Hi all,
I noticed that in the CREATE EXTENSION code, the permission is elevated to
the superuser who creates and owns all of the extension objects.
I was wondering why this elevation is done.
I understand that the C-based functions can only be created by a superuser.
Are there any other db objects
Hi,
The get_parameterized_baserel_size function does not differentiate for
PARTITIONED_REL and always appends the rel's own restriction clauses. However,
for PARTITIONED_REL, rel->tuples is computed in set_append_rel_size which comes
from the sum of lived childrel->rows. It is important
On 19.11.24 14:29, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
I noticed the existing code made inconsistent use of PGShmemHeader * vs.
void *, which also bled into your patch. I made the attached little patch
to clean that up a bit.
Right, it was bothering me the whole time, but not strong enough to make
me fix this
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 02:35:25PM +0100, Anthonin Bonnefoy wrote:
> 0001: Use implicit transaction block for the implicit pipeline
> transaction. I've added tests in pgbench that covered the same checks
> I did in psql. I've avoided using \syncpipeline since it was
> introduced in 17. I've also sl
> On 26 Nov 2024, at 11:50, Kirill Reshke wrote:
>
> I did mechanical patch rebase & beautification.
Many thanks! Addressing Tomas' feedback was still one of top items on my todo
list. And I'm more than happy that someone advance this patchset.
> Notice my first patch, i did small refactori
On Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 6:06 PM Sutou Kouhei wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In
> "Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations"
> on Fri, 22 Nov 2024 13:01:06 -0800,
> Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> >> @@ -1237,7 +1219,7 @@ CopyReadLine(CopyFromState cstate, bool is_csv)
> >> /*
Hello! Could you backport the commit "Fix meson uuid header check so it
works with MSVC" [1] to REL_16_STABLE please? Building with -Duuid=ossp
fails without it:
Running compile:
Working directory:
C:\gr-builds\6n4KsTYAF\0\pgpro-dev\postgrespro\builddir\meson-private\tmpx088n_nb
Code:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 9:47 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 1:42 PM vignesh C wrote:
> >.
> >
> > Few comments:
> > 1) Now that attribute string generation is moved to get_attrs_str and
> > there are only a couple of error statements in this function, how
> > about removing the
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 2:37 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 1:14 AM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> >
> > On 19/11/2024 01:20, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > I realized that building test_radixtree.c with TEST_SHARED_RT fails
> > > because it eventually sets RT_SHMEM when #include
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 10:22 AM Richard Guo wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 10:12 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > Richard Guo writes:
> > > I've applied some of the changes you suggested in your previous email
> > > and pushed the updated patch. Thank you for your review.
> > The buildfarm's not too
On Mon, 2024-11-18 at 20:29 -0500, Corey Huinker wrote:
> Attached is a re-basing of the existing patchset, plus 3 more
> additions:
Comments on 0003:
* If we commit 0003, is it a useful feature by itself or does it
require that we commit some or all of 0004-0014? Which of these need to
be in v18
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 12:07:59AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> It seems plausible to me that the -D_LARGE_FILES=1 settings in our
> AIX animals' configuration are carried over from some dim past where
> we didn't have this configure test, or it was implemented even less
> correctly than now. I wonder
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 08:56:50PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> [ getting back to the document-ABI-breakage-rules-better topic ... ]
>
> I wrote:
> > That text says exactly nothing about what specific code changes to
> > make or not make. I'm not sure offhand where (or if) we have this
> > docum
Thomas Munro writes:
> . o O ( I wonder if that missing Debian/Ubuntu bugfix[1] is why our
> AIX animals have -D_LARGE_FILES=1 jammed into $CC, even though
> AC_SYS_LARGEFILES claims to understand AIX )
I'm dubious. The two likely results if off_t is 32 bits are
(1) the compiler shifts the 1 off
Dear Swada-san,
>
> BTW while updating the patch, I found that we might want to launch
> different numbers of workers for scanning heap and vacuuming heap. The
> number of parallel workers is determined based on the number of blocks
> in the table. However, even if this number is high, it could h
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 2:29 PM Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> -#define LARGE_OFF_T (((off_t) 1 << 62) - 1 + ((off_t) 1 << 62))
> +#define LARGE_OFF_T off_t) 1 << 31) << 31) - 1 + (((off_t) 1 << 31) <<
> 31))
. o O ( I wonder if that missing Debian/Ubuntu bugfix[1] is why our
AIX animals have -D_LARG
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 1:42 PM vignesh C wrote:
>.
