On Sat, 18 May 2024 at 23:10, Vladimir Churyukin wrote:
> I guess the process of passing control from child processes to the parent
> could be a bit tricky for that one, but doable?
> Is there anything I'm missing that can be a no-go for this?
One seriously difficult/possibly impossible thing is
Hello Erik,
18.05.2024 04:31, Erik Wienhold wrote:
On 2024-05-17 02:06 +0200, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 08:41:11AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On this specific patch, maybe reword "parameter too large" to "parameter
number too large".
WFM here.
Done in v3.
Thank you
On Sun, 19 May 2024 at 02:40, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 03:35:17PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> > "Additionally, vacuum no longer silently imposes a 1GB tuple reference
> > limit even when maintenance_work_mem or autovacuum_work_mem are set to
> > higher values"
> Slightly
I noticed that PlannedStmt.hasReturning and hasModifyingCTE have an
outdated comment now that MERGE supports RETURNING (per commit
c649fa24a)
i.e. these two:
> bool hasReturning; /* is it insert|update|delete RETURNING? */
> bool hasModifyingCTE; /* has insert|update|delete in WITH? */
transfor
On Sun, 19 May 2024 at 13:27, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> David Rowley writes:
> > 1. No ability to control the order that the locks are obtained. The
> > order in which the locks are taken will be at the mercy of the plan
> > the planner chooses.
>
> I do not think I buy this argument, because plancache
David Rowley writes:
> With the caveat of not yet having looked at the latest patch, my
> thoughts are that having the executor startup responsible for taking
> locks is a bad idea and I don't think we should go down this path.
OK, it's certainly still up for argument, but ...
> 1. No ability to
On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 at 08:39, Tom Lane wrote:
> I spent some time re-reading this whole thread, and the more I read
> the less happy I got. We are adding a lot of complexity and introducing
> coding hazards that will surely bite somebody someday. And after awhile
> I had what felt like an epipha
Em sáb., 18 de mai. de 2024 às 15:52, Andrey M. Borodin <
x4...@yandex-team.ru> escreveu:
> Hi!
>
> In a thread about sorting comparators[0] Andres noted that we have
> infrastructure to help compiler optimize sorting. PFA attached PoC
> implementation. I've checked that it indeed works on the ben
When deploying RLS, I was surprised to find that certain queries which used
only builtin indexes and operators had dramatically different query plans when
a policy is applied. In my case, the query `tsvector @@ tsquery` over a GIN
index was no longer able to use that index. I was able to find one
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 7:00 AM Alexander Lakhin wrote:
> With blocknums[1], timing is changed, but the effect is not persistent.
> 10 query15 executions in a row, b7b0f3f27:
> 277.932 ms
> 281.805 ms
> 278.335 ms
> 281.565 ms
> 284.167 ms
> 283.171 ms
> 281.165 ms
> 281.615 ms
> 285.394 ms
> 277.
Thomas Munro writes:
> Oops, right I didn't know we had that documented. Thanks. Will hold
> off doing anything until the thaw.
FWIW, I don't think the release freeze precludes docs-only fixes.
But if you prefer to sit on this, that's fine too.
regards, tom lane
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 11:05:49AM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Oops, right I didn't know we had that documented. Thanks. Will hold
> off doing anything until the thaw.
No worries, thanks!
> Hmm, I also didn't know that Meson had its own list like our just-removed one:
>
> https://github.com/m
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 10:46 AM Ole Peder Brandtzæg
wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 07:20:09AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Yes, let's get that v3-0001 patch into PG17.
>
> Upon seeing this get committed in 4dd29b6833, I noticed that the docs
> still advertise the llvm-config-$version sear
040_pg_createsubscriber.pl seems to be failing occasionally on
culicidae near "--dry-run on node S". I couldn't immediately see why.
