Hi Alvaro,
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 9:39 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2025-Mar-12, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>
> > Does the test pass for you if you don't apply my patches?
>
> Yes. It also passes if I keep PG_TEST_EXTRA empty.
I am not able to reproduce this problem locally.
The test uses
In
Moving this patch to the next CF as this patch needs more design level
inputs which may not be feasible in this CF but do continue to review
the patch.
regards,
Ajin Cherian
Fujitsu Australia
On 2025-Mar-12, David G. Johnston wrote:
> I’m not accepting this line of work as part of this patch. Please limit
> this to the merits of choosing \N as the particular value for \pset null on
> this page. You can start a new thread regarding a policy change for
> marking up null values in the w
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: not tested
Implements feature: not tested
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:not tested
Hi,
Tested this patch with `--no-policies` option works as expected by ensuri
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: not tested
Implements feature: not tested
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:not tested
Hi,
Tested the latest patch that allows direct `COPY` operations on Materiali
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 05:15:53PM -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
> The usecase I can see here is that we don't want autovac creating so much
> WAL traffic that it starts forcing other backends to have to write WAL out.
> But tracking how many times autovac writes WAL buffers won't help with that
Ri
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 14:03:12 -0500
Nico Williams wrote:
> How about using a `set_config()` to deonte the "application_name" (and
> any other details) for the _next_ query, then have those details
> appear in the pg_stat_statements rows and logs?
>
> Clients would send a `SELECT set_config(...)` a
CREATE TABLE table_test (
foo text NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT test_pk PRIMARY KEY (foo),
CONSTRAINT test_uq UNIQUE (foo)
);
building index "pg_toast_29364884_index" on table "pg_toast_29364884"
serially
building index "test_pk" on table "table_test" serially
pg_class has 3 records, table, it
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 10:49 AM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 09:18, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > Thanks looks good to me.
> >
> > While looking at the patch, I have a few comments/questions
> >
> > + if (pub)
> > + result = lappend(result, pub);
> > + else
> > + {
> > + /*
> > + * W
Dear hackers,
I found that the patch needs to be rebased due to ac4494, PSA new version.
It could be applied atop HEAD and tests worked well.
Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
v18-0001-Distribute-invalidatons-if-change-in-catalog-tab.patch
Description: v18-0001-Distribute-invalidato
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 10:53, Peter Smith wrote:
>
>
> If time permits I'll try to help you get some of the ("needs review")
> threads moving by checking the simple ones first.
Thanks, Peter! Would anyone else like to volunteer for this
CommitFest? Since it's the last one, more help would be grea
On Thu, 2025-03-13 at 08:53 +0900, Ryo Kanbayashi wrote:
> Just to let you know, my action is not intended to steal your
> contribution but to prevent your good idea from being lost.
>
> TO: Mecael and other hackers,
>
> There are any problem in light of community customs?
Anything submitted to
On Wed, 12 Mar 2025 at 16:15, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> Thanks, Vignesh, for adding the test. I believe you've tested the
> effect of DROP PUBLICATION. However, I think we should also test the
> behavior of ALTER SUBSCRIPTION...SET PUBLICATION before creating the
> PUBLICATION, and then create the PU
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 9:06 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> I think this approach has other problems. For example, even if a role has
> admin directly on the dropped role, we'll block DROP ROLE if it also has
> admin indirectly:
>
This is exactly what we're aiming for. We don't want the ADMIN
On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 8:13 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that no one has volunteered yet for the March 2025
> Commitfest, so I’d like to volunteer to be one of the CF managers for
> March 2025 Commitfest.
>
> Regards,
> Vignesh
>
>
Hi Vignesh,
If time permits I'll try to help you g
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 09:18, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> Thanks looks good to me.
>
> While looking at the patch, I have a few comments/questions
>
> + if (pub)
> + result = lappend(result, pub);
> + else
> + {
> + /*
> + * When executing 'ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SET PUBLICATION', the
> + * apply worke
On Sat, 1 Mar 2025 at 23:07, Yuya Watari wrote:
> The previous patches did not apply to the current master, so I have
> rebased them.
Thank you for continuing to work on this. My apologies for having
completely disappeared from this thread for so long.
