At Tue, 18 May 2021 15:52:07 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> FWIW, you could be get a problematic base backup by the following steps.
>
> 0. (make sure /tmp/hoge is removed)
> 1. apply the attached patch
> 2. create a primary then start
> 3. create a standby then start
> 4. place stan
At Mon, 17 May 2021 10:46:24 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote
in
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:09 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:50 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Before the commit expectedTLEs is always initialized with just one
> > > entry for the TLI of the last
On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 12:48:38PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Currently a promotion causes all available WAL to be replayed before
> a standby becomes a primary whether it was in paused state or not.
> OTOH, something like immediate promotion (i.e., standby becomes
> a primary without replaying ou
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 9:45 PM osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> On Monday, May 17, 2021 6:52 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > Both patches are attached.
> The patch for PG13 can be applied to it cleanly and the RT succeeded.
>
> I have few really minor comments on your comments in the patch.
>
> (
On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 9:09 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 5:48 PM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:40 AM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > One more point:
> > > + $node_publisher->wait_for_catchup('tap_sub');
> > > +
> > > + # Ensure a transactional logi
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 7:59 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> If a promotion is triggered while recovery is paused, the paused state ends
> and promotion continues. But currently pg_get_wal_replay_pause_state()
> returns 'paused' in that case. Isn't this a bug?
>
> Attached patch fixes this issue by rese
On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 2:42 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:29 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > +1 to fix this. Are you already working on fixing this? If not, I'll
> > post a patch.
>
> I posted a patch recently (last Thursday my time). Perhaps you can review it?
Oh, I
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:29 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> +1 to fix this. Are you already working on fixing this? If not, I'll
> post a patch.
I posted a patch recently (last Thursday my time). Perhaps you can review it?
--
Peter Geoghegan
On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 1:28 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> Sorry, you're right. It couldn't be uninitialized, but it could be a
> fake 1-element list saying there are no ancestors rather than the real
> value. So I think the point was to avoid that.
Yeah, it will be a fake 1-element list. But just t
On Sat, Apr 24, 2021 at 11:16 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 5:29 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2021-04-23 16:12:33 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > > The only reason that I chose 4GB for FAILSAFE_MIN_PAGES is because the
> > > related VACUUM_FSM_EVERY_PAGES constant was
On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 6:19 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:13 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:05 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:30 PM Peter Smith
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > PSA a patch adding a test for this scenario.
From: Tom Lane
> In view of this, maybe the right thing is to disallow modifying CTEs
> in rule actions in the first place. I see we already do that for
> views (i.e. ON SELECT rules), but they're not really any safer in
> other types of rules.
You meant by views something like the following, di
On 2021/05/18 9:58, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
At Mon, 17 May 2021 23:29:18 +0900, Fujii Masao
wrote in
If a promotion is triggered while recovery is paused, the paused state
ends
and promotion continues. But currently pg_get_wal_replay_pause_state()
returns 'paused' in that case. Isn't this
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 5:48 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:40 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > One more point:
> > + $node_publisher->wait_for_catchup('tap_sub');
> > +
> > + # Ensure a transactional logical decoding message shows up on the slot
> > + $node_subscriber->safe_psql
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 03:47:01PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> There's several types of tools (particularly around backup) that need to
> parse control files. Unnecessarily increasing the numbers of versions
> that need to be dealt with makes that a bit harder.
I am digressing here, sorry for th
On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 01:27:48PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> A slightly different optimization that I have considered and even
> written patches before was to have ExecFindPartition() cache the last
> routed to partition and have it check if the new row can go into that
> one on the next call.
On Tue, 18 May 2021 at 14:09, Peter Smith wrote:
> Yeah, I would like to work my way through all of these warnings in my
> spare time and report back to this thread (after 1-2 months?) with a
> detailed analysis.
I'd recommend for any patches that they come in bite-sized chunks. A
committer is go
On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 12:08:57PM +1000, Peter Smith wrote:
> Yeah, I would like to work my way through all of these warnings in my
> spare time and report back to this thread (after 1-2 months?) with a
> detailed analysis.
