getting "shell command argument contains a newline or carriage return:" error with pg_dumpall when db name have new line in double quote

2025-01-29 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
name='dbstr1; > dbstr 2'" > After this message, we are stopping the dump. I think, if we are allowing new lines in the db name, then we should dump it. Please let me know your thoughts about this error. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-28 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 at 20:50, jian he wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 6:35 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > hi. > After some tests and thinking about your reply, I admit that using > expand_dbname_patterns > in pg_restore will not work. > We need to do p

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-27 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
ch. In offline discussion, Andew already reported this test case. I will fix this in the next version. > > Regards, > Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla, > EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com > -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-26 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
sed on your > v11_pg_dumpall-with-directory-tar-custom-format-21-jan.patch. I think, instead of char, if we read line by line, then we don't need that much code and need not to worry about double quotes. In the next version, I will merge some patches and will change it to read line by line. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-23 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
o deleted the function is_full_pattern. > > > I use > $BIN10/pg_restore --exclude-database=*x* --exclude-database=*s* > --exclude-database=*t* --verbose --file=test.sql x1.dump > the verbose message to verify my changes. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-21 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
ere will be lots of schema elements already exists ERROR. > but the above command case, pg_restore only restores the content/data > not schema, that's why there is very little error happening. > so here pg_restore not restore schema seems not ok? > > > 2. pg_dumpall with non-te

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-16 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
ngle db. As of now I removed this error and changed this to pg_log_info. > > > in doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_restore.sgml > > ... > --format= class="parameter">format > also need > plain > ? plain format is not supported with pg_restore. I added an error for this format. Here, I am attaching an updated patch for review and testing. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com v10_pg_dumpall-with-directory-tar-custom-format-17-jan.patch Description: Binary data

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-15 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
Thanks Jian for the review and testing. On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 14:29, jian he wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 5:31 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > > > > > > you also need change > > > > > > -f > > class=&quo

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-11 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
Maybe create a new file for connection > management routines? (since this clearly doesn't fit common.c nor > dumputils.c). I will make a new file in follow-up patches. > On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 at 21:38, Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 at 9:30 P

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-11 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
als-only > pg_restore --exclude-database=pattern > be in a separate patch? > > > i am also wondering what will happen: > pg_restore --exclude-database=pattern --dbname=pattern For restore, we will make server connection with ‘pattern’ database and we will skip restoring for ‘pattern’ database as we are giving ‘pattern’ with —exclude-database. With server connection, we will restore global.dat at the start of pg_restore. Thanks and regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EDB postgres >

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-11 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
copied this function from pg_dumpall.c. > suggest they should be unified. Maybe create a new file for connection > management routines? (since this clearly doesn't fit common.c nor > dumputils.c). Sure. I will create a new file and I will move these common functions into that. Thanks a

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-10 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
cases. Thanks. I am also working on test cases. I will add all error test cases in the next version and will include these two also. > > you also need change > > -f class="parameter">filename > --file= class="parameter">filename > > > Send output to the specified file. If this is omitted, the > standard output is used. > > > > ? > > since if --format=d, > --file=filename > can not be omitted. Okay. I will fix it. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-09 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 08:11, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 02:30, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Le mer. 8 janv. 2025 à 17:41, Mahendra Singh Thalor a écrit : > >> > >> On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 20:07, Ma

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-08 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 02:30, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > > Hi, > > Le mer. 8 janv. 2025 à 17:41, Mahendra Singh Thalor a > écrit : >> >> On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 20:07, Mahendra Singh Thalor >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi all, >> > >>

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-08 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 20:07, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > Hi all, > > On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 00:34, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > > On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 23:05, Nathan Bossart > > wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 02:05:13AM +05

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-08 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
Hi all, On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 00:34, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 23:05, Nathan Bossart wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 02:05:13AM +0530, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > Here, I am attaching an updated patch. I fixed some bugs of v

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-07 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 23:05, Nathan Bossart wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 02:05:13AM +0530, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > Here, I am attaching an updated patch. I fixed some bugs of v01 patch and > > did some code cleanup also. > > Thank you for picking this up!

