On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 7:42 AM tsunakawa.ta...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> From: Dilip Kumar
> > I have noticed that in StartupXlog also we reset it with 1, you might
> > want to fix that as well?
> >
> > StartupXLOG
> > {
> > ...
> > /*
> > * Initialize unlogged LSN. On a clean shutdown, it's restor
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 02:11:55AM +, tsunakawa.ta...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> Thanks for taking a look. I'm afraid my patch includes the fix for this part.
Yes. And now this is applied and back-patched.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
On October 26, 2019 6:06:07 AM PDT, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
>On 2019-10-10 00:52, Smith, Peter wrote:
>> I liked your idea of using an extern function declaration for
>implementing the file-scope compile-time asserts. AFAIK it is valid
>standard C.
>>
>> Thank you for the useful link to th
Hi,
On October 26, 2019 4:09:29 PM PDT, Vik Fearing
wrote:
>On 26/10/2019 17:41, Eugen Konkov wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> I have noticed that it would be cool to use '==' in place of 'IS
>NOT
>> DISTICT FROM'
>>
>> What do you think about this crazy idea?
>
>
>I think this is a terrible idea. The on
On 26/10/2019 17:41, Eugen Konkov wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I have noticed that it would be cool to use '==' in place of 'IS NOT
> DISTICT FROM'
>
> What do you think about this crazy idea?
I think this is a terrible idea. The only reason to do this would be to
index it, but indexes (btree at least) ex
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2019-10-10 11:20:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The reason we get "REPLICA IDENTITY NOTHING" is that a view's relreplident
>> is set to 'n' not 'd', which might not have been a great choice.
> Hm, yea. I wonder if we should add a REPLICA_IDENTITY_INVALID or such,
> for no
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2019-10-26 14:23:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... instead of
>> x IS NOT DISTINCT FROM y
>> I'm vaguely imagining
>> x = {magic} y
>> where unlike Eugen's suggestion, "=" is the real name of the underlying
>> comparison operator. For dump/restore this could be
Hi,
On 2019-10-10 11:20:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> regression=# create table mytab (f1 int primary key, f2 text);
> CREATE TABLE
> regression=# create view myview as select * from mytab group by f1;
> CREATE VIEW
>
> This situation is problematic for pg_dump because validity of the
> view depend
Hi,
On 2019-10-26 14:23:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > We do have some unresolved issues around how to let dump/restore
> > control the interpretation of IS [NOT] DISTINCT FROM, cf
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/ffefc172-a487-aa87-a0e7-472bf29735c8%40gmail.com
> > but I d
Andrew Gierth writes:
> "Tom" == Tom Lane writes:
> Tom> I'm inclined to think that we need to make ecpglib.h's
> Tom> bool-related definitions exactly match c.h,
> I'm wondering whether we should actually go the opposite way and say
> that c.h's "bool" definition should be backend only, and t
> "Tom" == Tom Lane writes:
Tom> On closer inspection, it seems to be just blind luck. For example,
Tom> if I rearrange the inclusion order in a file using ecpglib.h:
Ugh.
Tom> I'm inclined to think that we need to make ecpglib.h's
Tom> bool-related definitions exactly match c.h,
I'm w
I wrote:
> Alex Williams writes:
>> [ gripes about pg_dump printing REPLICA IDENTITY NOTHING for a view ]
> This is fixed in v10 and up thanks to d8c05aff5. I was hesitant to
> back-patch that at the time, but now that it's survived in the field
> for a couple years, I think a good case could be
I wrote:
> We do have some unresolved issues around how to let dump/restore
> control the interpretation of IS [NOT] DISTINCT FROM, cf
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/ffefc172-a487-aa87-a0e7-472bf29735c8%40gmail.com
> but I don't think this idea is helping with that at all.
BTW, takin
If long-running transaction is "read committed", then we are sure that any
new query coming
(even on same table1 as vacuum table) will need snapshot on point of time
query start and not the time transaction
starts (but still why read committed transaction on table2 cause vacuum on
table1 to skip
Amit Kapila writes:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 9:55 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> However, we're not out of the woods, because lookee here in
>> ecpglib.h:
>> #ifndef bool
>> #define bool char
>> #endif /* ndef bool */
>> I'm more than slightly surprised that we haven't already se
On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 12:49 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter writes:
> > On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 06:41:10PM +0300, Eugen Konkov wrote:
> >> I have noticed that it would be cool to use '==' in place of 'IS NOT
> >> DISTICT FROM'
> >> What do you think about this crazy idea?
>
> > Turning "IS
David Fetter writes:
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 06:41:10PM +0300, Eugen Konkov wrote:
>> I have noticed that it would be cool to use '==' in place of 'IS NOT
>> DISTICT FROM'
>> What do you think about this crazy idea?
> Turning "IS NOT DISTINCT FROM" into an operator sounds like a great
> idea.
On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 06:41:10PM +0300, Eugen Konkov wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I have noticed that it would be cool to use '==' in place of 'IS NOT
> DISTICT FROM'
>
> What do you think about this crazy idea?
Turning "IS NOT DISTINCT FROM" into an operator sounds like a great
idea. Let the name bike-
On 10/25/19 3:09 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2019-10-16 13:34, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> Could you please check how this animal is labeled? AFAICT, this is not
>>> an msys2 build but a mingw build (x86_64-w64-mingw32).
>> It is indeed an msys2 system. However, when we set MSYSTEM=MINGW64 a
Hi.
I have noticed that it would be cool to use '==' in place of 'IS NOT
DISTICT FROM'
What do you think about this crazy idea?
--
Best regards,
Eugen Konkov
On 2019-10-10 00:52, Smith, Peter wrote:
> I liked your idea of using an extern function declaration for implementing
> the file-scope compile-time asserts. AFAIK it is valid standard C.
>
> Thank you for the useful link to that compiler explorer. I tried many
> scenarios of the new StaticAssert
On 2019-09-30 20:16, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2019-09-27 17:50, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> On 2019-Sep-13, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>
>>> On 2019-Aug-20, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>>
The memory management of that seems too complicated. The "extra"
mechanism of the check/assign hooks only
When the user modifies the REPLICA IDENTIFY field type, the logical
replication settings are lost.
For example:
postgres=# \d+ t1
Table "public.t1"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats
target | Description
+
> These files don't use our printf replacement or the c.h porting
> layer,
> so unless we want to start doing that, I propose the attached patch
> to
> determine the appropriate format conversion the hard way.
I don't think such porting efforts are worth it for a single test case,
or in other word
Hi,
One of the function apply_typmod in numeric.c file present within #if 0.
This is like this for many years.
I felt this can be removed.
Attached patch contains the changes to handle removal of apply_typmod
present in #if 0.
Thoughts?
Regards,
Vignesh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 1:50 AM Alex Adriaanse wrote:
>
> Standby (corrupted):
>
> # dd if=data/base/18034/16103928.13 bs=8192 skip=89185 count=1 status=none |
> hexdump -C | head -8
> a3 0e 00 00 48 46 88 0e 00 00 05 00 30 00 58 0f |HF..0.X.|
> 0010 00 20 04 20 00 00 00
26 matches
Mail list logo