>
> Few comments:
> 1) Now that attribute string generation is moved to get_attrs_str and
> there are only a couple of error statements in this function, how
> about removing the function:
> +/*
> + * If !bms_is_empty(missingatts), report the err
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 at 16:06, Shubham Khanna
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 8:50 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > Hi Shubham,
> >
> > here are my review comments for patch v4-0001.
> >
> > ==
> > src/backend/replication/logical/relation.c
> >
> > logicalrep_report_missing_and_gen_attrs:
> >
Tatsuo Ishii writes:
> BTW, in my understanding, patch posters do not need to submit a patch
> for configure, a patch for configure.ac is enough since configure will
> be generated by committers anyway (if the patch gets committed).
Right. Even if the submitter includes a diff for configure,
it'
> Tatsuo Ishii writes:
>> I ran autoconf 2.69 on my Ubuntu 20.04 laptop and got the same diffs
>> plus diffs related runstatedir:
>
>> + --runstatedir=DIR modifiable per-process data [LOCALSTATEDIR/run]
>
>> If my understanding is correct, configure in the git repository has
>> been gener
Tatsuo Ishii writes:
> I ran autoconf 2.69 on my Ubuntu 20.04 laptop and got the same diffs
> plus diffs related runstatedir:
> + --runstatedir=DIR modifiable per-process data [LOCALSTATEDIR/run]
> If my understanding is correct, configure in the git repository has
> been generated by aut
[ getting back to the document-ABI-breakage-rules-better topic ... ]
I wrote:
> That text says exactly nothing about what specific code changes to
> make or not make. I'm not sure offhand where (or if) we have this
> documented, but there's an idea that adding fields at the end of
> a struct is s
While looking into this:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20241119193121.7ba727c489b5f0b6d20f9c25%40sraoss.co.jp
I noticed that the patch for configure includes diffs against the
current configure script in the git repository in addition to his
changes to configure.ac.
@@ -14728,7 +14729,7 @
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 10:12 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Richard Guo writes:
> > I've applied some of the changes you suggested in your previous email
> > and pushed the updated patch. Thank you for your review.
>
> The buildfarm's not too happy. It looks like this patch decided
> to use the name "di
Richard Guo writes:
> I've applied some of the changes you suggested in your previous email
> and pushed the updated patch. Thank you for your review.
The buildfarm's not too happy. It looks like this patch decided
to use the name "distinct_tbl" in a test script that runs in
parallel with anoth
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 9:43 AM Richard Guo wrote:
> I've applied some of the changes you suggested in your previous email
> and pushed the updated patch. Thank you for your review.
Ah, the buildfarm is complaining. I shouldn't create tables with the
same name in two test files. Fixing ...
Th
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 10:20 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> I suggest using a test program for this that Tom wrote nearly 20 years
> ago to validate changes that were made to the Bentley & McIlroy qsort,
> available from here:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/18732.1142967...@sss.pgh.pa.u
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 06:25:46PM +0300, Karina Litskevich wrote:
> The patch looks good to me.
Thanks for the review.
> They are not identical: space before AND vs space at the end of the
> previous line. I'd say that it would be better if they were
> identical. Personally, I prefer the one wit
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 9:59 PM Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
> On 11/13/24 16:34, Richard Guo wrote:
> > The function get_param_path_clause_serials() is used to get the set of
> > pushed-down clauses enforced within a parameterized Path. Since we
> > don't currently support parameterized MergeAppend pa
On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 5:40 PM Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
> I wonder if it would be possible to print only three rows instead of 10
> to prove the DISTINCT's correctness.
There are ten distinct values in the 'distinct_tbl' test table, so
I think it’d better to print all of them to verify correctness
Hi Shubham,
Here are my review comments for patch v5-0001.
Please don't reply with a blanket "I have fixed the given comments"
because it was not true. E.g., some of my previous comments are
rejected in favour of Amit's better code suggestion, but then other
comments seem not addressed for reason
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 6:21 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan writes:
> > I suppose that we'd have to invent some kind of new syntax for this.
> > But wouldn't it also make sense if it worked with "WHERE a IN (1, 2)
> > OR a IS NULL"? Or even with "WHERE a = 1 OR a IS NULL"?
>
> I'd be a stro
>
> Thanks. I think my only remaining feedback is that we should probably add a
> comment to explain why we aren't doing this for ARM yet [0].
Sounds good. Where would you like me to add this comment? Meson.build and
configure?
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> It would be fairly easy to teach nbtree about a new kind of
> ScalarArrayOp that worked just like a conventional SAOP, but also
> returned tuples matching "IS NULL" (IS NULL uses the equals strategy
> internally already, so it'd be almost the same as treating NULL as
> ju
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 at 11:34, Shayon Mukherjee wrote:
> Thank you for the guidance and tips. I was wondering if updating in-place is
> preferable or not, since my first instinct was to avoid it. I did not notice
> any breakage last time, unless I was looking in the wrong place (possibly?).