Looking at v33-0001, there are a few choice
>
> I've rebased the patch according to the CI bot's requirements. Please have
> a look.
>
Dear Sergey & Hackers,
+1 to the idea, and hope it becomes available in v18.
Here are some observations from my review:
1. backend_status.c, Line 572 - the following new condition can break the
logic of e
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 4:26 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 9:36 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Sawada-san,
> >
> > Thanks for updating the patch!
> >
> > > I've attached the updated patch. I address all comments I got so far
> > > and added a small regres
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 21:40 Álvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2025-Mar-12, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > Patch look good for committing?
>
> Ah sorry, I should have said so -- yes, it looks good to me.
Thanks (Maciek, Tender too) for the review.
I feel a
> slight dislike for using URL-escaped charact
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 7:38 AM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2025 at 16:15, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, Vignesh, for adding the test. I believe you've tested the
> > effect of DROP PUBLICATION. However, I think we should also test the
> > behavior of ALTER SUBSCRIPTION...SET PUBLICA
On Wednesday, March 12, 2025, David G. Johnston
wrote:
>
>
> My take on this is that the presence of environment variables doesn’t
> impact whether a given CLI option is shown optional or mandatory. We are,
> in effect, communicating that “datadir” must be specified for this
> command. And then
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 2:41 PM Alena Rybakina
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 10.03.2025 12:13, Ilia Evdokimov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > After commit eaf5027 we should add information about wal_buffers_full.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Ilia Evdokimov,
> > Tantor Labs LLC.
> >
> I thi
On Wednesday, March 12, 2025, Peter Smith wrote:
>
>
> I've made some updates and attached the v2 patch.
Thanks. Full review later.
Pg_controldata
- TODO. The page structure looks strange. There should be an "Options"
> section to describe -D, -V, and -?
Agreed.
>
> [7] pg_resetwal [ -f |
On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 9:10 PM Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 8:42 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
I confirmed with tests that with the patch, a lot less disk space is
used when there are lots of unpublished changes and the subscription
is not configured to be streaming.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 3:18 AM David G. Johnston
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 8:25 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>>
>> [1] initdb [option...] [ --pgdata | -D ] directory
>> [2] pg_archivecleanup [option...] archivelocation oldestkeptwalfile
>> [3] pg_checksums [option...] [[ -D | --pgdata ]datadir
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 05:59, Euler Taveira wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025, at 8:47 AM, vignesh C wrote:
>
> I reviewed the discussion on this thread and believe we now have an
> agreement on the design and GUC names. However, the patch still needs
> updates and extensive testing, especially cons
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 08:41:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> The "corrupted statistics file" whine is most likely
> caused by pg_upgrade copying the old system's pgstat.stat file
> into the new installation --- is that a good idea?
I don't believe pg_upgrade copies that file to the new cluster. At
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 08:53:49AM +0900, Ryo Kanbayashi wrote:
> If you can't work for ther patch for a while because you are busy or
> other some reason,
> I can become additinal reviewer and apply review comments from Micael
> to the patch instead of you.
>
> If you don't want my action, plea
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025, at 8:47 AM, vignesh C wrote:
> I reviewed the discussion on this thread and believe we now have an
> agreement on the design and GUC names. However, the patch still needs
> updates and extensive testing, especially considering its impact on
> backward compatibility. I'm unsure
I happened to notice these entries in a log file on a
buildfarm member [1]:
2025-03-12 15:39:53.265 UTC [7296] WARNING: found incorrect redo LSN 0/159FB60
(expected 0/4028)
2025-03-12 15:39:53.265 UTC [7296] LOG: corrupted statistics file
"pg_stat/pgstat.stat"
(this is near the end of the
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 4:28 PM Alena Rybakina
wrote:
> Thank you for the explanation!
>
> Now I see why these changes were made.
>
> After your additional explanations, everything really became clear and I
> fully agree with the current code regarding this part.
Cool.
> However I did not see an
> > Intel has contributed SSE4.2 CRC32C [1] and AVX-512 CRC32C [2] based on
> similar techniques to postgres.