The next commit fest is at the beginning of July, so there are a
couple o
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:28:49AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:35 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Not sure if we would be able to agree on something here, but the
>> barrier to what a session and a connection hold is thin when it comes
>> to roles and application_name.
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 2:32 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 5/11/21 5:56 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:07 PM Tomas Vondra
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 5/11/21 11:04 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >>> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 4:37 PM Michael Paquier
> >>> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hmm, does this seem common enough for the added complexity to be
> worthwhile?
>
> I'd also like to know if there's some genuine use case for this. For testing
> purposes does not seem to be quite a good enough reason.
Thanks for the response.
For some big data scenario, we sometimes transfe
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:16 AM David Rowley wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 May 2021 at 12:00, Peter Smith wrote:
> > That bug led me to wonder if similar problems might be going
> > undetected elsewhere in the code. There is a gcc compiler option [3]
> > -Wshadow which informs about the similar scenario
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:32:13PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 5/16/21 9:55 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Yes, I'm going to be proposing a series of smallish patches including
> these when the tree is branched (which I hope will be in a few weeks).
Thanks! That clearly needs to happen first.
On 05/17/21 21:19, Chapman Flack wrote:
> This makes twice in a row that I've failed to see how.
>
> If you go through the entries, in order, and simply prune from the list
> the ones you can already prove would never apply to this connection, how
> does that break the ordering principle?
Ok, I
On Tue, 18 May 2021 at 01:31, Amit Langote wrote:
> Hmm, does this seem common enough for the added complexity to be worthwhile?
I'd also like to know if there's some genuine use case for this. For
testing purposes does not seem to be quite a good enough reason.
A slightly different optimization
Hi Greg,
> I actually think that the Assert in SubTransGetTopmostTransaction() is
correct, but in the parallel-worker case, the snapshots are not being setup
correctly.
I agree with you that Assert in SubTransGetTopmostTransaction() is correct.
The root cause is Transaction Xmin are not
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 02:28:57PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2021-05-17 17:06:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Putting it just after attalign seems like a reasonably sane choice
>> from the standpoint of grouping things affecting physical storage;
>> and as you say, that wins from the standpoint
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:47 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:30 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
[...]
> > The essence of the trouble seems to be that the apply_handle_truncate
> > function never anticipated it may end up truncating the same table
> > from 2 separate workers (subscr
On 05/17/21 17:55, Tom Lane wrote:
> This seems pretty horrid to me, not only from a complexity standpoint,
> but because it would break the principle that pg_hba.conf entries are
> applied in order.
This makes twice in a row that I've failed to see how.
If you go through the entries, in order, a
At Mon, 17 May 2021 23:29:18 +0900, Fujii Masao
wrote in
> If a promotion is triggered while recovery is paused, the paused state
> ends
> and promotion continues. But currently pg_get_wal_replay_pause_state()
> returns 'paused' in that case. Isn't this a bug?
>
> Attached patch fixes this issu
On 2021/05/17 22:34, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/05/17 16:39, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for your comments!
>>
+ * is executed, wal records aren't nomally generated (although HOT
makes
>>>
>>> nomally -> normally?
>>
>> Yes, fixed.
>>
+ * It's not enough to
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:13 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:05 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:30 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > > PSA a patch adding a test for this scenario.
> >
> > I am not sure this test case is exactly targeting the problematic
>
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:38:15AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> I think there is a reasonable case to be made for this fixing an oversight in
>> bbe0a81db69bd10bd166907c3701492a29aca294 as opposed to adding a brand new
>> feature. Save for --no-synchronized-snapshots all
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 06:37:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Generally it's considered poor form to push any inessential patches
> during a release window (which I'd define roughly as 48 hours before
> the wrap till after the tag is applied). It complicates the picture
> for the final round of buil
Hi,
On 2021-05-13 17:42:52 -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
> Also, can someone give me a good reason NOT to bump the version?