That animal is using EXEC_BACKEND and I also saw a one-off failure a
bit like that on my own local Linux + EXEC_BACKEND test run
(sorry I didn't keep the details aro
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 11:44:40AM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> So, anyway, I'd argue that we need a parking lot for patches which we
> all agree are important and have a path forward but need someone to do
> the last 20-80% of the work. To avoid this being a dumping ground,
> patches should _o
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 07:20:09AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Yes, let's get that v3-0001 patch into PG17.
Upon seeing this get committed in 4dd29b6833, I noticed that the docs
still advertise the llvm-config-$version search dance. That's still
correct for Meson-based builds since we use the
On 5/18/24 21:06, Tomas Vondra wrote:
On 5/17/24 14:20, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 1:18 AM David Steele wrote:
However, I think allowing the user to optionally validate the input
would be a good feature. Running pg_verifybackup as a separate step is
going to be a more expensiv
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> I've pushed a small change, that should just mark with an asterisk any
> gitref that is more than 2 days older than the tip of the branch at the
> time of reporting.
Thanks!
regards, tom lane
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 2:20 AM Przemysław Sztoch
wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote on 5/15/2024 9:29 PM:
>
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 5:03 AM Przemysław Sztoch
> wrote:
>
> Apparently the functionality is identical to date_bin.
> When I saw date_bin in the documentation, I thought it solved all my pro
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 01:30:03PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-05-09 at 00:03 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I have committed the first draft of the PG 17 release notes; you can
> > see the results here:
> >
> > https://momjian.us/pgsql_docs/release-17.html
>
> For this item
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 02:56:54PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sat, May 4, 2024 at 7:36 AM Joe Conway wrote:
> > On 5/3/24 11:44, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > On 03.05.24 16:13, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > >>> On 30.04.24 19:29, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Also, the b
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 2:35 AM Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 2024-05-18 Sa 16:54, Yasir wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 1:45 AM Andrew Dunstan
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 2024-05-18 Sa 15:43, Yasir wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 7:27 PM Josef Šimánek
>> wrote:
>>
>>> pá 17. 5. 2024 v
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 09:22:59PM +0800, jian he wrote:
> On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 12:04 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > I have committed the first draft of the PG 17 release notes; you can
> > see the results here:
> >
> > https://momjian.us/pgsql_docs/release-17.html
> >
> > It will be i
On 2024-05-18 Sa 16:54, Yasir wrote:
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 1:45 AM Andrew Dunstan
wrote:
On 2024-05-18 Sa 15:43, Yasir wrote:
On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 7:27 PM Josef Šimánek
wrote:
pá 17. 5. 2024 v 8:09 odesílatel Yasir
napsal:
>
> Hi Hack
On 2024-05-16 Th 17:34, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
On 2024-05-16 Th 17:15, Tom Lane wrote:
I'd rather have some visible status on the BF dashboard. Invariably,
with a problem like this, the animal's owner is unaware there's a
problem. If it's just silently not reporting, then n
so 18. 5. 2024 v 23:29 odesílatel Yasir napsal:
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 2:23 AM Josef Šimánek wrote:
>>
>> so 18. 5. 2024 v 23:16 odesílatel Tom Lane napsal:
>> >
>> > =?UTF-8?B?Sm9zZWYgxaBpbcOhbmVr?= writes:
>> > > But this is different. If I understand it well, just by following
>> >
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 2:23 AM Josef Šimánek
wrote:
> so 18. 5. 2024 v 23:16 odesílatel Tom Lane napsal:
> >
> > =?UTF-8?B?Sm9zZWYgxaBpbcOhbmVr?= writes:
> > > But this is different. If I understand it well, just by following
> > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/install-windows-full.html y
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 2:16 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> =?UTF-8?B?Sm9zZWYgxaBpbcOhbmVr?= writes:
> > But this is different. If I understand it well, just by following
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/install-windows-full.html you'll
> > get those files no matter what is your specific environment
so 18. 5. 2024 v 23:16 odesílatel Tom Lane napsal:
>
> =?UTF-8?B?Sm9zZWYgxaBpbcOhbmVr?= writes:
> > But this is different. If I understand it well, just by following
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/install-windows-full.html you'll
> > get those files no matter what is your specific environ
Robert Haas wrote on 5/15/2024 9:29 PM:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 5:03 AM Przemysław Sztoch wrote:
Apparently the functionality is identical to date_bin.