>
> ...this is a restatement of facts we already know. I'm guessing the intended
> takeaway is "since Intel submitted an implementation to us based on paper A,
> then we are free to separa
On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 2:01 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 02:58:43AM -0500, Corey Huinker wrote:
> > Currently, a lot of our utility scripts (anything that uses
> > connectDatabase) don't support service=name params or PGSERVICE=name env
> > vars, which is really too bad.
On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 10:28 AM Jacob Champion
wrote:
> > I think some of the wrapped calls into library code might actually call back
> > into our code (to receive/send data), and our code then will use wait events
> > around lower level operations done as part of that.
>
> That would be a proble
Dear Sergey & Hackers,
+1 to the idea, and hope it becomes available in v18.
Here are some observations from my review:
1. backend_status.c, Line 572 - the following new condition can break the
logic of existing code, please move it inside the IF body, where you
compute values for pg_stat_sessio
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 3:34 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 9:48 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 10:54 AM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > >> BTW, I am planning to commit this only on HEAD as this is a behavior
> > > >> change. Please let me know i
Thanks for taking a look. I've pushed the patch to increase the
default effective_io_concurrency.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 8:07 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2025-03-10 19:45:38 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > From 7b35b1144bddf202fb4d56a9b783751a0945ba0e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Mel
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 6:33 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Hi Nisha,
>
> Thanks for addressing some of my v1 comments. I confirmed they are all
> ok. But, I haven't reviewed the v2 again because I still had doubts
> about the "stats" question and am waiting to see how that pans out.
> Meanwhile, I ha
On 12/03/2025 21:31, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
ReorderBufferGetRelids allocates an array with MemoryContextAlloc, and
ReorderBufferReturnRelids just calls pfree. The pools are long gone, and
now the naming looks weird.
Attached patch renames those functions and other such fu
On 12.03.2025 01:59, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 6:24 PM Alena Rybakina
wrote:
Hi, reviewing the code I noticed that you removed the
parallel_aware check for DSM initialization for BitmapIndexScan,
IndexScan, IndexOnlyScan,
but you didn't do the same in the ExecParallelReInit
> I think this is a seriously bad idea. The first line is already
> overloaded; we don't need several different extensions adding more
> stuff to it.
Fair enough.
> Plus, this doesn't consider what to do in non-text
> output formats.
the hook will be a no-op for non-text formats, which is not
d
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 01:35:39PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Thanks for the quick review. I'll plan on committing this shortly if CI is
> happy.
Committed.
--
nathan
On 2025-03-12 We 3:03 AM, jian he wrote:
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 1:06 AM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
Hello,
On 2025-Mar-11, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
In map.dat file, I tried to fix this issue by adding number of characters
in dbname but as per code comments, as of now, we are not supporting
On Wed, 2025-03-12 at 19:55 +0300, Alexander Borisov wrote:
> 1. Added static for casemap() function. Otherwise the compiler could
> not
> optimize the code and the performance dropped significantly.
Oops, it was static, but I made it external just to see what code it
generated. I didn't intend to
Sami Imseih writes:
> 1/ As you can see form the output above, I used explain_per_node_hook
> to append a "Plan Node ID" to the explain output. I really don't like having
> it
> there, and prefer that it gets added to the top line of the node.
> i.e.
>-> Foreign Scan on t_r1 (cost=100.00..
Hi!
On 10.03.2025 12:13, Ilia Evdokimov wrote:
Hi,
After commit eaf5027 we should add information about wal_buffers_full.
Any thoughts?
--
Best regards,
Ilia Evdokimov,
Tantor Labs LLC.
I think I can add it. To be honest, I haven't gotten to know this
statistic yet, haven't had time to get
Hi,
>>> EXPLAIN output. It wouldn't make sense for core to have an EXPLAIN
>>> option whose whole purpose is to cater to the needs of some extension,
>>> so that made me think of providing some extensibility infrastructure.
>> Making EXPLAIN extensible sounds like a good idea.. FWIW, There is a
Hi!
On 10.03.2025 16:33, Kirill Reshke wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 at 23:00, Alena Rybakina wrote:
Hi!
On 17.02.2025 17:46, Alena Rybakina wrote:
On 04.02.2025 18:22, Alena Rybakina wrote:
Hi! Thank you for your review!
