On 21.11.25 16:35, Tom Lane wrote:
* In 0003, we can't be very sure what "isblank((unsigned char) c)"
will do with non-ASCII input data, except that it could very
easily do insane things with fragments of a multibyte character.
I recommend keeping pg_isblank but redefining it along the lines of
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 17:50, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 6:30 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> I have fixed all these comments and also the comments of 0002, now I
> feel we can actually merge 0001 and 0002, so I have merged both of
> them.
I just started to have a look at the patch
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 10:16 AM Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
>
> Fixed as above.
>
> I've addressed the above comments as well as rebased the patch based
> on changes in commit 76b7872 in patch v26
>
Thanks for the patch. Please find a few trivial comments:
1)
+ if (AmLogicalSlotSyncWorkerProcess())
+
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 9:29 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> I noticed that recently, a shadow warning has crept into the code I am
> building.
>
> --
> subscriptioncmds.c:1125:30: warning: declaration of ‘rel’ shadows a
> previous local [-Wshadow]
>foreach_ptr(SubRemoveRels, rel, sub_remov
On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 at 09:35, Shubham Khanna wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2025 at 7:18 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 3:42 PM Shubham Khanna
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 12:55 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Shubham.
> > > >
> > > > A comment about th
On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 at 15:46, Ajin Cherian wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 7:42 PM shveta malik
> wrote:
>>
>> A few comments:
>>
>> 1)
>> +/*
>> + * Structure holding parameters that need to be freed on error in
>> + * pg_sync_replication_slots()
>> + */
>> +typedef struct SlotSyncApiFailurePa
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 02:32, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 3:47 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 10:31 AM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 5:59 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > After thinking of this c
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 3:27 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Peter Smith writes:
> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 1:49 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> ... and, probably, less ability of the compiler to verify that the
> >> variadic arguments match the format string. I think you've taken
> >> this a bit too far.
>
>
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 3:50 PM Chao Li wrote:
...
> I’m just curious why my compile doesn’t warn on that? I am on M4 MacOS
> 15.6.1, Apple clang 17.0.0.
It's not the default build settings. I have this extra warning enabled
locally so that any code I write or review will not accidentally
introd
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 4:33 PM shveta malik wrote:
>
> A few more comments:
>
>
> 10)
> +# Promote standby3, increasing effective_wal_level to 'logical' as
> its wal_level
> +# is set to 'logical'.
> +$standby3->promote;
> +
> +# Check if effective_wal_level is increased to 'logical' on the
> cas
Hi all,
I have updated the code based on the feedback received to my earlier
mails and prepared a patch for further review. In this patch, I have
renamed the checkpoint_total_time to last_checkpoint_duration,
stats_reset has been kept as the last column following the usual
pattern, last_checkpoint
> On Nov 28, 2025, at 11:59, Peter Smith wrote:
>
> I noticed that recently, a shadow warning has crept into the code I am
> building.
>
> --
> subscriptioncmds.c:1125:30: warning: declaration of ‘rel’ shadows a
> previous local [-Wshadow]
> foreach_ptr(SubRemoveRels, rel, sub_remo
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 7:42 PM shveta malik wrote:
>
> A few comments:
>
> 1)
> +/*
> + * Structure holding parameters that need to be freed on error in
> + * pg_sync_replication_slots()
> + */
> +typedef struct SlotSyncApiFailureParams
> +{
> + WalReceiverConn *wrconn;
> + List *slot_names;
> +
hi.
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/functions-json.html#FUNCTIONS-SQLJSON-TABLE
JSON_TABLE (
context_item, path_expression [ AS json_path_name ] [ PASSING {
value AS varname } [, ...] ]
I quickly realized I didn't have tests that path_expression is not String
A_Const and PASSING claus
Peter Smith writes:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 1:49 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... and, probably, less ability of the compiler to verify that the
>> variadic arguments match the format string. I think you've taken
>> this a bit too far.