When I saw date_bin in the documentation, I thought it solved all my problems.
Unfortunately, DST problems have many corner cases.
I tried to ch
=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zZWYgxaBpbcOhbmVr?= writes:
> But this is different. If I understand it well, just by following
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/install-windows-full.html you'll
> get those files no matter what is your specific environment (or
> specific set of tools).
Hm? Visual Studio seems l
On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:43 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 22/01/2024 21:58, Vladimir Churyukin wrote:
> > A question about protocol design - would it be possible to extend the
> > protocol, so it can handle multiple startup / authentication messages
> > over a single connection? Are there a
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 1:45 AM Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 2024-05-18 Sa 15:43, Yasir wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 7:27 PM Josef Šimánek
> wrote:
>
>> pá 17. 5. 2024 v 8:09 odesílatel Yasir
>> napsal:
>> >
>> > Hi Hackers,
>> >
>> > I have been playing with PG on the Windows platfor
On 2024-05-18 Sa 15:43, Yasir wrote:
On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 7:27 PM Josef Šimánek
wrote:
pá 17. 5. 2024 v 8:09 odesílatel Yasir
napsal:
>
> Hi Hackers,
>
> I have been playing with PG on the Windows platform recently. An
annoying thing I faced is that a lot of
so 18. 5. 2024 v 22:36 odesílatel Tom Lane napsal:
>
> Yasir writes:
> > We can add it to "~/.config/git/ignore" as it will ignore globally on
> > windows which we don't want. Also we don't have ".git/info/exclude" in PG
> > project's so the best place left is projects's .gitignore. That's what w
On 2024-05-18 Sa 12:50, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 11:50:20AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Maybe "Introduce an incremental JSON parser" would have been a better
headline.
Well, this gets into a level of detail that is beyond the average
reader. I think at that level people
Yasir writes:
> We can add it to "~/.config/git/ignore" as it will ignore globally on
> windows which we don't want. Also we don't have ".git/info/exclude" in PG
> project's so the best place left is projects's .gitignore. That's what was
> patched.
As Peter said, we're not going to do that. The
On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 7:27 PM Josef Šimánek
wrote:
> pá 17. 5. 2024 v 8:09 odesílatel Yasir
> napsal:
> >
> > Hi Hackers,
> >
> > I have been playing with PG on the Windows platform recently. An
> annoying thing I faced is that a lot of Visual Studio's temp files kept
> appearing in git change
On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 7:27 PM Josef Šimánek
wrote:
> pá 17. 5. 2024 v 8:09 odesílatel Yasir
> napsal:
> >
> > Hi Hackers,
> >
> > I have been playing with PG on the Windows platform recently. An
> annoying thing I faced is that a lot of Visual Studio's temp files kept
> appearing in git change
Hello Thomas,
18.05.2024 07:47, Thomas Munro wrote:
After more debugging, we learned a lot more things...
1. That query produces spectacularly bad estimates, so we finish up
having to increase the number of buckets in a parallel hash join many
times. That is quite interesting, but unrelated t
Hi!
In a thread about sorting comparators[0] Andres noted that we have
infrastructure to help compiler optimize sorting. PFA attached PoC
implementation. I've checked that it indeed works on the benchmark from that
thread.
postgres=# CREATE TABLE arrays_to_sort AS
SELECT array_shuffle(a) ar
> On 17 May 2024, at 21:41, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I've been looking at GiST to see if there could be a good way to do
> parallel builds - and there might be, if the opclass supports sorted
> builds, because then we could parallelize the sort.
>
> But then I noticed we support this
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> On 2024-May-17, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Anyone else want to vote?
> I had pretty much the same thought as you. It seems a waste to leave
> the code in existing branches be slow only because we have a much better
> approach for a branch that doesn't even exist yet.
I won't
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 11:50:20AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > Maybe "Introduce an incremental JSON parser" would have been a better
> > > headline.