There's several types of tools (particularly around backup) that need to
parse control files. Unnecessarily increasing the numbers of versions
that need to be dealt with makes tha
David Rowley writes:
>>> You may want to hold on until 14beta1 is tagged, though.
>> Of course we can wait till that day but I wonder why.
> I imagined that would be a good idea for more risky patches so we
> don't break something before a good round of buildfarm testing.
> However, since this i
On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 17:18, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 09:33:27AM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> >> Me too. Let's backpatch.
> >
> > A README is not directly user-facing, it is here for developers, so I
> > would not really bother with a backpatch. Now it is not a big deal
Chapman Flack writes:
> On 05/17/21 16:35, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> So you're saying that some entries int he parameter section would
>> depend on the db/user/ip combo and some would depend just on the ip?
> I don't *think* that's what I was saying. What I was thinking was this:
> ...
This seem
Hi,
On 2021-05-17 17:06:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Putting it just after attalign seems like a reasonably sane choice
> from the standpoint of grouping things affecting physical storage;
> and as you say, that wins from the standpoint of using up alignment
> padding rather than adding more.
Make
On 05/17/21 16:35, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> So you're saying that some entries int he parameter section would
> depend on the db/user/ip combo and some would depend just on the ip?
I don't *think* that's what I was saying. What I was thinking was this:
The pg_hba.conf file is an ordered list of e
Andres Freund writes:
> If we moved attcompression to all the other bool/char fields, we'd avoid
> that size increase, as there's an existing 2 byte hole.
+1. Looks to me like its existing placement was according to the good
old "add new things at the end" anti-pattern. It certainly isn't
relat
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 01:48:03PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> pg_attribute is one of the biggest table in a new cluster, and often the
> biggest table in production clusters. Its size is also quite relevant in
> memory, due to all the TupleDescs we allocate.
>
> I just noticed that the new attc
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:56:54PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> The fix is like what we used to use for plperl back then:
>
> diff --git a/src/include/utils/pg_locale.h b/src/include/utils/pg_locale.h
> index f3e04d4d8c..499ada2b69 100644
> --- a/src/include/utils/pg_locale.h
> +++ b/src/inclu
You might find that ICU 69 (pretty new, see
http://site.icu-project.org/download/69) will cause compile failures
with PG 10 (pretty old). ICU 69 has switched to using stdbool.h, which
conflicts with the home-made definitions that we used until PG10.
Compile errors look like this:
pg_collatio
Hi,
pg_attribute is one of the biggest table in a new cluster, and often the
biggest table in production clusters. Its size is also quite relevant in
memory, due to all the TupleDescs we allocate.
I just noticed that the new attcompression increased the size not just
by 1 byte, but by 4, due to p
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:31 PM Chapman Flack wrote:
>
> On 05/17/21 16:15, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > The row is selected by the combination of username/database/ipaddress.
> > But you have to pick the minimum TLS version before the client has
> > sent that... Basically we have to make the choic
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:45:44PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I propose that the B-Tree index item (bottom-up index deletion, "Allow
> btree index additions to remove expired index entries to prevent page
> splits") link back to the documentation for those that want to drill
> down:
>
> https
On 05/17/21 16:15, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> The row is selected by the combination of username/database/ipaddress.
> But you have to pick the minimum TLS version before the client has
> sent that... Basically we have to make the choice long before we've
> even started looking at pg_hba.
Use the pe
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 8:58 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> * Chapman Flack (c...@anastigmatix.net) wrote:
> > If pg_hba syntax changes are being entertained, I would love to be able
> > to set ssl_min_protocol_version locally in a hostssl rule.