> I
David Rowley writes:
> There are still no votes against it, so unless some come in, I plan to
> start looking at the patches proposed to turn buffers on with analyze
> with my committer hat on.
I'm kind of -0.5, but I'd not bothered to vote because it was
pretty clear what the result was going to
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 4:39 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm a little skeptical that we should expend a lot more effort on
> the sorts of cases discussed here. Basically, this sort of patch
> improves matters for people who write crummy queries while penalizing
> everybody else.
I think that it's more
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 at 09:44, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 4:23 PM David Rowley wrote:
> > I think this might be a good time for anyone out there who is against
> > turning on BUFFERS when ANALYZE is on to speak up.
> >
> > Votes for changing this so far seem to be: Me, Michael
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 01:12:52PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 08:11:09AM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
>> On Fri, 2024-11-22 at 15:09 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>>> I took another look at v32-0001 and v32-0002, and they look
>>> reasonable to
>>> me. Unless additional feed
> On Nov 5, 2024, at 10:55 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 9:59 AM Shayon Mukherjee wrote:
>> My take away from whether or not an in-place update is needed on pg_index [1]
>>
>> - It’s unclear to me why it’s needed.
>> - I understand the xmin would get incremented when using
On 22.11.2024 09:08, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 12:07 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 09:39:21AM -0500, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
Oh, and a +1 in general to the patch, OP, although it would also be nice to
start finding the bottlenecks that cause such
On Nov 13, 2024, at 16:38, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> I came to this thinking that it was important to keep core (contrib, PL)
> extensions separate from non-core extensions, and if so, it’d be useful to
> have other defaults so that `make install` would go to the right one (site by
> default).
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 3:55 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>> There are cases where we don't already draw the necessary conclusions,
>> such as a>1 and a>2, which could be simplified to a>2. But those cases
>> aren't necessarily that common.
> Actually, we do use the more restr
On Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 8:50 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Hi, Here are my review comments for patch v9-0001.
>
> These are only trivial nits for some code comments. Everything else
> looked good to me.
>
> ==
> .../replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c
>
> ReorderBufferTruncateTXN:
>
> 1.
> + * The
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 11:12 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
>
> Few comments:
Thank you for reviewing the patch!
> 1) Should we have the Assert inside ReorderBufferTruncateTXNIfAborted
> instead of having it at multiple callers, ReorderBufferResetTXN also
> has the Assert inside the function after trunc
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 3:55 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> There are cases where we don't already draw the necessary conclusions,
> such as a>1 and a>2, which could be simplified to a>2. But those cases
> aren't necessarily that common.
Actually, we do use the more restrictive operator with cases like
On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 09:00:01PM +, Devulapalli, Raghuveer wrote:
> Sure. Updated patch.
Thanks. I think my only remaining feedback is that we should probably add
a comment to explain why we aren't doing this for ARM yet [0].
[0] https://postgr.es/m/ZwXsE0KG_wh6_heU%40nathan
--
nathan
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 11:27 AM Srirama Kucherlapati
wrote:
> After modifying the expected output for this testcase as below, the issue was
> resolved and the test case passed. But we are trying to see the root cause of
> this.
>
> "12:34:56-08:00"
This is not an AIX-specific issue. It was fixe
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 5:27 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 8:50 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > 5.
> > As I reported above (#2), I think it is better to check for empty BMS
> > in the caller because then the code is easier to read. Also, you need
> > to comment on which of these
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 3:58 AM ro b wrote:
> 1. Background
> A few months ago, when i read source codes of B-tree in routine
> _bt_preprocess_keys, i found that there are more contradictory
> checking case we can add. I sent email to pgsql-hackers and
> then community contributor
> > create mode 100644 src/test/modules/test_crc32c/test_crc32c.c
> > create mode 100644 src/test/modules/test_crc32c/test_crc32c.control
>
> Needs to be integrated with the meson based build as well.
Done.
> > +drive_crc32c(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
> > +{
> > + int64 count = P
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 4:23 PM David Rowley wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 at 08:30, Guillaume Lelarge
> wrote:
> > OK, I'm fine with this. v4 patch attached with one plan showing read,
> > written, and dirtied buffers.
>
> I think this might be a good time for anyone out there who is against
>
Toto guyoyg writes:
>> What we have here is a straightforward way to write a query versus a
>> much-less-straightforward way [...] So I'm not seeing why we should put our
>> finite development resources into optimizing the much-less-straightforward
>> way.