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2025-01-01 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
: exclude-database=NAME, for pg_restore, I am using NAME as of now, I will try to make it PATTERN. PATTERN should be matched from map.dat file. Please have a look over the patch and let me know feedback. On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 at 23:53, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > Hi all, > With the h

Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall

2024-12-31 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
t; about making it more convenient :) > > -- > Magnus Hagander > Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/> > Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/> > -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com v01_poc_pg_dumpall_with_directory_31dec.patch Description: Binary data

Re: Collecting statistics about contents of JSONB columns

2022-05-17 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 04:29, Nikita Glukhov wrote: > > > On 04.02.2022 05:47, Tomas Vondra wrote: > > On 1/25/22 17:56, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > > ... > > For the last few days, I was trying to understand these patches, and based on Tomas's su

Re: Collecting statistics about contents of JSONB columns

2022-03-11 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
en keep at least frequencies for the non-analyzed paths. Next, I will take the latest patches from Nikita's last email and I will do more tests. Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Collecting statistics about contents of JSONB columns

2022-01-25 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
retty 328 kB (1 row) -- *Without json patches:* postgres=# analyze test ; ANALYZE *Time: 120.864* ms postgres=# SELECT pg_size_pretty( pg_total_relation_size('pg_catalog.pg_statistic') ); pg_size_pretty 272 kB I haven't found the root cause of t

Re: Replication & recovery_min_apply_delay

2021-11-10 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
Thanks Dilip and Bharath for the review. I am working on review comments and will post an updated patch. On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 at 15:31, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 1:02 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 15:02, Daniel Gu

Re: Replication & recovery_min_apply_delay

2021-10-26 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
ook v3[1] patch from this thread and re-based on commit head(5fedf7417b69295294b154a21). Please find the attached patch for review. link [1] : v3 patch <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CANXE4TeinQdw%2BM2Or0kTR24eRgWCOg479N8%3DgRvj9Ouki-tZFg%40mail.gmail.com> -- Thanks and Regards Ma

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-23 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 at 22:53, Sadhuprasad Patro wrote: > > > On 2021/08/20 11:07, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > 1) > > > Resets statistics for a single table or index in the current database > > > -to zero. > > > +

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-19 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 at 07:37, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 at 06:32, Sadhuprasad Patro wrote: > > > > > If we do support resetting the stats for shared tables in > > > 'pg_stat_reset', which is for DB level, > > > then th

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-19 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
* table.* table should be replaced with 'object' as we have table, index, toast for shared tables and if we can modify the above comment with some additional info, then it will be good. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-10 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Wed, 11 Aug 2021 at 09:17, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 10:49 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > I checked this and found that we already have one process "stats > > collector" and in v02 patch, we are sending requests to collect sta

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-10 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 at 22:32, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 at 21:53, Sadhuprasad Patro wrote: > > > > > As of now, we are adding handling inside pg_stat_reset for shared > > > tables but I think we can add a new function with the name of >

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-10 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
be better if we can reset stats in pgstat_recv_resetcounter for shared tables also because shared tables are not much in counting so it will be good if we reset in one function only. I will debug this part more and will see. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: "ERROR: cache lookup failed for function %d" while dropping function from another session

2021-08-08 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:07, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > Hi, > I am able to hit "ERROR: cache lookup failed for function %d" while I am dropping function from another session. > > Reproducible steps are as(I tried on current head d8a75b1308b133502ae3): > >

"ERROR: cache lookup failed for function %d" while dropping function from another session

2021-08-08 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
.c:1430 > #15 0x55e0b808dbe9 in main (argc=3, argv=0x55e0ba8fee70) at main.c:199 > cache lookup failed errors are never an expected behavior(Thanks Robert Hass for your opinion) so I think we should fix this error. I haven't debugged it so I will debug it and will post my findings in the coming days. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-08 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
; > > pg_stat_reset_single_table_counters > > > - > > > > > > (1 row) > > > > > > postgres=# SELECT * FROM pg_statio_all_tables where relid = > > > 'pg_database'::regclass::oid; > > &g

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-06 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 11:49, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 00:13, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > > On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 21:17, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 8:53 PM Himanshu Upadhyaya &g

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-06 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 00:13, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 21:17, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 8:53 PM Himanshu Upadhyaya > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Sadhu, > > > > > > Patch working as expe

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-06 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
e | relname | heap_blks_read | heap_blks_hit | idx_blks_read | idx_blks_hit | toast_blks_read | toast_blks_hit | tidx_blks_read | tidx_blks_hit ---++-++---+---+--+-+++--- 1262 | pg_catalog | pg_database | 0 | 0 | 2 |0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 (1 row) postgres=# -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com v0002-pg_stat_reset-and-pg_stat_reset_single_table_counter.patch Description: Binary data