> > Well, this gets into a level of detail that is beyond the average
> > reader. I think at that level people will need to read the git logs or
On 2024-Jan-30, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> Yep, in this constellation the implementation holds much better (in
> terms of memory) in my create/let/drop testing.
>
> I've marked the CF item as ready for committer, but a note for anyone
> who would like to pick up it from here -- we're talking about fi
On 2024-May-17, Robert Haas wrote:
> Anyone else want to vote?
I had pretty much the same thought as you. It seems a waste to leave
the code in existing branches be slow only because we have a much better
approach for a branch that doesn't even exist yet.
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL D
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 04:29:38PM +0800, jian he wrote:
> On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 12:04 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > I have committed the first draft of the PG 17 release notes; you can
> > see the results here:
> >
> > https://momjian.us/pgsql_docs/release-17.html
> >
>
> >> Add json
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 09:09:11AM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 11:48 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > On 2024-05-15 10:38:20 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > I disagree with this. IMO the impact of the Sawada/Naylor change is
> > > likely to be enormous for people wi
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 08:48:02PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2024-05-15 10:38:20 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I disagree with this. IMO the impact of the Sawada/Naylor change is
> > likely to be enormous for people with large tables and large numbers of
> > tuples to clean up (
For some reason the review indicated "failed".
It should of course read:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, passed
Documentation:tested, passed
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 03:35:17PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> On Thu, 16 May 2024 at 14:48, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 09:13:14AM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > > Also +1 on the Sawada/Naylor change being on the highlight section of
> > > the release (as David sugge
pá 17. 5. 2024 v 8:09 odesílatel Yasir napsal:
>
> Hi Hackers,
>
> I have been playing with PG on the Windows platform recently. An annoying
> thing I faced is that a lot of Visual Studio's temp files kept appearing in
> git changed files. Therefore, I am submitting this very trivial patch to
>
On 2024-05-17 Fr 02:34, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 17.05.24 08:09, Yasir wrote:
I have been playing with PG on the Windows platform recently. An
annoying thing I faced is that a lot of Visual Studio's temp files
kept appearing in git changed files. Therefore, I am submitting this
very trivia
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, failed
Implements feature: tested, failed
Spec compliant: tested, failed
Documentation:tested, failed
Hi, works out well everything. This is my first review, so if
On 5/18/24 02:00, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 12:41 PM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>> I've been looking at GiST to see if there could be a good way to do
>> parallel builds - and there might be, if the opclass supports sorted
>> builds, because then we could parallelize the sort.
>
> On 18 May 2024, at 15:22, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> Let's continue working on that patch/thread, I'll take a look in the
> next CF.
Cool! I'd be happy to review the patch before CF when Bernd or Christoph will
address current issues.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 11:38:35PM -0700, Will Mortensen wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 7:14 PM Will Mortensen wrote:
>> This comment on ProcSleep() seems to have the values of dontWait
>> backward (double negatives are tricky):
>>
>> * Result: PROC_WAIT_STATUS_OK if we acquired the lock,
>>
On 5/17/24 14:20, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 1:18 AM David Steele wrote:
>> However, I think allowing the user to optionally validate the input
>> would be a good feature. Running pg_verifybackup as a separate step is
>> going to be a more expensive then verifying/copying at t
On 5/18/24 08:51, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>
>
>> On 18 May 2024, at 00:41, Tomas Vondra
>> wrote:
>>
>> if the opclass supports sorted builds, because then we could
>> parallelize the sort.
>
> Hi Tomas!
>
> Yup, I'd also be glad to see this feature. PostGIS folks are using
> their geomet
On 2024/5/18 14:38, Will Mortensen wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 7:14 PM Will Mortensen wrote:
>> This comment on ProcSleep() seems to have the values of dontWait
>> backward (double negatives are tricky):
>>
>> * Result: PROC_WAIT_STATUS_OK if we acquired the lock,
>> PROC_WAIT_STATUS_ERRO
60 matches
Mail list logo