On 02.02.2025 23:43, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 01:56:04PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> The change here seems fine. My only quibble is that this sentence now
> seems out of place: "Option --analyze-in-stages can be used to
> generate minimal statistics quickly." I'm thinking we should make a
> clearer separation for with a
12.03.2025 19:55, Alexander Borisov wrote:
[...]
A couple questions:
* Is there a reason the fast-path for codepoints < 0x80 is in
unicode_case.c rather than unicode_case_func.h?
Yes, this is an important optimization, below are benchmarks that
[...]
I forgot to add the benchmark:
Benchm
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> ReorderBufferGetRelids allocates an array with MemoryContextAlloc, and
> ReorderBufferReturnRelids just calls pfree. The pools are long gone, and
> now the naming looks weird.
> Attached patch renames those functions and other such functions to use
> the terms Allo
On 03/03/2025 19:44, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
In any case, the attached patch works and seems like an easy fix for
stable branches at least.
Committed that to master and all affected stable branches.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)
On 2025-Mar-12, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 05:23:25PM +0100, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Strange: this code is not covered by any tests.
> >
> > https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/utils/adt/acl.c.gcov.html#5533
> > https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/utils/adt/
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 07:34:16PM +0100, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> Thanks :-) I confirm that this covers the code in select_best_grantor
> that you're modifying.
Thanks for the quick review. I'll plan on committing this shortly if CI is
happy.
--
nathan
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 05:23:25PM +0100, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> Strange: this code is not covered by any tests.
>
> https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/utils/adt/acl.c.gcov.html#5533
> https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/utils/adt/acl.c.gcov.html#5438
Huh. Well, it's easy enoug
On 7/3/2025 16:56, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
On 2/3/2025 20:35, Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
On 17/2/2025 04:00, Michael Paquier wrote:
No documentation provided.
Ok, I haven't been sure this idea has a chance to be committed. I will
introduce the docs in the next version.
This is a new version with bu
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 10:34:46AM +, chiranmoy.bhattacha...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 02:41:18AM +, nathandboss...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> v5-no-sve is the result of using a function pointer, but pointing to the
>> "slow" versions instead of the SVE version. v5-sve is t
On 2025-Mar-12, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
> Hi Alvaro,
>
> Here are the latest patches, which includes the regression fix.
Thank you.
Taking a step back after discussing this with some colleagues, I need to
contradict what I said at the start of this thread. There's a worry
that changing pg_attrib
Hi, Alexander!
On 06.03.2025 11:23, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
Hi, Alena!
On Sat, Mar 1, 2025 at 1:39 PM Alena Rybakina wrote:
On 09.02.2025 18:38, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
Also, aren't we too restrictive while requiring is_simple_values_sequence()?
For instance, I believe cases like this (c
On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 at 23:52, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> Currently, if you configure a hot standby server with a smaller
> max_connections setting than the primary, the server refuses to start up:
>
> LOG: entering standby mode
> FATAL: recovery aborted because of insufficient parameter setti
I noticed some weird naming conventions in reorderbuffer.c which are
leftovers from a long time ago when reorderbuffer.c maintained its own
small memory pools to reduce palloc/pfree overhead. For example:
extern Oid *ReorderBufferGetRelids(ReorderBuffer *rb, int nrelids);
extern void ReorderBuf
Hello,
I noticed that the test file 001_repo_changes.pl finished successfully
after having taken 180s to run. This seems pretty suspicious --
normally that step takes around one second.
The problem is seen in this step:
[19:44:49.572](0.262s) ok 24 - update works with dropped subscriber column
Hi,
On 2025-03-11 20:57:43 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > I think we'll really need to do something about this for BSD users
> > regardless
> > of AIO. Or maybe those OSs should fix something, but somehow I am not having
> > high hopes for an OS that claims to have POSIX confirming unnamed semaphor
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 4:08 AM Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2025-03-11 at 11:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Right, that was what I was thinking, but hadn't had time to look in
> > detail. The postDataBound dependency isn't real helpful here, we
> > could lose that if we had the data dependency.
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 2:16 PM James Coleman wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> A colleague noticed today that the docs still say that "Scans of
> common table expressions (CTEs)" are "always parallel restricted".