> * Or is it the use of the ternary operator to select the forma
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 6:16 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 06:18:32PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 4:58 PM Amul Sul wrote:
> >> One question: Regarding date2timestamp_no_overflow(), should we rename
> >> it to date2double? We can't use date2timest
hi.
now you can
SELECT * FROM JSON_TABLE(jsonb '{"a": 123}', '$' || '.' || 'a' COLUMNS
(foo int PATH '$'));
previously, top level path expression (in the above example ('$' || '.' || 'a'))
is hard coded as String A_Const. see gram.y:
if (!IsA($5, A_Const) ||
castNode(A_Const, $5)->val.node.t
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 12:00:30PM +0300, Kirill Reshke wrote:
> Shouldnt `SEQ_LOG_VALS` be moved to sequnce_xlog.c ?
I am not sure to follow this one. This controls the frequency of the
records inserted, which has nothing to do with the redo path.
> Also, while on it, maybe it is worth to renam
I noticed that recently, a shadow warning has crept into the code I am building.
--
subscriptioncmds.c:1125:30: warning: declaration of ‘rel’ shadows a
previous local [-Wshadow]
foreach_ptr(SubRemoveRels, rel, sub_remove_rels)
^
../../../src/include/nodes/p
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 1:49 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Peter Smith writes:
> > I couldn't think of a reason why the "; " string needed to be
> > separated from the rest of the message like that. And when you combine
> > the strings, the logic easily collapses into a single statement with
> > less co
Hi,
0001: These days we handle LLVM API evolution with LLVM_VERSION_MAJOR
guards. These GDB and Perf support probes escaped recent garbage
collection cycles by not being phrased like that. Function probes are
generally better for cross-platform variations and library build
options that are expo
Peter Smith writes:
> I couldn't think of a reason why the "; " string needed to be
> separated from the rest of the message like that. And when you combine
> the strings, the logic easily collapses into a single statement with
> less code and greater readability.
... and, probably, less ability
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 10:25 PM Mircea Cadariu
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 25/11/2025 17:16, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > Thanks for writing the test case and turning it into a patch. I agree that
> > we should add a regression test to ensure the reported issue doesn't recur.
> Thanks for your feedback, upda
While reviewing another conflict-related thread, I noticed that the
existing conflict messages are currently getting built using
unexpected logic.
e.g
--
if (tuple_value.len > 0)
{
appendStringInfoString(&tuple_value, "; ");
appendStringInfo(&tuple_value, _("existing local row %s"),
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 06:18:32PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 4:58 PM Amul Sul wrote:
>> One question: Regarding date2timestamp_no_overflow(), should we rename
>> it to date2double? We can't use date2timestamp_safe because we already
>> have that function. The renaming is
Hi Dilip.
Some review comments for v8-0001.
==
Commit message
1.
When the patches 0001 and 0002 got merged, I think the commit message
should have been updated also to say something along the lines of:
When ALL TABLES or ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA is used with publication won't
publish the clt.
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 10:59:47AM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> I agree with you, the patches make more sense this way.
>
> The patches are split into two in v10. There are no changes from v9,
> except that one extra blank line was removed [1].
Note that there were a couple of things incorre
On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 at 02:31, David Rowley wrote:
> The patch basically adds:
>
> if (!keep_startblock)
> scan->rs_startblock = InvalidBlockNumber;
I've pushed that patch.
David
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 11:25 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 2:14 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 16:09, Aleksander Alekseev
> > wrote:
> > > The certificate expired Wed, 26 Nov 2025 23:59:59 GMT. I'm pretty
> > > confident https worked yesterday.
> >
> >
Hi Tatsuya-san,
I just reviewed and tested v6, and got a major concern and a few small comments.
> On Nov 27, 2025, at 22:59, 河田達也 wrote:
>
> Hi Sawada-san,
> I rebased and applied the changes you suggested.
> The updated v6 is attached.
> Best regards,
> Tatsuya Kawata
>
1. Major concern: In
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 2:14 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 16:09, Aleksander Alekseev
> wrote:
> > The certificate expired Wed, 26 Nov 2025 23:59:59 GMT. I'm pretty
> > confident https worked yesterday.
>
> Oh, sorry! Then I must have remembered incorrectly. Thomas and Jelt
Dean Rasheed writes:
> Here's an update, doing it that way. It does appear somewhat neater.
Yeah, this looks pretty good. Two nitpicky suggestions:
* Perhaps using foreach_current_index() would be better than
adding the separate loop variable "i" in RewriteQuery.
