В Чт, 21/10/2021 в 13:28 -0400, Stephen Frost пишет:
> Greetings,
>
> I really don't think this is necessary. Similar to PageSetChecksumCopy
> and PageSetChecksumInplace, I'm sure we would have functions which are
> called in the appropriate spots to do encryption (such as 'encrypt_page'
> and 'e
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 10:36:42AM +0200, Ronan Dunklau wrote:
> Done. I haven't touched the timeline switch test patch for now, but I still
> include it here for completeness.
As 0001 and 0002 have been applied, I have put my hands on 0003, and
found a couple of issues upon review.
+ Asse
On 2021/10/16 19:43, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
I'm fine with the distinction that's made, now I'm thinking about the
appropriate areas where ERRCODE_FDW_INVALID_OPTION_NAME can be used.
Is it correct to use ERRCODE_FDW_INVALID_OPTION_NAME in
postgresImportForeignSchema where we don't check buff
On Sun, 2021-10-24 at 21:32 +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> My initial reaction was that members of pg_maintenance should be able
> to do all of these things (VACUUM, ANALYZE, CLUSTER, REINDEX, and
> CHECKPOINT).
What about REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW? That seems more specific to a
workload, but it'
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 8:56 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
I am getting a compilation error in the latest patch on HEAD. I think
was relying on some variable removed by a recent commit
92316a4582a5714d4e494aaf90360860e7fec37a. While looking at that
compilation error, I observed that we don't need the sec
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 7:02 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Fri, 22 Oct 2021 18:43:52 +0530, Amul Sul wrote in
> > Any thoughts about the patch posted previously?
>
> Honestly, xlogreader looks fine with the current shape. The reason is
> that it seems cleaner as an interface boundary since t
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 9:43 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
> > Do you think pg_signal_backend is the wrong group to allow usage of
> > pg_log_backend_memory_contexts()? Alternatively, it could simply not
>
> Yes. I think it would be danger that who is allowed to dump memory
> context into log files
At Sun, 24 Oct 2021 20:31:37 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote in
> On Mon, 2021-10-25 at 11:53 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > In other words, I don't think pg_signal_backends is not meant to
> > control "log something on another session" or "rotate log file".
> > It's
> > danger that if we allow som
On Mon, 2021-10-25 at 11:53 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> In other words, I don't think pg_signal_backends is not meant to
> control "log something on another session" or "rotate log file".
> It's
> danger that if we allow somewone to rotate log files, that means to
> allow same user to termin
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 11:59 AM Greg Nancarrow wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 12:41 PM Greg Nancarrow wrote:
> >
> > I was also previously concerned about what the behavior should be when
> > only including just the partitions of a partitioned table in a
> > publication using ALL TABLES IN S
At Sun, 24 Oct 2021 09:50:58 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote in
> On Sat, 2021-10-23 at 20:42 +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> > The predefined roles documentation notes
> > that members of pg_signal_backend cannot signal superuser-owned
> > backends, but AFAICT pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() has no suc
On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 11:18 AM Greg Nancarrow wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 4:31 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > I think here the main point is that does this addresses Peter's
> > concern for this Patch to use a separate syntax? Peter E., can you
> > please confirm? Do let us know if you have
At Fri, 22 Oct 2021 18:43:52 +0530, Amul Sul wrote in
> Any thoughts about the patch posted previously?
Honestly, xlogreader looks fine with the current shape. The reason is
that it seems cleaner as an interface boundary since the caller of
xlogreader doesn't need to know about the details of xl
At Wed, 20 Oct 2021 21:35:44 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote in
> Hi,
>
> The FATAL error "recovery ended before configured recovery target was
> reached" introduced by commit at [1] in PG 14 is causing the standby
> to go down after having spent a good amount of time in recovery. There
> can b
Justin Pryzby writes:
> On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 05:10:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> + if (tbloids->len > 1)
> I think this should say
> + if (tbloids->len > 0)
No, >1 is the correct test, because it's checking the string length
and we started by stuffing a '{' into
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 07:20:57PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> Thanks. I've no further comments on the v10 patch.