> >
> > Some clients at $work are stuck
On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 5:06 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> * Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 7:08 AM Peter Eisentraut
> > wrote:
> > > On 28.04.21 16:09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > > Looking at it now, I wonder how well do the "hostno" option
On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 1:25 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > As I understand it, the general issue here was that if
> > XLogFileReadAnyTLI() was called before expectedTLEs got set, then
> > prior to this commit it would have to fail, because the foreach() loop
> > in that function would be iterating ov
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 2:55 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 5/17/21 5:51 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:11 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> >>> On 17 May 2021, at 10:17, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >>> Since PostgreSQL 9.3, in commit a266f7dd93b, we've added the text:
> >
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:45 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/btree-implementation.html#BTREE-DELETION
This linke currently 404s --
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/btree-implementation.html#BTREE-DELETION
works, though.
--
Peter Geoghegan
I propose that the B-Tree index item (bottom-up index deletion, "Allow
btree index additions to remove expired index entries to prevent page
splits") link back to the documentation for those that want to drill
down:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/btree-implementation.html#BTREE-DELETION
The s
On 2021-May-16, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> OK, what I was trying to say was that if you dump/restore, and the old
> password was md5, the newly-restored password will be md5, but it was
> very unclear. I changed it to this:
>
>
>
>
>
> Change the default of the pass
Hi,
On 2021-05-17 20:14:40 +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> FWIW a patch proposal to copy the oldest unfrozen XID during pg_upgrade (it
> adds a new (- u) parameter to pg_resetwal) has been submitted a couple of
> weeks ago, see: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/33/3105/
I'll try to look at it
On 5/16/21 9:55 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 02:22:24PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> PostgresNode is currently able to create nodes suitable for upgrade down
>> to release 10. If we add '-w' to the 'pg_ctl start' flags that can
>> extend down to release 9.5. (Just teste
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:10 PM Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> The above patch had some changes missing which resulted in some tap
> tests failing. Sending an updated patchset. Keeping the patchset
> version the same.
Thanks for the updated patch, the updated patch fixes the tap test failures.
Regards,
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 08:22:25PM +0530, Nitin Jadhav wrote:
> I agree and thanks for creating those patches. I am not able to apply
> the patch on the latest HEAD. Kindly check and upload the modified
> patches.
The CFBOT had no issues with the patches, so I suspect an issue on your side.
http:/
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 7:52 AM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
> > > While working on [1], I observed that extra memory is allocated in
> > > [1]
> https://mail.google.com/mail/u/2/#search/multi+column+list/KtbxLxgZZTjRxNrBWvmHzDTHXCHLssSprg?compose=CllgCHrjDqKgWCBNMmLqhzKhmrvHhSRlRVZxPCVcLkLmFQwrccpTpqLNgb
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 5:57 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 11:09 PM vignesh C wrote:
> ...
> >
> > Thanks for the comments. Attached v4 patch has the fix for the same.
> >
>
> I have not tried this patch so I cannot confirm whether it applies or
> renders OK, but just going by
> > While working on [1], I observed that extra memory is allocated in
> > [1]
> > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/2/#search/multi+column+list/KtbxLxgZZTjRxNrBWvmHzDTHXCHLssSprg?compose=CllgCHrjDqKgWCBNMmLqhzKhmrvHhSRlRVZxPCVcLkLmFQwrccpTpqLNgbWqKkTkTFCHMtZjWnV
I am really sorry for this. I wanted
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> On 17 May 2021, at 03:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I have bumped into $subject while playing with this feature, and this
>> can be really useful to be able to reset the compression method for
>> all the tables at restore. The patch is simple but that's perhaps too
>
If a promotion is triggered while recovery is paused, the paused state ends
and promotion continues. But currently pg_get_wal_replay_pause_state()
returns 'paused' in that case. Isn't this a bug?
Attached patch fixes this issue by resetting the recovery pause state to
'not paused' when standby pr
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:17 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:29 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > It looks like the values such as '123.456', '789.123' '100$%$#$#',
> > '9,223,372,' are accepted and treated as valid integers for
> > postgres_fdw options batc
Hi,
On 5/10/21 2:03 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have committed the first draft of the PG 14 release notes. You can
> see the most current build of them here:
>
> https://momjian.us/pgsql_docs/release-14.html
>
> I need clarification on many items, and the document still needs its
> item
> On 17 May 2021, at 03:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I have bumped into $subject while playing with this feature, and this
> can be really useful to be able to reset the compression method for
> all the tables at restore. The patch is simple but that's perhaps too
> late for 14, so I am adding i
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 04:18:27PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/05/10 15:03, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I have committed the first draft of the PG 14 release notes. You can
> > see the most current build of them here:
> >
> > https://momjian.us/pgsql_docs/release-14.html
>
> Than
On 2021/05/17 16:39, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
Thanks for your comments!