* I think it would be wise to
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 1:34 AM Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 7:25 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> > Here are the back patches as requested. I hope they are OK.
>
> Thanks for the patches! I've pushed them.
>
Thanks for pushing! I enjoyed the discussions in this thread and
learned some
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 20:00, Mihail Nikalayeu
wrote:
>
> Hello, Mathias!
>
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 7:41 PM Matthias van de Meent
> wrote:
> > I'm not sure a complete and common approach is that easy between CIC
> > and REPACK CONCURRENTLY.
>
> Yes, you're right, but I hope something like [0] m
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 17:55, Dean Rasheed wrote:
>
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 16:55, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > I do think there's another way we could attack it. Similarly
> > to the way VALUES RTEs are either processed or skipped by
> > checking the rangetable length, we could pass down the length
Hello, Mathias!
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 7:41 PM Matthias van de Meent
wrote:
> I'm not sure a complete and common approach is that easy between CIC
> and REPACK CONCURRENTLY.
Yes, you're right, but I hope something like [0] may work.
[0]:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CADzfLwXN4NXv8C%2
Hi, Antonin!
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 6:40 PM Mihail Nikalayeu
wrote:
> > 1. Create an empty index.
> Yes, patch does exactly the same, introducing special lightweight AM -
> STIR (Short Term Index Replacement) to collect new tuples.
Initially understood incorrectly - in your solution you propose
On Sun, 9 Nov 2025 at 19:02, Mihail Nikalayeu wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> This is a rebased version.
>
> Also I decided to keep only part 3 for now, because we need some
> common solution to keep the horizon advance for both INDEX and REPACK
> operations [0].
I'm not sure a complete and common approach
> On 27 Nov 2025, at 01:59, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> This is because the WAL, created with old version, contains records like this:
>
> lsn: 0/05561030, prev 0/05561008, desc: CREATE_ID 2047 offset 4093 nmembers
> 2: 2830 (keysh) 2831 (keysh)
> lsn: 0/055611A8, prev 0/05561180, desc: ZE
Hello,
On 2025-Nov-13, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 3:08 PM Jacob Champion
> wrote:
> > I'm writing up a patch that combines all of that.
>
> And here's what I have so far. I could use help double-checking the
> .po result; I'm not entirely sure my usage of update-po is corre
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 17:56, Antonin Houska wrote:
>
> Michail Nikolaev wrote:
>
> > I think about revisiting (1) ({CREATE INDEX, REINDEX} CONCURRENTLY
> > improvements) in some lighter way.
>
> I haven't read the whole thread yet, but the effort to minimize the impact of
> C/RIC on VACUUM seems
On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 at 11:55, Sugamoto Shinya wrote:
>
>
>
> 2025年11月25日(火) 6:50 Nathan Bossart :
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 11:56:34AM -0800, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> > On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 8:33 PM Sugamoto Shinya
>> > wrote:
>> >> This follows the pattern already used elsewhere in Postg
Hi
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 20:38, Sugamoto Shinya wrote:
>
>
>
> Regarding the option `convert_selectively`, what do you think about this?
> Still it seems to me that this option is accessible from SQL interfaces. But
> for now
> I just removed the comment changes from my v2 patch and would like t
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 16:55, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hmmm ... I don't love this particular implementation, because it
> is doubling down on the already-undesirable assumption that the
> rule CTEs have no name conflicts with the outer query's CTEs.
> Still, unless somebody sets out to remove that rest
Hello, Antonin!
> I haven't read the whole thread yet, but the effort to minimize the impact of
> C/RIC on VACUUM seems to prevail
Yes, the thread is super long and probably you missed annotations to
most important emails in [0].
> Of course, I could have missed some important point, so please ex
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 5:55 PM Sugamoto Shinya
wrote:
>
>
> 2025年11月25日(火) 6:50 Nathan Bossart :
>
>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 11:56:34AM -0800, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> > On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 8:33 PM Sugamoto Shinya
>> wrote:
>> >> This follows the pattern already used elsewhere in PostgreS
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 14:31, Bernice Southey wrote:
>
> FWIW, I think I found a way to fix my bug that doesn't break your
> rules example. I added a bool to RewriteQuery, and used this to stop
> reprocessing updatable view CTEs. This leaves the rules recursion path
> unchanged. Which means rule C
Sergei Glukhov writes:
> On 11/27/25 7:01 AM, David Rowley wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 07:26, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Should we back-patch? I'm unsure. Clearly it's a bug that we
>>> cannot generate an indexscan plan in this case, but we've learned
>>> that changing plans in released branches
Michail Nikolaev wrote:
> I think about revisiting (1) ({CREATE INDEX, REINDEX} CONCURRENTLY
> improvements) in some lighter way.
