On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 2:17 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> While hacking on pg_rewind, I noticed that commit and abort WAL records
> are never marked with the XLR_SPECIAL_REL_UPDATE flag. But if the record
> contains "dropped relfilenodes", surely it should be?
>
Right.
> It's harmless as far
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 4:14 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 6:14 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Yeah, that makes sense. I will take care of that later today or
> > tomorrow. We have not noticed that because currently none of the
> > extensions is using those functions. BTW, I notic
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 10:29 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 3:20 PM Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> > I'd like to join the party, but IIUC, we don't yet reach a consensus
> > on which one is the right way to go. So I think we need to discuss
> > that first.
>
> Either way, we definitely
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 1:57 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2020-Aug-13, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
> > That is:
> > 1. Whenever a patch is pushed on master on the main repo a process kicked
> > off (or maybe wait 5 minutes to coalesce multiple patches if there are)
> > 2. This process checks out m
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 4:06 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 10:24 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > It's true that heap_page_is_all_visible() is called from only
> > lazy_vacuum_page() but I'm concerned it would lead misleading since
> > it's not actually removing tuples but
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 02:23:16PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> It seems a bit silly to worry about allocating just the exact amount
> needed; the current approach looked fine to me.
Okay, thanks.
> The logic to keep track
> number of used slots used is baroque, though -- that could use a lot o
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 6:14 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> Yeah, that makes sense. I will take care of that later today or
> tomorrow. We have not noticed that because currently none of the
> extensions is using those functions. BTW, I noticed that after
> failure, the next run is green, why so? Is the
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 1:04 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 12:52 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> > Here's a rebase.
>
> And another, since I was too slow and v6 is already in conflict...
> sorry for the high frequency patches.
And ... now that this has a commitfest entry, cfbot told
On 2020-Aug-14, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2020-Aug-12, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > Hmm, we do make the FK constraint depend on the ATTACH for the direct
> > children; what I think we're lacking is dependencies on descendants
> > twice-removed (?) or higher. This mock patch seems to fix this pro
On 2020-Aug-13, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> That is:
> 1. Whenever a patch is pushed on master on the main repo a process kicked
> off (or maybe wait 5 minutes to coalesce multiple patches if there are)
> 2. This process checks out master, and runs pgindent on it
> 3. When done, this gets committed t
On 2020-Aug-13, Stephen Frost wrote:
> For my 2c, anyway, I like the idea of having folks update the typedefs
> themselves when they've got a patch that needs a new typedef to be
> indented correctly.
Well, let's for starters encourage committers to update typedefs.
Personally I've stayed away fr
On 08/14/20 15:38, Tom Lane wrote:
> (3) If the SQL syntax is really just "WITH variable value [, ...]"
> then I'm afraid we're going to have a lot of parse-ambiguity problems
> with wedging full SET syntax into that. The ability for the righthand
There is precedent in the SET command for having
Previously submitted patch got somehow trailing spaces mangled on the
way out. This is an attempt to use application/octet-stream MIME instead
of text/x-patch to preserve those for regression tests.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:11 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> please, assign your patch to commitfest a
Chapman Flack writes:
> On 08/14/20 14:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>> SAVEPOINT s1;
>> SET LOCAL search_path = pg_catalog, pg_temp;
>> ... protected code here ...
>> RELEASE SAVEPOINT s1;
>> but this does not work because SET LOCAL persists to the end of the
>> outer transaction. Maybe we could invent a
On 08/14/20 14:50, Tom Lane wrote:
> SAVEPOINT s1;
> SET LOCAL search_path = pg_catalog, pg_temp;
> ... protected code here ...
> RELEASE SAVEPOINT s1;
>
> but this does not work because SET LOCAL persists to the end of the
> outer transaction. Maybe we could invent a vari
Yesterday's releases included some fixes meant to make it harder
for a malicious user to sabotage an extension installation/update
script. There are some things remaining to be done in the area,
though:
1. We don't have a way to make things adequately secure for extensions
that depend on other ex
On 2020-Aug-14, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Regarding the maximum number of slots allocated. Do people like the
> current approach taken by the patch to do a single loop of the
> dependency entries at the cost of more allocating perhaps too much for
> the array holding the set of TupleTableSlots (th
On 2020-Aug-12, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Hmm, we do make the FK constraint depend on the ATTACH for the direct
> children; what I think we're lacking is dependencies on descendants
> twice-removed (?) or higher. This mock patch seems to fix this problem
> by adding dependencies recursively on all
Arseny Sher writes:
> FWIW, I've also looked through the patch and it's fine. Moderate testing
> also found no issues, check-world works, bgws are started during smart
> shutdown as expected. And surely this is better than the inital
> shorthack of allowing only parallel workers.
Thanks, apprecia
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 10:23:27PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> We have nothing in core, yet, that helps with this kind of problem
> with binary upgrades. In the last year, Julien and I worked on an
> upgrade case where a glibc upgrade was involved with pg_upgrade used
> for PG, and it could no
Tom Lane writes:
> Thomas Munro writes:
>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 4:45 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>>> After some more rethinking and testing, here's a v5 that feels
>>> fairly final to me. I realized that the logic in canAcceptConnections
>>> was kind of backwards: it's better to check the main pmS
mohand oubelkacem makhoukhene writes:
> I would like to implement a new data type next to char, number, varchar...