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-06 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
d -- SharedDependRelationId 1214 7. pg_shseclabel -- SharedSecLabelRelationId 3592 8. pg_db_role_setting -- DbRoleSettingRelationId 2694 9. pg_replication_origin -- ReplicationOriginRelationId 6000 10. pg_subscription -- SubscriptionRelationId 6100 -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://w

Re: Support reset of Shared objects statistics in "pg_stat_reset" function

2021-08-06 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
ing to do if not there. */ dbentry = pgstat_get_db_entry(msg->m_databaseid, false); - if (!dbentry) return; I think, by mistake, you removed one line in the patch. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Fix uninitialized variable access (src/backend/utils/mmgr/freepage.c)

2021-07-01 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
> if (result.index > 0) /* result.index is garbage or invalid here) */ > > regards, > Ranier Vilela -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Can we remove extra memset in BloomInitPage, GinInitPage and SpGistInitPage when we have it in PageInit?

2021-04-06 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 at 19:14, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 6:09 PM Michael Paquier wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 10:58:17AM +0530, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > Your changes look to fine me and I am also not getting any failure. I

Re: UPDATE ... SET (single_column) = row_constructor is a bit broken from V10 906bfcad7ba7c

2021-03-22 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 at 02:43, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 02:10:49PM +0530, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > Hi Hackers, > > > > Commit 906bfcad7ba7c has improved handling for "UPDATE ... SET > > (column_list) = row_constructor",

UPDATE ... SET (single_column) = row_constructor is a bit broken from V10 906bfcad7ba7c

2021-03-22 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
e above test case is passing in all the branches. This looks like a bug. Thoughts? Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Can we remove extra memset in BloomInitPage, GinInitPage and SpGistInitPage when we have it in PageInit?

2021-03-21 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
ev system with the > attached patch. > > > Thoughts? Your changes look to fine me and I am also not getting any failure. I think we should back-patch all the branches. Patch is applying to all the branches(till v95) and there is no failure. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Faulty HEAP_XMAX_LOCK_ONLY & HEAP_KEYS_UPDATED hintbit combination

2021-02-04 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
usage in > README.tuplock would definitely be useful, especially since the combination > isn't always produced. How about adding something like: > > HEAP_KEYS_UPDATED > This bit lives in t_infomask2. If set, indicates that the XMAX updated > this tuple and changed the key values, or it deleted the tuple. > + It can also be set in combination of HEAP_XMAX_LOCK_ONLY. > It's set regardless of whether the XMAX is a TransactionId or a MultiXactId. Make sense. Please can you update this? -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Faulty HEAP_XMAX_LOCK_ONLY & HEAP_KEYS_UPDATED hintbit combination

2021-01-24 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
in exec_simple_query (query_string=0x5612a787b570 > "UPDATE t1 SET val = 'hoho' WHERE id = 2;") at postgres.c:1240 > #18 0x5612a612b8dd in PostgresMain (argc=1, argv=0x7ffc8b5e3790, > dbname=0x5612a78a74f0 "postgres", username=0x5612a78a74c8 "

Re: display offset along with block number in vacuum errors

2020-08-25 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
mation, so I think we should back-patch to 13. The > second one is to add additional vacuum error context information, so > that is for only HEAD. Does that make sense? Also, let me know if you > have any more comments. Thanks Amit for updating the patch. All changes in v7-02 look fine to me. Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com > > -- > With Regards, > Amit Kapila. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: display offset along with block number in vacuum errors

2020-08-04 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
Thanks Sawada and Justin. On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 at 09:33, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 at 16:02, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > > Thanks Justin. > > > > On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 at 11:47, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 3

Re: display offset along with block number in vacuum errors

2020-08-01 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
t; whoops > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:35:17AM +0530, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > > Here: > > > > > > > > @@ -1924,14 +1932,22 @@ lazy_vacuum_page(Relation onerel, BlockNumber > > > > blkno, Buffer buffer, > > > &

Re: display offset along with block number in vacuum errors

2020-07-28 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
Thanks Justin, Sawada and Michael for reviewing. On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 at 16:43, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:18:43PM +0530, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > Hi hackers, > > We discussed in another email thread[1], that it will be helpful if we can > &

Re: display offset along with block number in vacuum errors

2020-07-27 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
Thanks Michael for looking into this. On Sat, 25 Jul 2020 at 15:02, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:18:43PM +0530, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > In commit b61d161(Introduce vacuum errcontext to display additional > > information), we added vacuum err

display offset along with block number in vacuum errors

2020-07-24 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
errmsg_internal("for block %u and offnum %u, found xmin %u from before relfrozenxid %u", + ItemPointerGetBlockNumber(tid), + ItemPointerGetOffsetNumber(tid), xid, relfrozenxid))); Attaching v01_0002 patch for this method. Please let me know your thoughts. [1] : http://postgr.es/m/

Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions

2020-06-04 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Fri, 29 May 2020 at 15:52, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 5:19 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: >> >> On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 16:46, Amit Kapila wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> On the top of v16 patch set [1], I did some testing for DDL's a

Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions

2020-05-27 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
ix (DDL & DML), it is 2-10%. why are we seeing 11-13 % of the extra wall, basically, the amount of extra WAL is not very high but the amount of WAL generated with add column int/date is just ~1000 bytes so additional 100 bytes will be around 10% and for add column text it is ~35000 bytes so % is less. For text, these ~35000 bytes are due to toast. [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFiTN-vnnrk580ucZVYnub_UQ-ayROew8fQ2Yn5aFYMeF0U03w%40mail.gmail.com [2]: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1g11MrSd_I39505OnGoLFVslz3ykbZ1nmfR_gUiE_O9k/edit?usp=sharing -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions

2020-04-29 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 11:15, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 11:55, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 2:28 PM Erik Rijkers wrote: > > > > > > On 2020-04-23 05:24, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > > > On

Re: Vacuum o/p with (full 1, parallel 0) option throwing an error

2020-04-08 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 22:11, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:57:08AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 10:25 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor > > wrote: > > > I think, Tushar point is that either we should allow both > > > v

Re: Vacuum o/p with (full 1, parallel 0) option throwing an error

2020-04-08 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
a clear error message which matches what you tried to do. > I think, Tushar point is that either we should allow both vacuum(parallel 0, full 1) and vacuum(parallel 1, full 0) or in the both cases, we should through error. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Why does [auto-]vacuum delay not report a wait event?

2020-03-21 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
6008137499a in ServerLoop () at postmaster.c:1691 #15 0x560081373e63 in PostmasterMain (argc=3, argv=0x560082189020) at postmaster.c:1400 #16 0x5600811d37ea in main (argc=3, argv=0x560082189020) at main.c:210 Here, stats is null so it is crashing. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager

2020-03-05 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 at 12:03, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 11:45 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 15:39, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 8:06 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > > &

Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager

2020-03-05 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 13:54, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 12:15 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 11:45 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor > > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 15:39, Amit Kapila wrote: > > &g

Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager

2020-03-04 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 at 12:03, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 11:45 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 15:39, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 8:06 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > > &

Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager

2020-03-03 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
kCycleRecurseMember just ignores these two types > of locks by checking the lock tag. Thanks Amit for summary. Based on above 3 points, here attaching 2 patches for review. 1. v01_0001-Conflict-EXTENTION-lock-in-group-member.patch (Patch by Dilip Kumar) Basically this patch is for point b and c. 2

Re: Assert failure due to "drop schema pg_temp_3 cascade" for temporary tables and \d+ is not showing any info after drooping temp table schema

2020-02-27 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
not actually sure that > it is autovacuum's job to handle that better. > > Any thoughts? Hi, Patch looks good to me and it is fixing the assert failure. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager

2020-02-12 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
suggestions. I have started working on the implementation based on the suggestion. I will post a patch for this in few days. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager

2020-02-10 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 00:27, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 09:44, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:57 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 at 12:07, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager

2020-02-07 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 09:44, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:57 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > > On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 at 12:07, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 8:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > &

Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager

2020-02-05 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
8.49 % 32 392.881863 388.470622-1.12 % 56 551.753235 528.018852 -4.30 % 60 648.273767 653.251507 +0.76 % 64 645.975124 671.322140 +3.92 % 66

Re: Error message inconsistency

2020-01-29 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
he single patch. What do we think > > > > about backpatching this? > > > > > > No objection to the patch for HEAD, but it does not seem like > > > back-patch material: it is not fixing a bug. > > > > > > > Okay, I will commit this early next week

Re: making the backend's json parser work in frontend code

2020-01-28 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 20:36, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 2:02 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > I can see one warning on HEAD. > > > > jsonapi.c: In function ‘json_errdetail’: > > jsonapi.c:1068:1: warning: control reaches end of non

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-27 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 12:32, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 12:04 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 08:14, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 2:13 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-27 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 08:14, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 2:13 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > > On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 at 12:11, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 4:58 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-27 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 at 12:11, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 4:58 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 15:32, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 12:48, Masahiko Sawada > > &