I haven't read the whole thread yet, but the effort to minimize the impact of
C/RIC on VACUUM seems to prevail. Following is one more proposal. The core
idea is that
Dean Rasheed writes:
> Yes, I think that would work, but I think a simpler solution would be
> to just have RewriteQuery() track which CTEs it had already rewritten,
> which can be done just by passing around a list of CTE names.
> Something like the attached.
Hmmm ... I don't love this particula
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 11:00 AM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> Why do we accept reloptions there without complaint? Should we tighten
> this up a little bit, or maybe it makes sense to accept this for some
> reason? I suspect the reloptions were added to index_elems after the ON
> CONFLICT clause was
Hi!
While working on a patch to implement 64-bit transaction IDs in
PostgreSQL, I ran into a small problem. The
LockApplyTransactionForSession/UnlockApplyTransactionForSession
functions utilize the SET_LOCKTAG_APPLY_TRANSACTION macro, which
assumes XIDs are 32-bits.
In my case, the transaction ID
Hi,
While reviewing a patch I noticed that we allow some extraneous items in
ON CONFLICT clauses -- for instance,
create table tab (a int unique, b int);
insert into tab values (1, 1) on conflict (a int4_ops (fillfactor=10)) do
nothing;
Why do we accept reloptions there without complaint? Shou
On 26.11.25 20:29, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 12:55 AM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 19.11.25 19:49, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 8:10 PM Chao Li wrote:
I continue reviewing ...
Thank you for another detailed review! New patches are attached (v61),
det
Hi Sawada-san,
I rebased and applied the changes you suggested.
The updated v6 is attached.
Best regards,
Tatsuya Kawata
>
v6-0001-Add-memory-usage-reporting-to-VACUUM-VERBOSE.patch
Description: Binary data
Hi hackers! This patch updates the comment flatten_join_alias_vars() that
explains why it can be skipped when the expression to preprocess_expression()
is of specific types, we now mention TABLEFUNC in the comment so that comment
and code stay consistent.
Regards,
steve
v1-0001-Mention-TAB
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 7:25 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are the back patches as requested. I hope they are OK.
Thanks for the patches! I've pushed them.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Dean Rasheed wrote:
> Yes, I think that would work, but I think a simpler solution would be
> to just have RewriteQuery() track which CTEs it had already rewritten,
> which can be done just by passing around a list of CTE names.
> Something like the attached.
I was playing around with an idea I ha
Thanks, the patch looks good now.
There is one tiny thing that I noticed only now, sorry:
> --- a/src/backend/utils/misc/Makefile
> +++ b/src/backend/utils/misc/Makefile
> @@ -32,7 +32,8 @@ OBJS = \
> stack_depth.o \
> superuser.o \
> timeout.o \
> - tzparser.o
> + tzparser.o \
>
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 03:07:17PM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 11:57, Bertrand Drouvot
> wrote:
> >
> > The patches are split by modules to ease the review.
>
> I applied all patches and built/tested without any errors. So I guess
> that the changes are correct.
Hi,
While reviewing a patch I noticed that we have a `make -s headerscheck` but
there is no equivalent in meson.
I prepared a small patch that adds `headerscheck` and `cpluspluscheck`
targets.
Best Regards,
Miłosz Bieniek
0001-Add-headerscheck-run_target-to-meson.patch
Description: Binary data
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 18:48, David Rowley wrote:
> This seems to have caused issues on skink [1] under Valgrind. The
> problem seems to be that initscan() does not always initialise
> rs_startblock. I'm now trying to figure out if there's some reason for
> that, or if that's been overlooked at s
Hi Aleksander,
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 16:09, Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
>
> Hi Nazir,
>
> > > The non-encrypted version serves fine. Sorry for the message to a wide
> > > audience, but I don't know who maintains cfbot.