>
> While I think that strictly remains true at the implementation level,
> from a user's perspe
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 7:25 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > 0002: Add get_opfamily_member_for_cmptype(). This was called
> > get_opmethod_member() in your patch set, but I think that name wasn't
> > quite right. I also removed the opmethod argument, which was rarely
> > used
On 2025-Mar-12, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> Does the test pass for you if you don't apply my patches?
Yes. It also passes if I keep PG_TEST_EXTRA empty.
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
On 2025-Mar-12, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> There's a count_one_bits() function in acl.c that can be replaced with a
> call to pg_popcount64(). This isn't performance-critical code, but IMHO we
> might as well use the centralized implementation.
Makes sense. Patch looks good to me.
> @@ -5532,7 +5
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 at 19:59, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
Thanks for the review! And sorry for the late reply.
> On 2024-12-25 15:57:34 +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> > So, this patchset extends pg_buffercache with 3 functions:
> >
> > 1- pg_buffercache_evict_all(): This is very similar
Hi,
On 2025-03-11 19:55:35 -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-03-11 12:41:08 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 01:51:42PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2024-09-16 07:43:49 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > For non-sync IO methods, I gather it's essential that a process
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 5:35 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> When running these tests, I encounter this strange diff in the dumps,
> which seems to be that the locale for type money does not match. I
> imagine the problem is that the locale is not set correctly when
> initdb'ing one of the
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 12:10:30PM +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> I think moving the check to the second pass won´t work in this case.
> The reason is that we rely on entries in the pg_auth_members table. By
> the time the check occurs in the second pass, the first pass will have
> already removed
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 7:00 AM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> And another small patch set extracted from the bigger one, to keep
> things moving along:
>
> 0001: Add get_opfamily_method() in lsyscache.c, from your patch set.
>
Right, this came from v21-0006-*, with a slight code comment change and o
There's a count_one_bits() function in acl.c that can be replaced with a
call to pg_popcount64(). This isn't performance-critical code, but IMHO we
might as well use the centralized implementation.
--
nathan
>From 932fac13bf168571b145a54c29d9ac28ca2a070f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nathan Bos
On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 6:43 PM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
>
> Okay, I got cold feet today working on this. I actually think we
> probably want some kind of guc set (set like union/intersection/etc
> not set like assign a value) infrastructure for gucs that can be equal
> to any combination of predete
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 6:27 PM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
>
> I did more manual testing of my patches, and I think they are mostly
> ready for commit except for the IsConnectionBackend() macro (if we
> have something to change it to).
I've committed this and marked it as such in the CF app.
Thanks
> On 12 Mar 2025, at 20:02, Evgeny Voropaev wrote:
>
v6 looks good to me. I'll flip the CF entry.
Thanks!
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 11:14 AM Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
> Thanks for the new version!
v10 is attached with most fixes after review and one new thing
introduced: pg_numa_available() for run-time decision inside tests
which was needed after simplifying code a little bit as you wanted.
I've also f
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 8:46 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2025/03/11 20:55, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> > Hi Fujii-san,
> >
> > It seems that this was forgotten somehow.
> >
> > The patch still applies.
> >
> > Examining c4d5cb71d229095a39fda1121a75ee40e6069a2a, it seems that this patch
> > could
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 11:25 AM Jacob Champion
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 8:22 AM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Right. How about the attached? It checks as an alternative to a
> > password whether the SCRAM keys were provided. That should get us back
> > to the same level of checking?
>
Hello Hackers!
Andrey, thank you for your review and remarks.
> Patch adds whitespace errors
Cleaned.
> if (writePage != 0) should be if (writePage)
Done.
