
https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blob/master/doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml
---
This function should store the tuple int
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 2:22 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> I'm basically just curious which buffers have most of the additional
> contention. Is it the lower number of leaf pages, the inner pages, or
> (somewhat unexplicably) the meta page, or ...? I was thinking that the
> callstack that e.g. my lwl
On 2019-03-12 14:15:06 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 12:40 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Have you looked at an offwake or lwlock wait graph (bcc tools) or
> > something in that vein? Would be interesting to see what is waiting for
> > what most often...
>
> Not recently, t
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 12:40 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Have you looked at an offwake or lwlock wait graph (bcc tools) or
> something in that vein? Would be interesting to see what is waiting for
> what most often...
Not recently, though I did use your BCC script for this very purpose
quite a few
Bonjour Michaël,
Here is a partial review:
- 0001 if a patch to refactor the routine for the control file
update. I have made it backend-aware, and we ought to be careful with
error handling, use of fds and such, something that v4 was not very
careful about.
This refactoring patch is ok for
Hello
> Dispatches from the department of grammatical nitpicking...
Thank you!
> + entire table, however if a valid CHECK constraint is
>
> I think this should be:
>
> entire table; however, if...
>
> + * are set NOT NULL, however, if we can find a constraint which proves
>
> similarly here
Cha
Hi,
Thanks Kirk !
On 3/12/19 2:20 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
The words 'by default' should be removed here, because there is also
no non-default way to get that behavior, either.
Here is v9 based on Kirk's and your input.
Best regards,
Jesper
>From 5b879f79300412638705e32aa3ed51aff3cbe75c Mon
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 4:34 AM Antonin Houska wrote:
> Andy Fan wrote:
> > I just don't know why shm_mq is designed to single-reader & single-writer.
>
> shm_mq was implemented as a part of infrastructure for parallel query
> processing. The leader backend launches multiple parallel workers and
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 2:03 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 12:22:53PM +1100, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> > I checked the code why the current_logfiles is not implemented as
> > shared memory and found that the current syslogger doesn't attach to
> > the shared memory of the postm
=?UTF-8?Q?L=C3=A6titia_Avrot?= writes:
> So, as you're asking that too, maybe my reasons weren't good enough. You'll
> find enclosed a new version of the patch
> with asinh, acosh and atanh (v5).
Pushed with some minor adjustments (mainly cleanup of the error handling).
> Then I tried for severa
Hi,
On 2019-03-11 19:47:29 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I now believe that the problem is with LWLock/buffer lock contention
> on index pages, and that that's an inherent cost with a minority of
> write-heavy high contention workloads. A cost that we should just
> accept.
Have you looked at an
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:40 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> Hey, I understood something today!
And I said something that could be understood!
> I think it's pretty clear that we have to view that as acceptable. I
> mean, we could reduce contention even further by finding a way to make
> indexes 40% l
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 10:22 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>> 21 февр. 2019 г., в 23:50, Paul Ramsey
>> написал(а):
>>
>> Merci! Attached are updated patches.
>>
>
> As noted before, patches are extremely useful.
> So, I've looked into the code too.
>
> I've got some questions about
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 2:34 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:32 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > If I wanted to try to say this in fewer words, would it be fair to say
> > that reducing the size of an index by 40% without changing anything
> > else can increase contention on the r
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:32 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> If I wanted to try to say this in fewer words, would it be fair to say
> that reducing the size of an index by 40% without changing anything
> else can increase contention on the remaining pages?
Yes.
--
Peter Geoghegan
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:47 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 5:17 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > The regression that I mentioned earlier isn't in pgbench type
> > workloads (even when the distribution is something more interesting
> > that the uniform distribution default).
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:05 PM Jamison, Kirk wrote:
> I was thinking of something like the attached,
+ machine. Note that this option isn't passed to the
+ vacuumdb application by default.
The words 'by default' should be removed here, because there is also
no non-default way to get th
> On Mar 12, 2019, at 9:45 AM, Paul Ramsey wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Mar 12, 2019, at 9:13 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>
>> On 2019-03-12 14:42:14 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 08:38:56PM +, Regina Obe wrote:
I tested on windows mingw64 (as of a week ago) and con
I wrote:
> Neel Patel writes:
>> Is this error message expected or what should be the behaviour ?
> It's certainly a bug.
Oh, no, I take that back: it's not a bug, you're just abusing
pg_get_expr() to try to do something it can't do, which is make
sense of an expression involving more than one r
Neel Patel writes:
> Getting "*ERROR: bogus varno: 2*" and below is the sample SQL.