> >
> > Thomas and Jelte maintain the CFBot. AFAIK, CFBot has worked like that
Hi Nazir,
> > The non-encrypted version serves fine. Sorry for the message to a wide
> > audience, but I don't know who maintains cfbot.
>
> Thomas and Jelte maintain the CFBot. AFAIK, CFBot has worked like that
> from the start so I guess that is expected.
The certificate expired Wed, 26 Nov 202
Hi,
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 16:00, Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I've just discovered that cfbot has a little problem with TLS:
>
> ```
> $ curl -vvv https://cfbot.cputube.org
> * Host cfbot.cputube.org:443 was resolved.
> * IPv6: (none)
> * IPv4: 139.180.174.5
> * Trying 139.180.174.5:
Hi,
I've just discovered that cfbot has a little problem with TLS:
```
$ curl -vvv https://cfbot.cputube.org
* Host cfbot.cputube.org:443 was resolved.
* IPv6: (none)
* IPv4: 139.180.174.5
* Trying 139.180.174.5:443...
* Connected to cfbot.cputube.org (139.180.174.5) port 443
* ALPN: curl offer
On Sun, Nov 23, 2025 at 4:28 PM Corey Huinker wrote:
> I've reorganized some things a bit, mostly to make resource cleanup simpler.
Thanks for updating the patch! I will look into it.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 6:31 AM Corey Huinker wrote:
>> Other initial comments:
>>
>> The commit message says:
>>
>> This is managed via two new options, fetch_stats and remote_analyze,
>> both are available at the server level and table level. If fetch_stats
>> is true, then the ANALY
Hi John,
> How about this:
>
> "Short byteas will have terminating NUL bytes in the abbreviated
> datum. Abbreviated comparison need not make a distinction between
> thse NUL bytes, and NUL bytes representing actual NULs in the
> authoritative representation." [...]
>
> After that, the rest seems
Hi,
On 2025-Nov-27, Mihail Nikalayeu wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 7:34 PM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> > We ran into one more problem with the new test, evidenced by timeouts by
> > buildfarm member prion. For CATCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE builds on two of the
> > tests, we get a few invalidations of t
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 02:39:39PM +0300, Kirill Reshke wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 11:57, Bertrand Drouvot
> wrote:
> >
> > For 0005 (collid not used in internal_citext_pattern_cmp()) I think that the
> > unused column should be used (as done in 0005) due to an oversight in commit
> > f2
On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 at 21:57, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I was toying with the idea of decoupling rewriting of WITHs from
> the main recursion. This would look roughly like
>
> 1. Pull out RewriteQuery's first loop into a new function, say
> RewriteQueryCTEs. Call this from QueryRewrite just before cal
Hi,
Thank you for working on this!
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 11:57, Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
>
> Hi hackers,
>
> PFA patches to remove unused function parameters in contrib (more patches will
> come for non contrib).
>
> The patches are split by modules to ease the review.
I applied all patches and
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 2:49 PM Chao Li wrote:
> I did an initial test before, but I didn’t read the code at the time. Today,
> I spent time reviewing 0001. Overall, I believe the implementation is solid.
> I just got a few comments/suggestions.
Thanks for looking!
> > On Nov 26, 2025, at 21:1
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 11:57, Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
>
> Hi hackers,
>
> PFA patches to remove unused function parameters in contrib (more patches will
> come for non contrib).
>
> The patches are split by modules to ease the review.
>
> For 0005 (collid not used in internal_citext_pattern_cmp())
Hi all,
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:11 PM Michael Banck wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 06:23:08PM +0100, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
> > El mié, 26 nov 2025, 11:14, Soumya S Murali
> > escribió:
> > There is a "Checkpoints" section in the pgbadger reports, and that's
> > probab
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 3:20 PM shveta malik wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 2:32 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> >
> > I've squashed all fixup patches and attached the updated patch.
> >
>
> Thanks for test results and the patch. Please find a few comments:
>
> 1)
> If primary has effective_w
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 2:32 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> I've squashed all fixup patches and attached the updated patch.