> Ah, I should have explained this: t
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 8:22 AM jian he wrote:
> current status:
> drop table if exists idxpart,idxpart0,idxpart1 cascade;
> create table idxpart (a int not null) partition by list (a);
> create table idxpart0 (a int constraint foo not null no inherit);
>
> alter table idxpart attach partition idx
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 10:15 AM Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 25 Nov 2024, at 22:53, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > In the following code, we use "defined(__darwin__) || defined(_MSC_VER)":
> >
> > +#if defined(__darwin__) || defined(_MSC_VER)
> > +#define SUBMS_MINIMAL_STEP_BITS 10
> >
On 2024-Nov-25, Dmitry Nikitin wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Add Assert to stop invalid values to pass on
>
> PageGetMaxOffsetNumber() can legitimately return zero
> (InvalidOffsetNumber) as an indication of error. However there are no
> any checks against that. As a result, for exampe, subsequen
Thanks for your answers.
> What we have here is a straightforward way to write a query versus a
> much-less-straightforward way [...] So I'm not seeing why we should put our
> finite development resources into optimizing the much-less-straightforward
> way.
Ah, I should have explained this: th
On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 3:21 PM Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote:
> TL;DR A PoC for changing shared_buffers without PostgreSQL restart, via
> changing shared memory mapping layout. Any feedback is appreciated.
A lot of people would like to have this feature, so I hope this
proposal work
On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 08:45:15AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 03:54:32PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> I'll manage. 0001 was a doozy to back-patch, and this obviously isn't a
>> terribly pressing issue, so I plan to wait until after the November minor
>> release to a
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 08:11:09AM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-11-22 at 15:09 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> I took another look at v32-0001 and v32-0002, and they look
>> reasonable to
>> me. Unless additional feedback materializes, I'll plan on committing
>> those
>> soon.
>
> Thos
Hi!
While reviewing other threads implementing stream API for various core
subsystems, I spotted that pgstattuple could also benefit from that.
So, PFA.
Notice refactoring around pgstat_hash_page and changes in pgstat_page
signature. This is needed because pgstat_hash_tuple uses
_hash_getbuf_with
> On 25 Nov 2024, at 22:53, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> In the following code, we use "defined(__darwin__) || defined(_MSC_VER)":
>
> +#if defined(__darwin__) || defined(_MSC_VER)
> +#define SUBMS_MINIMAL_STEP_BITS 10
> +#else
> +#define SUBMS_MINIMAL_STEP_BITS 12
> +#endif
> #define SUBMS_BIT
On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 12:20 AM Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 23 Nov 2024, at 10:58, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > I've attached an updated patch that squashed changes I made for v33.
> > We're still discussing increasing entropy on Windows and macOS, but
> > the patch seems to be in go
Sorry here the right attachment
Il giorno lun 25 nov 2024 alle ore 11:15 Emanuele Musella <
emamus...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> Thank you Bertrand for your feedbacks. We are looking for CFbot part so we
> can compile it like CFbot.
>
> For now we have fixed all points.
>
> Thank you
>
> Il giorno
> Hi Hackers,
>
> I am working on a feature in postgres_fdw extension to show plans used by
> remote postgresql servers in the output of the EXPLAIN command.
> I think this will help end users understand query execution plans used by
> remote servers. Sample output for table people where peopl
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 at 20:46, Kirill Gavrilov wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 1, 2024 at 2:46 PM Jim Jones wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 27.09.24 12:36, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>> > Consider max_log_size = 10Mb. The perspective might look very different.
>> > It’s not about WHERE anymore. It's a guard against heavy
On 24/09/2024 08:08, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
On 19/9/2024 09:55, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
This wrong prediction makes things much worse if the query has more
upper query blocks.
His question was: Why not consider the grouping column unique in the
upper query block? It could improve estimations.
Af
On 2024/11/25 8:31, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
Now that two minor releases are out, are you going to commit and
back-patch this?
Yes, I will.
But, the patch didn't apply cleanly to some back branches, so I've created
and attached updated patches for them. Could you review these?
If they look good,
Hi Team, here are few updates.
As of now we have removed all the old changes and made the changes that are
pretty much required by building from scratch. We had few issues with our
hardware as a result it took a while to build the code.
Below are the changes done as of now.
commit d2b4b4c2259e
On Fri, 2024-11-22 at 15:09 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I took another look at v32-0001 and v32-0002, and they look
> reasonable to
> me. Unless additional feedback materializes, I'll plan on committing
> those
> soon.