+ * is executed, wal records aren't nomally generated (although HOT makes
nomally -> normally?
Yes, fixed.
+ * It's not enough to check the number of generated wal records, for
+ * example the walwriter m
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:37 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> When loading some data into a partitioned table for testing purpose,
>
> I found even if I specified constant value for the partition key[1], it still
> do
>
> the tuple routing for each row.
>
>
> [1]-
>
> UPDATE
On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 12:37 PM 刘鹏程 wrote:
>
>
> BTW, I test it in a high performance server. It is verly easily be
> reproduced. My colleague and me use different environment both can reproduce
> it.
>
Hi Pengcheng,
Although the issue won't reproduce easily in my system, I can
certainly se
On 5/17/21 5:51 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:11 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 17 May 2021, at 10:17, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Since PostgreSQL 9.3, in commit a266f7dd93b, we've added the text:
>>>
>>> + The obsolete "winflex" binaries distributed on the P
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:29 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> It looks like the values such as '123.456', '789.123' '100$%$#$#',
> '9,223,372,' are accepted and treated as valid integers for
> postgres_fdw options batch_size and fetch_size. Whereas this is not
> the case with fdw_startup_co
On Monday, May 17, 2021 6:52 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:13 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:44 PM Amit Langote
> wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 7:43 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Also, don't we need to free the
> > > > entire map as su
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:40 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 9:06 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 7:06 PM vignesh C wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 4:41 PM Michael Paquier
> > > wrote:
> >
> > Few comments:
> > 1.
> > + # Ensure a transaction
Hi,
When loading some data into a partitioned table for testing purpose,
I found even if I specified constant value for the partition key[1], it still do
the tuple routing for each row.
[1]-
UPDATE partitioned set part_key = 2 , …
INSERT into partitioned(part_key, ...)
Em dom., 16 de mai. de 2021 às 22:37, Kyotaro Horiguchi <
horikyota@gmail.com> escreveu:
> At Sat, 15 May 2021 11:35:13 -0300, Ranier Vilela
> wrote in
> > Em sex., 14 de mai. de 2021 às 19:52, Tom Lane
> escreveu:
> >
> > > I wrote:
> > > > So the question for us is whether it's worth tryin
Hi Tom & Robert,
Could you review this Assert(TransactionIdFollowsOrEquals(xid,
TransactionXmin)) in SubTransGetTopmostTransaction.
I think this assert is unsuitable for parallel work process.
Before we discuss it in
https://www.postgresql-archive.org/Parallel-scan-with-SubTransGetTopmo
> On 11 May 2021, at 09:29, Michael Paquier wrote:
> FWIW, I think that the case of getting some information about any
> failed connections while a connection has been successfully made
> within the scope of the connection string parameters provided by the
> user is rather thin, and I really feel
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 7:39 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Bharath Rupireddy writes:
> > > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 12:00 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Yeah, this error message seems outright buggy. However, it's a minor
> > >> matter. Als
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:05 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:30 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > > PSA a patch adding a test for this scenario.
> >
> > I am not sure this test case is exactly targeting the problematic
>
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:05 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:30 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> > PSA a patch adding a test for this scenario.
>
> I am not sure this test case is exactly targeting the problematic
> behavior because that will depends upon the order of execution of t
Hi,
It looks like the values such as '123.456', '789.123' '100$%$#$#',
'9,223,372,' are accepted and treated as valid integers for
postgres_fdw options batch_size and fetch_size. Whereas this is not
the case with fdw_startup_cost and fdw_tuple_cost options for which an
error is thrown. Attaching a
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:13 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:44 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 7:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > > Also, don't we need to free the
> > > entire map as suggested by me?
