Re: make VALIDATE domain constraint lock on related relations as ShareUpdateExclusiveLock

On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:57 AM jian he wrote: > > hi. > > We can still perform DML operations on a table while validating its > check constraint. > Similarly, it should be fine to do DML while validating domain constraints? > but currently, it's not allowed for domain constraints. > > The attache

Re: PG 18 release notes draft committed

On Mon, 2025-05-12 at 20:27 -0700, David G. Johnston wrote: > On Thursday, May 1, 2025, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I will continue improving it until beta 1, and until the final release. > > I will probably add markup in 1-3 weeks.  Let the feedback begin.  ;-) > > > Should all columns removed fro

Re: Suggestion to add --continue-client-on-abort option to pgbench

On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 9:20 AM wrote: > I also appreciate you for pointing out my mistakes in the previous version of > the patch. I fixed the duplicated lines. I’ve attached the updated patch. > This is a useful feature, so +1 from my side. Here are some initial comments on the patch while hav

Re: Why our Valgrind reports suck

On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 12:11 AM Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > And, since there's nothing new under the sun around here, > > we already had a discussion about that back in 2021: > > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/3471359.1615937770%40sss.pgh.pa.us > > That thread seems to have led

RE: Changing shared_buffers without restart

Hi Ashutosh, > > * During resize, simply calculate the new size and call ftruncate on each > > segment to adjust memory accordingly, no need to mmap/munmap or modify any > > memory mapping. > > > > > That's same as my understanding. Great, thanks for confirming! > I thought I had shared a test pr

Re: Suggestion to add --continue-client-on-abort option to pgbench

Hi Stepan and Matthias, Thank you both for your replies. I agree with Matthias's detailed explanation regarding the purpose of the patch. > Regarding the patch code, I noticed that there are duplicate case > entries in the command-line option handling (specifically for case 18 > or case ESTATUS_

fix: propagate M4 env variable to flex subprocess

Hi all, I was trying to build Postgres with Meson specifying the binaries of the tools such as bison, flex and m4. I found that the m4 binary wasn't being used by flex, and digging into this led me to the pgflex wrapper. The pgflex wrapper runs flex with an explicit environment, so it doesn't inh

Re: PG 18 release notes draft committed

On Thursday, May 1, 2025, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I will continue improving it until beta 1, and until the final release. > I will probably add markup in 1-3 weeks. Let the feedback begin. ;-) > Should all columns removed from system views and/or catalogs be listed in “Migration” or is there

make VALIDATE domain constraint lock on related relations as ShareUpdateExclusiveLock

hi. We can still perform DML operations on a table while validating its check constraint. Similarly, it should be fine to do DML while validating domain constraints? but currently, it's not allowed for domain constraints. The attached patch addresses this problem. so, with the patch, the followin

Re: Useless LEFT JOIN breaks MIN/MAX optimization

On 12.05.2025 14:05, Tom Lane wrote: Robert Haas writes: But that's also assuming that you're correct here about how to descend through a JoinExpr, which I'm not quite sure whether is true. It's also assuming that we should solve the problem here rather than in some other part of the code e.g.

Re: queryId constant squashing does not support prepared statements

> > On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 12:47:19PM GMT, Sami Imseih wrote: > > So, I think we can create a new parse node ( parsenode.h ) that will only be > > used in parsing (and gram.c only ) to track the start/end locations > > and List and > > based on this node we can create A_ArrayExpr and A_Expr with t

Re: Proposal: Exploring LSM Tree‑Based Storage Engine for PostgreSQL (Inspired by MyRocks)

On Sun, May 11, 2025 at 11:06:00AM -0700, Manish Rai Jain wrote: > The motivation stems from the well‑known write‑amplification issues > with B‑trees under high write throughput. An LSM‑based engine could > offer: Consider the ZFS copy-on-write b-tree-ish design, which has _even more_ write amplif

Re: Adding error messages to a few slash commands

On Mon Apr 14, 2025 at 12:27:53 GMT +03, Pavel Luzanov wrote: > I recommend to create a new entry for this patch in the open July > commitfest . > I will be able to review this patch in a couple months later in June, > if no one wants to review it earlier. I

Re: Proposal: Exploring LSM Tree‑Based Storage Engine for PostgreSQL (Inspired by MyRocks)

Hi Manish, > I’ve been exploring the idea of integrating an LSM tree–based storage engine > into PostgreSQL — similar in spirit to MyRocks for MySQL — by replacing the > underlying storage while preserving PostgreSQL’s upper layers (planner, > executor, MVCC, etc.). > [...] Personally I wouldn

Re: Request for Implementation of Custom Error Messages for CHECK Constraints

On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 11:22:21AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote: > On Monday, May 12, 2025, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Yeah, you could name the constraint > "Custom_error_message_when_the_condition_is_not_met." and then just > convert underscore to spaces and display that to the user.