>
1.
wal_level_insufficient means that the
- primary doesn't have a sufficient to
- perform logical decoding. It is set only for logical slots.
+
Hi,
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 13:19, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2025 at 01:16, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> > Committed
>
> Here is a small follow-up commit for documenting this feature.
I meant to write 'patch', not 'commit'; sorry.
--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsof
Hi,
On Sat, 22 Nov 2025 at 01:16, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> Committed
Here is a small follow-up commit for documenting this feature.
--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsoft
From f1107df597594e48fcb0c3e596e4c9e26287367b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 13
On Nov 23, 2025 at 11:46 PM Fujii Masao
wrote:
> The difference is that PGC_USERSET also allows per–replication-user
> overrides when needed, which gives users more flexibility without
> losing the ability to set a server-wide setting, I think.
> ...
> I think there are valid use cases for applyi
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 2:32 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
>
> I've squashed all fixup patches and attached the updated patch.
>
Thanks for test results and the patch. Please find a few comments:
1)
If primary has effective_wal_level as logical and standby has zero
slots; then during promotion of
Hi Euler,
> Since we have an agreement that $SUBJECT is ok, I wrote a patch for it. It
> selects the compression method based on USE_LZ4. It also adjusts the
> postgresql.conf if required.
Many thanks for working on this. Unfortunately the patch is
incomplete. I think we also agreed that lz4 shou
> On 27 Nov 2025, at 07:33, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 06:48:56AM +0100, Erik Rijkers wrote:
>> In doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_dump.sgml, a tiny typo:
>>
>> "unless the directory exist and is empty." should be
>> "unless the directory exists and is empty."
>>
>> i.e., 'exists':
Hello all,
Based on the discussion, I have updated the patch to handle the RESET form
correctly without modifying psql’s tab-completion APIs.
Both the current database connection and the parsed input tokens are
already available via pset.db and the word tokens.The new patch extracts:
-
th
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 13:45, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
>
> Thanks Vaibhav for the review.
>
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2025 at 16:05, Vaibhav Dalvi
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mahendra,
> >
> > Thanks Mahendra for working on this.
> >
> > Looks like my previous comment below is not addressed:
> > 1.
> >
> >> #
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 4:58 PM Amul Sul wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 6:48 AM Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 7:59 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 06:40:38PM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> > > It seems to me that it is important to keep documented the overfl
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 10:38, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 09:35:14AM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > This doesn't really feel like an improvement to me, sequence.c is small
> > enough as is it is. If this helps with the other work you're doing though,
> > no objections.
Hi hackers,
PFA patches to remove unused function parameters in contrib (more patches will
come for non contrib).
The patches are split by modules to ease the review.
For 0005 (collid not used in internal_citext_pattern_cmp()) I think that the
unused column should be used (as done in 0005) due t
Hi,
On 11/27/25 7:01 AM, David Rowley wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 07:26, Tom Lane wrote:
So I'm inclined to apply the attached and just call it good.
I think the patch looks fine.
+1, verified, thanks a lot!
Should we back-patch? I'm unsure. Clearly it's a bug that we
cannot generat
Hi,
Thank you for this improvement. I think it will be very helpful to have the
ability to
report dsa and dshash memory sizes.
Please find below a few comments.
1. As a result of this change, the following comment
in pg_get_dsm_registry_allocations
is incorrect.
/*
* Since w
Thanks Vaibhav for the review.
On Tue, 18 Nov 2025 at 16:05, Vaibhav Dalvi
wrote:
>
> Hi Mahendra,
>
> Thanks Mahendra for working on this.
>
> Looks like my previous comment below is not addressed:
> 1.
>
>> ### Use of Dump Options Structure (dopt)
>> Please ensure consistency by utilizing the m
Hi,
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 05:51, 邱宇航 wrote:
>
> > I do not think that will be a problem but I can change it if the
> > general consensus is towards this way. Also, if we change this for
> > pg_buffercache_mark_dirty_* functions, I think we need to apply the
> > same for the pg_buffercache_evict_
Hi,
On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 02:35, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 10:48:24AM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> > Thanks for the heads up! It is rebased, I also added
> > 'CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS()' while looping over the 'NBuffers' regarding
> > the comment in the email [1].
> >
>
94 matches
Mail list logo