Okay, thanks. I have applied this part, then.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 05:10:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> 0003 is the same except I added a missing free().
>
> 0004 is a new patch based on an idea from Andres Freund [1]:
> in the functions that repetitively issue the same query against
> different tables, issue just one query and use a WHERE
On 2021-Oct-24, Robert Haas wrote:
> You know, one thing we could think about doing is patching some of the
> older branches to make them compile on modern machines. That would not
> only be potentially useful for people who are upgrading from ancient
> versions, but also for hackers trying to do
Robert Haas writes:
> You know, one thing we could think about doing is patching some of the
> older branches to make them compile on modern machines. That would not
> only be potentially useful for people who are upgrading from ancient
> versions, but also for hackers trying to do research on the
On 10/24/21, 10:20 AM, "Jeff Davis" wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-10-24 at 20:19 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>> Are there any other database activities that fall under the
>> "maintenance" category? How about CLUSTER, REINDEX? I didn't check
>> the
>> code for their permissions.
>
> I looked around an
On 10/24/21, 9:51 AM, "Jeff Davis" wrote:
> On Sat, 2021-10-23 at 20:42 +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>> The predefined roles documentation notes
>> that members of pg_signal_backend cannot signal superuser-owned
>> backends, but AFAICT pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() has no such
>> restriction a
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 7:51 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I just tried to build 9.1. My config line there doesn't have ssl, but I
> do get this in the compile stage:
Hmm.
You know, one thing we could think about doing is patching some of the
older branches to make them compile on modern machines.
On Sun, 2021-10-24 at 20:19 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> At this point, the idea of having a new role for maintenance work
> looks good. With this patch and Mark Dilger's patch introducing a
> bunch of new predefined roles, one concern is that we might reach to
> a
> state where we will have p
On Sun, 2021-10-24 at 19:58 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> It looks like we are better off with removing explicit superuser()
> checks from the functions and using normal GRANT based system, see
> others agreeing on this at [1]. As we have lots of functions that are
> doing explicit superuser()
On Sat, 2021-10-23 at 20:42 +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> The predefined roles documentation notes
> that members of pg_signal_backend cannot signal superuser-owned
> backends, but AFAICT pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() has no such
> restriction at the moment. Should we add this?
Added, good c
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 7:49 AM Bharath Rupireddy <
bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 3:15 AM Jeff Davis wrote:
> >
> > Add new predefined role pg_maintenance, which can issue VACUUM,
> > ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT.
>
>
> Are there any other database activities tha
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 3:15 AM Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> Add new predefined role pg_maintenance, which can issue VACUUM,
> ANALYZE, CHECKPOINT.
>
> Patch attached.
At this point, the idea of having a new role for maintenance work
looks good. With this patch and Mark Dilger's patch introducing a
bunc
On 10/20/21 08:40, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 10/19/21 11:22 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 10:16:06PM +0200, Erik Rijkers wrote:
[0001-move-perl-test-modules-to-PostgreSQL-Test-namespace.patch ]
[0002-move-PostgreSQL-Test-PostgresVersion-up-in-the-names.patch]
>>
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 1:27 AM Jeff Davis wrote:
>
>
> Simple patch to implement $SUBJECT attached.
>
> pg_signal_backend seems like the appropriate predefined role, because
> pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() is implemented by a sending signal.
+1.
It looks like we are better off with removing
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 12:21 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 09:08:01AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > pg_get_replication_slots holds the ReplicationSlotControlLock until
> > the end of the function so it can be assured that *slot contents will
> > not change. In ReadRe
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 10:07 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> Note: The best kind would be *unnamed* POSIX semas, where we get to
> control their placement in existing memory; that's what we do on Linux
> and FreeBSD. They weren't supported on OpenBSD last time we checked:
> it rejects requests for shar
Hi all,
Thank you for the feedback so far!
Attached is a completed implementation (including tests and documentation).
Based on the feedback I have received so far, I will be submitting this
implementation to the commitfest.
Thanks again,
Kenaniah
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 9:05 AM Stephen Frost
32 matches
Mail list logo