Re: Proposal: Exploring LSM Tree‑Based Storage Engine for PostgreSQL (Inspired by MyRocks)

On Sun, 11 May 2025 at 14:06, Manish Rai Jain wrote: > > Hi hackers, > > I’ve been exploring the idea of integrating an LSM tree–based storage engine > into PostgreSQL — similar in spirit to MyRocks for MySQL — by replacing the > underlying storage while preserving PostgreSQL’s upper layers (pla

Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO SELECT [FOR ...] take 2

On 3/31/25 5:33 PM, Dean Rasheed wrote: On 3/4/25 10:24 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: Rebased the patch to add support for OLD.* and NEW.*. I took a closer look at this, and I have a number of comments: Thanks for taking a look and improving my patch! And thanks to Kirill too. * The changes

Re: Request for Implementation of Custom Error Messages for CHECK Constraints

On Monday, May 12, 2025, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Yeah, you could name the constraint > "Custom_error_message_when_the_condition_is_not_met." and then just > convert underscore to spaces and display that to the user. > > The 63 byte limit seems much more likely to be a factor if the name has to

Re: Request for Implementation of Custom Error Messages for CHECK Constraints

On Sat, May 10, 2025 at 07:58:47PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Miguel Ferreira" writes: > > I propose extending the syntax of the ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT > > statement (and potentially CREATE TABLE) to allow for the > > specification of a custom error message for each CHECK constraint. > > Why d

Re: Small fixes needed by high-availability tools

Hi, dropping in my 2 cents here. On Mon, 12 May 2025 at 18:42, Andrey Borodin wrote: > >> Problem: user might try to cancel locally committed transaction and if we > >> do so we will show non-replicated data as committed. This leads to loosing > >> data with UPSERTs. > > > > Could you explain w

Re: Useless LEFT JOIN breaks MIN/MAX optimization

Robert Haas writes: > But that's also assuming that you're correct here about how to descend > through a JoinExpr, which I'm not quite sure whether is true. It's > also assuming that we should solve the problem here rather than in > some other part of the code e.g. the join removal code, and I'm n

Re: libcurl in libpq.pc

On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 8:49 AM Jacob Champion wrote: > > On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 3:50 AM Christoph Berg wrote: > > Since nothing in libpq should need curl for compiling, should we drop > > it there instead? > > The static build (libpq.a) still needs libcurl. The module is only > compiled for use

Re: libcurl in libpq.pc

On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 3:50 AM Christoph Berg wrote: > Since nothing in libpq should need curl for compiling, should we drop > it there instead? The static build (libpq.a) still needs libcurl. The module is only compiled for use by the shared library. --Jacob

Allow reading LSN written by walreciever, but not flushed yet

Moved off from "Small fixes needed by high-availability tools" > On 12 May 2025, at 01:33, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 6:30 PM Andrey Borodin wrote: >> >> 3. Allow reading LSN written by walreciever, but not flushed yet >> >> Problem: if we have synchronous_standby_names = A

Re: add tab-complete for ALTER DOMAIN ADD...

On 2025-May-12, Fujii Masao wrote: > I have no objection to this commit. However, I had assumed we would > wait to commit changes like this - which aren't bug fixes or > v18-related oversights - until master becomes the development branch > for v19. Maybe I'm missing something.. Yeah, fair questi

Re: Small fixes needed by high-availability tools

> On 6 May 2025, at 12:00, Matthias van de Meent > wrote: > > On Fri, 2 May 2025 at 15:00, Andrey Borodin wrote: >> >> Hi hackers! >> >> I want to revive attempts to fix some old edge cases of physical quorum >> replication. >> >> Please find attached draft patches that demonstrate ideas.

Re: add tab-complete for ALTER DOMAIN ADD...

Fujii Masao writes: > On 2025/05/11 23:22, Álvaro Herrera wrote: >> Done that, and pushed. > I have no objection to this commit. However, I had assumed we would > wait to commit changes like this - which aren't bug fixes or > v18-related oversights - until master becomes the development branch >

Re: [PATCH] Fix replica identity mismatch for partitioned tables with publish_via_partition_root

Hi! This is probably not the most familiar part of Postgres to me, but does it break anything? Or is it just inconsistency in the replication protocol? A test for the described scenario would be a great addition. And, if it is feasible, provide an example of what would be broken with the way part

Re: Why our Valgrind reports suck

=?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera writes: > On 2025-May-11, Tom Lane wrote: >> In particular, I had not realized that autovacuum >> leaks a nontrivial amount of memory per relation processed (cf 0009), >> and apparently has done for a few releases now. This is horrid in >> databases with many table

Re: Why our Valgrind reports suck

On 2025-May-11, Tom Lane wrote: > Okay, here is a patch series that updates the > 0001-Make-memory-contexts-themselves-more-visible-to-valg.patch > patch you posted in that thread, and makes various follow-up > fixes that either fix or paper over various leaks. Wow, that's a lot of extra fixes.