> >
> > Yes, I had missed that too. Addressed in the up
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:11 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > On 17 May 2021, at 10:17, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
> > Since PostgreSQL 9.3, in commit a266f7dd93b, we've added the text:
> >
> > + The obsolete "winflex" binaries distributed on the PostgreSQL FTP
> > site
>
> Which was sligh
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 2:20 PM osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Thursday, May 13, 2021 7:21 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > I don't think we can reproduce it with core plugins as they don't lock user
> > catalog tables.
> OK. My current understanding about how the deadlock happens is below.
>
On Monday, May 17, 2021 5:47 PM, Amit Kapila wrote
> +$node_publisher->safe_psql('postgres',
> + "ALTER SYSTEM SET synchronous_standby_names TO 'any 2(sub5_1,
> sub5_2)'");
> +$node_publisher->safe_psql('postgres', "SELECT pg_reload_conf()");
>
> Do you really need these steps to reproduce the pr
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:30 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> The essence of the trouble seems to be that the apply_handle_truncate
> function never anticipated it may end up truncating the same table
> from 2 separate workers (subscriptions) like this test case is doing.
> Probably this is quite an old
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:07 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > After 86dc900, In " src/include/nodes/pathnodes.h ", I noticed that it
> > uses the word " partitioned UPDATE " in the comment above struct
> RowIdentityVarInfo.
> >
> > But, it seems " inherited UPDATE " is used
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:44 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 7:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > Also, don't we need to free the
> > entire map as suggested by me?
>
> Yes, I had missed that too. Addressed in the updated patch.
>
+ relentry->map = convert_tuples_by_name(indesc,
> On 17 May 2021, at 10:17, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Since PostgreSQL 9.3, in commit a266f7dd93b, we've added the text:
>
> + The obsolete "winflex" binaries distributed on the PostgreSQL FTP site
Which was slightly updated in 0a9ae44288d.
> At this point. I suggest we simply stop distri
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 3:23 PM Bharath Rupireddy <
bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 2:21 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Bharath Rupireddy writes:
> > > Thanks for pointing to the changes in the commit message. I corrected
> > > them. Attaching v4 patch set,
>
> Pavel
>
>
>> Regards
>>
>> Pavel
>>
>
schema-variables-20210517.patch.gz
Description: application/gzip
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:40 PM Fujii Masao
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2021/04/23 19:11, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:04 PM Fujii Masao
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2021/04/23 18:46, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 9:10 AM Fujii Masao
> >>> wrote:
> >>
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:30 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> While doing logical replication testing we encountered a problem which
> causes a deadlock error to be logged when replicating a TRUNCATE
> simultaneously to 2 Subscriptions.
> e.g.
> --
> 2021-05-12 11:30:19.457 AEST [11393] ERROR:
On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 11:39 PM Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> Attached is a new version.
I have committed the patch.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
Apologies, in my mind this was an internals to the postgres_fdw code,
which is why I cam here. I checked that part of the docs and nowhere
does it say anything about defaulting to 5432. However in the referred
section, 34.1.2, there it says that libpq defaults to the "port number
established w
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:35 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 04:56:42PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > I definitely use it all the time to monitor autovacuum all the time.
> > The others as well regularly, but autovacuum continuously. I also see
> > a lot of people doing t
Since PostgreSQL 9.3, in commit a266f7dd93b, we've added the text:
+ The obsolete "winflex" binaries distributed on the PostgreSQL FTP site
+ and referenced in older documentation will fail with "flex: fatal
+ internal error, exec failed" on 64-bit Windows hosts. Use flex from
+
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 02:30:04PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> rebased to keep cfbot happy. This will run with default=zlib.
I have been looking at bit at this patch set, and I think that we
should do something here for 15~.
First, I think that we should make more tests and pick up one
compres
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