Those refactoring patches look fine to me, the only comment I have is
that
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 04:18:54PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 07:12:56AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > Not sure here, could custom stats start incrementing before the database
> > system
> > is ready to accept connections?
>
> In theory, that could be possib
On Sat, Oct 19, 2024 at 4:17 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> Removed that in the v2 attached.
Hi Michael,
The patch looks good to me.
I'd like to suggest discussing a little cosmetic change in the
affected lines. Compare the following.
Lines 2095-2098:
appendPQExpBuffer(&sql,
"
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 7:14 AM John Naylor wrote:
> To evaluate this technique further, it'll need some work to handle
> duplicates well.
I suggest using a test program for this that Tom wrote nearly 20 years
ago to validate changes that were made to the Bentley & McIlroy qsort,
available from h
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 at 16:19, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 6:47 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
>
> >
> > For patch 2, it will be good to introduce expanded functionality to
> > make as well. But patch 1 is ready for the committer. So marked
> > accordingly.
> >
>
> Didn't fi
Thanks for the review!
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 7:39 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> This breaks an existing property of psql. One example: \edit where we
> should keep the existing query buffer rather than discard it if a
> failure happens. This patch forcibly removes the contents of the
> query
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 6:43 PM Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for checking it!
>
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 15:19, Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 11:28 PM Nazir Bilal Yavuz
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, that is exactly why we have both '--schedule' and '--test
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 6:47 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> For patch 2, it will be good to introduce expanded functionality to
> make as well. But patch 1 is ready for the committer. So marked
> accordingly.
>
Didn't find a CF entry for this. Please create and update.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh
Em dom., 24 de nov. de 2024 às 18:54, David Rowley
escreveu:
> > SELECT format('|%10s|', 'foo');
This example you said returns one value, so I think it is ok.
I'm talking about lists with multiple fields or multiple lines. In [1] we
have both modes.
I don't think that "(2 rows)" is useful
sele
On 25.11.24 05:07, Tristan Partin wrote:
Looks correct to me. TIPs 628[0] and 666[1] seem to be the proposals
which added Tcl_Size and changed functions to use the type.
Reviewed-by: Tristan Partin
Committed and backpatched. Thanks for checking.
Attached is a very rough and limited proof of concept of $subject when
tuplesort uses abbreviated keys. It only works with int64:
Demo:
--setup
drop table if exists test;
create table test (a bigint);
insert into test select (1_000_000_000 * random())::bigint from
generate_series(1,1_000_000,1) i
Em dom., 24 de nov. de 2024 às 13:57, Tom Lane escreveu:
> Yeah. You can set it to INFO if you like, but the behavior is not
> different from setting it to NOTICE.
No, I don't think they have the same behavior.
If you set client_min_messages to Error then notice will not be sent, info
will wil
Hello ,
The patch is pretty trivial.
--
Best regards,
Dmitry mailto:pgsql-hack...@dima.nikitin.nameFrom 0ff6a234740d7a7d2bb9572271a1dbdfd4f45f39 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dmitry Nikitin
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 10:31:53 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Get rid off the
Dear PostgreSQL hackers,
I am writing to seek guidance and potential collaboration on a project
involving cardinality estimation improvements in PostgreSQL. The project
aims to enhance join result cardinality estimation by incorporating
HyperLogLog (HLL) estimates alongside the existing join opera
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 8:50 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Hi Shubham,
>
> here are my review comments for patch v4-0001.
>
> ==
> src/backend/replication/logical/relation.c
>
> logicalrep_report_missing_and_gen_attrs:
>
> 1.
> static void
> -logicalrep_report_missing_attrs(LogicalRepRelation *re
Thank you Bertrand for your feedbacks. We are looking for CFbot part so we
can compile it like CFbot.
For now we have fixed all points.
Thank you
Il giorno mar 19 nov 2024 alle ore 20:28 Bertrand Drouvot <
bertranddrouvot...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 05:21:18PM +0
On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 3:03 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> Attach the V10 patch set which addressed above comments
> and fixed a CFbot warning due to un-initialized variable.
>
We should make the v10_2-0001* as the first main patch for review till
we have a consensus to resolve LSN<->Timesta
On 2024-11-23 07:34, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 4:17 AM Masahiro Ikeda
wrote:
Though the change fixes the assertion error in 'make check', there are
still
cases where the number of return values is incorrect. I would also
like
to
continue investigating.
Thanks for taking
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 1:26 AM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 01:31:45PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 12:24 PM Nisha Moond
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Attached the patch with modification.
> > >
> >
> > Looks reasonable to me.
>
> +1
>
Pushed.
--
With Re
88 matches
Mail list logo