Re: Adding skip scan (including MDAM style range skip scan) to nbtree

On Sun, May 11, 2025 at 11:09 PM Tomas Vondra wrote: > I where "revert" is master with the removal patch. Sorry about the > confusion, I guess I was distracted and did some mistake. > > So, this seems to be in line with the hypothesis ... That makes way more sense. I wonder if we can fix this pr

Re: Vacuum statistics

On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 5:34 PM Alena Rybakina wrote: > > I did a rebase and finished the part with storing statistics separately from > the relation statistics - now it is possible to disable the collection of > statistics for relationsh using gucs and > this allows us to solve the problem with

libcurl in libpq.pc

Re: Jacob Champion > Wolfgang reported over in [1] that I've missed a comma when appending > to the PKG_CONFIG_REQUIRES_PRIVATE list, making libpq.pc look ugly: > > Requires.private: libssl, libcrypto libcurl Is adding libcurl there even the right move? This will make all programs using pkgco

[PATCH v2] Re: Cancel problems of query to pg_stat_statements

Hi! Thanks for the review! Its true that qtext_load_file() can be called with acquired lock in pg_stat_statements_internal()… So I perform INTERRUPTS_PENDING_CONDITION in v2 patch and call CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS later, after cycle ended and lock released. v2-cancelable-qtext_load_file.patch D

Re: Add pg_buffercache_mark_dirty[_all] functions to the pg_buffercache

On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 2:43 PM Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote: > > Hi, > > On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 at 19:17, Xuneng Zhou wrote: > > > > > > Would love to hear if this makes sense or or am I overlooking something > > here. Thanks for any feedback! > > I think what you said makes sense and is correct if we

Re: Small fixes needed by high-availability tools

On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 6:30 PM Andrey Borodin wrote: > > > I want to revive attempts to fix some old edge cases of physical quorum > replication. > > Please find attached draft patches that demonstrate ideas. These patches are > not actually proposed code changes, I rather want to have a design

Consider explicit incremental sort for Append and MergeAppend

For ordered Append or MergeAppend, it seems that incremental sort is currently not considered when injecting an explicit sort into subpaths that are not sufficiently ordered. For instance: set enable_seqscan to off; explain (costs off) select hundred as x, two as y from tenk1 union all select th

Re: Add an option to skip loading missing publication to avoid logical replication failure

If the presumed theory regarding the cause of the issue is correct — as outlined in this email — and no data replication occurs in this scenario

Re: Fix slot synchronization with two_phase decoding enabled

On Sat, May 10, 2025 at 4:59 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 4:52 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) > wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 6:59 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yes, this is possible. Here is my theory as to how it can happen in the > > > current > > > case. In the

Re: Add SPLIT PARTITION/MERGE PARTITIONS commands

Hi! We (with colleagues) discussed further improvements to SPLIT/MERGE PARTITION(S). As a result of the discussion, the following answers to the questions remained: 1. Who should be the owner of new partitions (SPLIT PARTITION command) if owner of the partition being split is not the same as

Re: add tab-complete for ALTER DOMAIN ADD...

On 2025/05/11 23:22, Álvaro Herrera wrote: On 2025-Apr-29, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: jian he writes: + /* ALTER DOMAIN ADD */ + else if (Matches("ALTER", "DOMAIN", MatchAny, "ADD")) + COMPLETE_WITH("CONSTRAINT", "NOT NULL", "CHECK"); I think the complet

Re: queryId constant squashing does not support prepared statements

> On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 12:47:19PM GMT, Sami Imseih wrote: > So, I think we can create a new parse node ( parsenode.h ) that will only be > used in parsing (and gram.c only ) to track the start/end locations > and List and > based on this node we can create A_ArrayExpr and A_Expr with the List >

Re: queryId constant squashing does not support prepared statements

> On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 10:12:24AM GMT, Dmitry Dolgov wrote: > Agree, I'll try to extend number of test cases here as a separate patch. Here is the extended version, where start/end is replaced by location/length, array_expr is handled as well, and more ARRAY cases are added. >From 81fe0b08473ea