> for example a special "Money" type, but
> I don't want to use extensions and the Create type command. I want to
> implement it directly inside source code,
> because I want to im
On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 2:29 PM Anastasia Lubennikova <
a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> On 31.07.2020 23:28, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 1:51 PM Anastasia Lubennikova
> > wrote:
> >> Questions from the first review pass:
> >>
> >> 1) Do we need XLH_INSERT_ALL_VISIBLE_SET
Hello
I would like to implement a new data type next to char, number, varchar... for
example a special "Money" type, but
I don't want to use extensions and the Create type command. I want to
implement it directly inside source code,
because I want to implement my new type at lower level, in ord
Konstantin Knizhnik writes:
> I still do not completely understand current criteria of shippable
> functions.
> I understood Tom's explanation, but:
> postgres=# create table t1(t text collate "C");
> CREATE TABLE
> postgres=# create foreign table ft1(t text collate "ru_RU") server
> pg_fdw opt
Bharath Rupireddy writes:
> Is there any way the bgworkers(for that matter, any postmaster's child
> process) knowing that there's a smart shutdown pending? This is
> useful, if any of the bgworker(if not parallel workers) want to
> differentiate the two modes i.e. smart and fast shutdown modes an
Thomas Munro writes:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 4:45 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> After some more rethinking and testing, here's a v5 that feels
>> fairly final to me. I realized that the logic in canAcceptConnections
>> was kind of backwards: it's better to check the main pmState restrictions
>> first
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 08:55:53AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 03:26:33AM +, tsunakawa.ta...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm not sure if I should have posted this to pgsql-advocacy, but this is
> > being developed so I posted here.
> > Does anyone know i
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> While hacking on pg_rewind, this in pg_rewind's main() function caught
> my eye:
Good catch.
> Attached is a patch to fix this, as well as a similar issue in
> pg_checksums. pg_basebackup and pgbench also print progres reports like
> this, but they seem correct to
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 09:00:06AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 02:58:30PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> I assumed it had code for that stuff already. Mainly because I assumed it
>> supported doing pg_upgrade, which requires similar things no?
>
> While pg_upgrade requi
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 02:58:30PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:42 AM Dave Page wrote:
> That would require fairly large changes to the installer to allow it to
> login to the database server (whether that would work would be dependent
> on
> how pg_hba.co
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 03:26:33AM +, tsunakawa.ta...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm not sure if I should have posted this to pgsql-advocacy, but this is
> being developed so I posted here.
>
> Does anyone know if this development come to open source Postgres, or only to
> the cloud se
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 7:41 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:47 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor
> wrote:
> >
> > Apart from these, I fixed Justin's comment of extra brackets(That was
> > due to "patch -p 1 < file", as 002_fix was not applying directly). I
> > haven't updated the docum
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 7:18 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 7:51 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 07:39:21PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 1:09 AM Justin Pryzby
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > lazy_check_needs_freeze iterate
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 10:24 AM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
>
> It's true that heap_page_is_all_visible() is called from only
> lazy_vacuum_page() but I'm concerned it would lead misleading since
> it's not actually removing tuples but just checking after vacuum. I
> guess that the errcontext should s
I see this feature quite useful in concept and decided to test it.
On a real database of 7 million rows I observed speedup of 4 times in case
of single column index on points only and 2.5 times speedup in case of
index on points with several included columns. Standard deviation between
in series o
While hacking on pg_rewind, I noticed that commit and abort WAL records
are never marked with the XLR_SPECIAL_REL_UPDATE flag. But if the record
contains "dropped relfilenodes", surely it should be?
It's harmless as far as the backend and all the programs in PostgreSQL
repository are concerned
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 04:53:54PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> The following sentence in high-availability.sgml is not true:
>
> The background writer is active during recovery and will perform
> restartpoints (similar to checkpoints on the primary) and normal block
> cleaning acti
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 11:45:52AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> MAX_CATALOG_INSERT_BYTES sounds decent to me. I mentioned dependency.h
> because I was uncaffeinatedly thinking that this was used with API
> defined there -- but in reality it's used with indexing.h functions, and
> it seems to me
On Aug 14, 2020, at 2:15 PM, Bharath Rupireddy
mailto:bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
I think, since the idle_session_timeout is by default disabled, we
have no problem. My thought is what if a user enables the
feature(knowingly or unknowingly) on the remote backend? If the user
While hacking on pg_rewind, this in pg_rewind's main() function caught
my eye:
progress_report(true);
printf("\n");
It is peculiar, because progress_report() uses fprintf(stderr, ...) for
all its printing, and in fact the only other use of printf() in
pg_rewind is in printing the "pg_
On Mon, 10 Aug 2020 at 23:56, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> The problem was simply that when a page is
> examined by a seqscan, we do HeapTupleSatisfiesVisibility of each tuple
> in isolation; and for each tuple we call SetHintBits(). And only the
> first time the FPI happens; by the time we get to t
Hi,
The following sentence in high-availability.sgml is not true:
The background writer is active during recovery and will perform
restartpoints (similar to checkpoints on the primary) and normal block
cleaning activities.
I think this is an oversight of the commit 806a2ae in 2011; t
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 02:21:58PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Thanks Julien. I'm planning to do a bit more testing and review, and
> then hopefully commit this next week. If anyone else has objections
> to this design, now would be a good time to speak up.
The design to use pg_depend for the v
On 14.08.2020 09:40, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 8:54 PM Konstantin Knizhnik
wrote:
Right now jsonb functions are treated as non-shippable by postgres_fdw
and so predicates with them are not pushed down to foreign server:
I wonder if there is some way of making postgres
45 matches
Mail list logo