Hmm, reproduced here on HEAD.
> Is this error message expected or what should be the behaviour ?
It's certainly a bug. Don't know the cause yet, but it looks like
pg_get_expr() is getting confused:
#0 errfin
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 1:13 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> (I'm not sure what I think about which behavior is really more
>> desirable. We can debate that if there's actually a plausible
>> choice to be made, which seems to depend on Windows.)
> Yeah, that's a fair question. My m
Hi,
Getting "*ERROR: bogus varno: 2*" and below is the sample SQL.
- Create table "test_bogus" as below.
CREATE TABLE test_bogus(
id serial PRIMARY KEY,
display_name text NOT NULL,
Hi,
On March 12, 2019 10:17:19 AM PDT, Robert Haas wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 1:13 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> (I'm not sure what I think about which behavior is really more
>> desirable. We can debate that if there's actually a plausible
>> choice to be made, which seems to depend on Windows.)
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 1:13 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> (I'm not sure what I think about which behavior is really more
> desirable. We can debate that if there's actually a plausible
> choice to be made, which seems to depend on Windows.)
Yeah, that's a fair question. My motivation for asking was tha
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 10:07 PM Nagaura, Ryohei
wrote:
> I rewrote two TCP_USER_TIMEOUT patches.
> I changed the third argument of setsockopt() from 18 to TCP_USER_TIMEOUT.
>
> This revision has the following two merits.
> * Improve readability of source
> * Even if the definition of TCP_USER_TIM
Hi Nikita,
Thanks for looking at the patch.
On 3/12/19 11:33 AM, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I have looked at this patch set too, but so far only at first two
> infrastructure patches.
>
> First of all, I agree that opclass parameters patch is needed here.
>
OK.
>
> 0001. Pass all ke
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 8:03 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> While the WaitLatch alternative avoids the problem, I doubt
>> we're ever going to remove pg_usleep entirely, so it'd be
>> good if it had fewer sharp edges. nanosleep() has the
>> same behavior as Windows, ie, the sleep is
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 10:25 PM Nagaura, Ryohei
wrote:
> The main purpose of this parameter is to avoid client's waiting for DB server
> infinitely, not reducing the server's burden.
> This results in not waiting end-user, which is most important.
+1. If the server fails to detect that the cli
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 8:03 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> While the WaitLatch alternative avoids the problem, I doubt
> we're ever going to remove pg_usleep entirely, so it'd be
> good if it had fewer sharp edges. nanosleep() has the
> same behavior as Windows, ie, the sleep is guaranteed to be
> termina
John Naylor writes:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 5:36 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> This seems committable from my end --- any further comments?
> I gave it a read and it looks good to me, but I haven't tried to run it.
Thanks for checking. I've pushed both patches now.
I noticed while looking at the pg
Em seg, 4 de mar de 2019 às 03:55, Michael Paquier
escreveu:
>
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 03:33:12PM +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> > I've made some more iterations looking for ideas how to improve the
> > patch and found non.
> > Code style, docs, tests, make-check worlds, bit status, everything
>
> On Mar 12, 2019, at 9:13 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2019-03-12 14:42:14 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 08:38:56PM +, Regina Obe wrote:
>>> I tested on windows mingw64 (as of a week ago) and confirmed the
>>> patch applies cleanly and significantly faster fo
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 2:45 AM Amit Langote
> wrote:
>> I noticed another issue with the code -- it's using strcmp() to compare
>> specified string against "minvalue" and "maxvalue", which causes the
>> following silly error:
>>
>> create table q2 partition of q for values
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 9:27 AM Bruno Hass wrote:
> I've been reading about TOASTing and would like to modify how the slicing
> works by taking into consideration the type of the varlena field. These
> changes would support future implementations of type specific optimized
> TOAST'ing functions
On 2019-03-12 14:42:14 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 08:38:56PM +, Regina Obe wrote:
> > I tested on windows mingw64 (as of a week ago) and confirmed the
> > patch applies cleanly and significantly faster for left, substr
> > tests than head.
>
> int32
> pglz_decompr
> 12 марта 2019 г., в 19:40, Paul Ramsey написал(а):
>
>> On Mar 11, 2019, at 10:42 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> int32
>> pglz_decompress(const char *source, int32 slen, char *dest,
>> - int32 rawsize)
>> + int32 rawsize, bool i
On 2019-Mar-09, Amit Langote wrote:
> Attached find 3 patches -- for PG 10, 11, and HEAD. I also realizes
> that a description of PARTITION OF clause was also missing in the
> Parameters section of CREATE FOREIGN TABLE, which is fixed too.