> XLogSimpleInsert(int64 simpledata, RmgrId rmid, uint8 info)
> I’d rename function XLogSimpleInsert() to something more descriptive
> and
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 3:20 PM Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2025-Mar-12, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>
> > If the test passes for you, can you please try the patches at [1] on
> > top of your patches? Please apply those, set and export environment
> > variable PG_TEST_EXTRA=regress_dump_test, and run 00
10.03.2025 14:30, Alexander Korotkov пишет:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 3:55 PM Yura Sokolov wrote:
>> 28.02.2025 16:03, Yura Sokolov пишет:
>>> 17.02.2025 00:27, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 10:31 AM Yura Sokolov
wrote:
> I briefly looked into patch and have coup
On Fri, Mar 7, 2025, at 5:34 PM, Rafael Thofehrn Castro wrote:
> Did additional benchmarks and found issues with the patch that doesn't do
> execProcNode
> wrapping. There are sporadic crashes with **double free or corruption (top)**
>
> So making the patch that uses the wrapper the current
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> 0002: Add get_opfamily_member_for_cmptype(). This was called
> get_opmethod_member() in your patch set, but I think that name wasn't
> quite right. I also removed the opmethod argument, which was rarely
> used and is somewhat redundant.
Hm, that will throw an error
And another small patch set extracted from the bigger one, to keep
things moving along:
0001: Add get_opfamily_method() in lsyscache.c, from your patch set.
0002: Add get_opfamily_member_for_cmptype(). This was called
get_opmethod_member() in your patch set, but I think that name wasn't
quit
On 2025-Mar-12, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> The 002_pg_upgrade test passes with and without my patches now. But
> then the tests added here do not leave behind any parent-child table.
> Previously we have found problems in dumping and restoring constraints
> in an inheritance hierarchy. I think the te
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 Yuya,
Tested this patch and noted that this patch signific
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 11:24 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 3:17 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 5:51 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
>
> Some thoughts/questions on the idea
>
> I notice that we are always considering block-level parallelism for
> heaps
On 3/12/25 12:48 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
The CREATE DATABASE hang is indeed new in v15. The general dblink missed
interrupt processing (e.g. pg_cancel_backend response delay) is an old bug.
Aha, that was what you were referring to! My apologies, was reading your
mail a bit too quickly. :)
Co
Hi,
The v7 patch looks good to me, handling the bitcode modules in a uniform
way and also avoiding the hacky code and warnings, much better now.
A small note about the bitcode emission for generated sources in contrib,
using cube as example, currently it creates two dict entries in a list:
bc_seg
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 12:59 PM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Yes, that structure looks ok. But you can remove one level of block in
> get_extension_control_directories().
>
Sorry, missed during debugging. Fixed
> I found a bug that was already present in my earlier patch versions:
>
> @@ -423,7 +4
Tomas Vondra writes:
> On 3/11/25 14:07, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> As the resident perl style pedant, I'd just like to complain about the
>> below:
>>
>> Tomas Vondra writes:
>>
>>> diff --git a/src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/Cluster.pm
>>> b/src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/Cluster.pm
>
On 3/11/25 14:07, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> As the resident perl style pedant, I'd just like to complain about the
> below:
>
> Tomas Vondra writes:
>
>> diff --git a/src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/Cluster.pm
>> b/src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/Cluster.pm
>> index 666bd2a2d4c..1c66360c16c
On Wed, 12 Mar 2025 at 09:14, vignesh C wrote:
>
> The patch was not applying on top of HEAD because of recent commits,
> here is a rebased version.
I have moved this to the next CommitFest since it will not be
committed in the current release. This also allows reviewers to focus
on the remaining
Hi,
After an off-list discussion with Fujii-san, I'm now trying to modify
the following message that is output when a client attempts to connect
instead of changing the log level as the original proposal:
$ psql: error: connection to server at "localhost" (::1), port 5433
failed: FATAL: t
Hi Alvaro,
Here are the latest patches, which includes the regression fix.
Thanks,
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 3:38 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 3:20 PM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2025-Mar-12, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> >
> > > If the test passes for you, can you ple
On Wednesday, March 12, 2025, Marcos Pegoraro wrote:
> Em ter., 11 de mar. de 2025 às 17:43, Tom Lane
> escreveu:
>
>> I think that idea (changing all the docs) is a complete nonstarter
>> because people would not understand why the results they get don't
>> look like what it says in the docs.
Michael Paquier writes:
> And I guess that we're OK here, so applied. That should be the last
> one.
Quite a few buildfarm members are not happy about the initialization
that 9a8dd2c5a added to PendingBackendStats. For instance [1]:
gcc -std=gnu99 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
-W
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