Thanks! Applied all three -- I appreciate your help in
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 2:45 AM Amit Langote
wrote:
> I noticed another issue with the code -- it's using strcmp() to compare
> specified string against "minvalue" and "maxvalue", which causes the
> following silly error:
>
> create table q2 partition of q for values from ("MINVALUE") to (maxvalue
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:30 AM Amit Langote
wrote:
> Now the question is where to put this text? Currently, we have:
>
> 5.10. Table Partitioning
> 5.10.1. Overview
> 5.10.2. Declarative Partitioning
> 5.10.3. Implementation Using Inheritance
> 5.10.4. Partition Pruning
> 5.10.5. Part
Hi!
I think it's good idea to able create subscription for database owner, but
owner do not have permission on all tables in database.
At the begging Stephen Frost said about table filter at subscription side.
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20181106215244.GH18594%40tamriel.snowman.net
I c
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 11:30 PM David Rowley
wrote:
> Looks good to me. Good idea to keep the controversial setting of
> client_min_messages to debug1 in the tests in a separate patch.
>
> Apart from a few lines that need to be wrapped at 80 chars and some
> comment lines that seem to have been
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 10:42 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 08:38:56PM +, Regina Obe wrote:
>> I tested on windows mingw64 (as of a week ago) and confirmed the
>> patch applies cleanly and significantly faster for left, substr
>> tests than head.
>
> int32
> pglz_d
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:23 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 03:30:22PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Sorry that I didn't get to this before you did -- I was on PTO on
> > Friday and did not work on the weekend.
>
> My apologies, Robert. It seems that I have been too much has
Hi,
Am Dienstag, den 19.02.2019, 16:37 +0100 schrieb Fabien COELHO
>
> About :
>
> total_percent = total_size ? (int64) ((current_size / MEGABYTES) * 100 /
> (total_size / MEGABYTES)) : 0;
>
> MEGABYTES can be simplified and will enhance precision. ISTM that the
> percent could be a double:
Hi!
> * What are the most important use cases here? Are we just trying to
> avoid the unnecessary use of superuser, or is there a real use case for
> subscribing to a subset of a publication?
For instance in target database we do not have permission on some table used in
publication,
but we stil
Hi!
Thank you for comments, I’ll fix all inconsistencies in documentation.
> I don't understand this requirement. There are a bunch of
> password-less, still secured authentication that Postgres can use
> depending on the situations. To name one: peer. So this concept
> design looks rather broken
Hi Amit,
On 3/12/19 4:22 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
I wrestled with this idea a bit and concluded that we don't have to
postpone *all* of preprocess_targetlist() processing to query_planner,
only the part that adds row mark "junk" Vars, because only those matter
for the problem being solved. To re
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:not tested
Hello
Patch is applied cleanly, compiles and pass check-world. Has t
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:13:46AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> I have a feeling it is project policy to return 0 from main(), and
> exit(1) if a program aborts with an error.
Yes, it does not matter much in practice, but other tools just don't
do that. Note that changing it can be actually anno
On 3/11/19 2:23 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 4:32 PM Pavan Deolasee
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Currently either the table level option `toast_tuple_target` or the compile
>> time default `TOAST_TUPLE_TARGET` is used to decide whether a new tuple
>> should be compressed or
On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 22:29, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 09:54:45PM +0530, Ramanarayana wrote:
> > I went through the python script and found that the stdout encoding is
> set
> > to utf-8 only if python version is <=2. The same needs to be done for
> > python 3
>
> If you s
Hello
Thank you for explain. I thought so.
PS: I am not sure for now about patch status in CF app. Did not changed status
regards, Sergei
t_procinfo()
minmax_multi_get_procinfo()
Attached patches with all my changes.
--
Nikita Glukhov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
0001-Pass-all-keys-to-BRIN-consistent-function-at-once-20190312.patch.gz
Description: application/gzip
0002-Move-IS-NOT-N
On 12.03.2019 08:19, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 02:35:49PM +, Georgios Kokolatos wrote:
To be honest, I have not checked closely on the failure, still it is
the only test failing which by itself should be worthwhile
mentioning.
This works for me, as well as a plain inst
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