Re: making the backend's json parser work in frontend code

2020-01-27 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
rmtree.c, pgfnames.c) which could perhaps be > generalized. I think I'll start a new thread about that. > Hi, I can see one warning on HEAD. jsonapi.c: In function ‘json_errdetail’: jsonapi.c:1068:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type] } ^ Attaching a patch to fix warning. Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com Fixed_compiler_warning_json_errdetail.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-24 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 15:32, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 12:48, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 11:23, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 7:14 AM Masahiko Sawada > > > w

can we use different function in place of atoi in vacuumdb.c file

2020-01-23 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2Bfd4k6DgwtQSr4%3DUeY%2BWbGuF7-oD%3Dm-ypHPy%2BsYHiXZc%2BhTUQ%40mail.gmail.com -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Error message inconsistency

2020-01-23 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
tion constraint of relation "part_1" is violated b some row > > > > +1 for the second option suggested by Beena. I fixed above comment and updated expected .out files. Attaching updated patches. To make review simple, I made 3 patches as: v4_0001_rationalize_constrain

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-23 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
s will no longer be true. > > Attached the updated version patch. > Thanks Sawada-san for the re-based patch. I reviewed and tested this patch. Patch looks good to me. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Error message inconsistency

2020-01-21 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 10:51, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 6:31 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > > On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 09:53, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 10:05 PM Alvaro Herrera < alvhe...@2ndquadrant.co

Re: Error message inconsistency

2020-01-21 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
psql you can use > \set VERBOSITY verbose > > In psql you can also use \errverbose after an error to print those > fields. Thanks for the explanation. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-17 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
ers. + */ This comment is confusing me. I think, "then" should be replaced with "than". -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-15 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 08:22, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 1:02 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 19:31, Mahendra Singh Thalor > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 19:04, Mahendra Singh Th

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-15 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 19:31, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 19:04, Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 17:27, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 10:05 AM Masahiko Sawada > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-15 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 19:04, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 17:27, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 10:05 AM Masahiko Sawada > > wrote: > > > > > > Thank you for updating the patch! I have a few small comme

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-15 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
ERROR: parallel option requires a value between 0 and 1024 LINE 1: VACUUM (PARALLEL) tmp; ^ postgres=# Because above error is added in this parallel patch, so we should have test case for this to increase code coverage. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-14 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 17:16, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 16:17, Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 10:06, Masahiko Sawada > > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 03:20, Mahendra Singh Tha

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-14 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 16:17, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 10:06, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 03:20, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 at 15:51, Sergei Kornilov wrote: &

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-14 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 10:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 03:20, Mahendra Singh Thalor > wrote: > > > > On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 at 15:51, Sergei Kornilov wrote: > > > > > > Hi > > > Thank you for update! I

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-13 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
hen we can avoid multiple function calling of skip_parallel_vacuum_index and if there is no index which can't performe parallel vacuum, then we will not call vacuum_indexes_leader as head of list pointing to null. (we can save unnecessary calling of vacuum_indexes_leader) Thoughts? -- Thanks

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-11 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 19:48, Masahiko Sawada < masahiko.saw...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 13:18, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 9:23 AM Masahiko Sawada > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 at 2

Re: Assert failure due to "drop schema pg_temp_3 cascade" for temporary tables and \d+ is not showing any info after drooping temp table schema

2020-01-10 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
drop cascades to table test1 DROP SCHEMA postgres=# \d Did not find any relations. postgres=# create temporary table test1 (a int); CREATE TABLE postgres=# \d Did not find any relations. postgres=# Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-10 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
t; > And therefore we turn off the parallel vacuum for the remaining tables... Can > we improve this case? Good point. Yes, we should improve this. I tried to fix this. Attaching a delta patch that is fixing both the comments. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com v44-0002-delta_Allow-vacuum-command-to-process-indexes-in-parallel.patch Description: Binary data

Re: Assert failure due to "drop schema pg_temp_3 cascade" for temporary tables and \d+ is not showing any info after drooping temp table schema

2020-01-09 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
n main (argc=3, argv=0x2ce2290) at main.c:210 I think, before committing 1st patch, we should fix this crash also and then we should commit all the patches. Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2020-01-09 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 17:31, Sergei Kornilov wrote: > > Hello > > I noticed that parallel vacuum uses min_parallel_index_scan_size GUC to skip > small indexes but this is not mentioned in documentation for both vacuum > command and GUC itself. > > + /* Determine the number of parallel work

Re: Questions/Observations related to Gist vacuum

2020-01-09 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
was 2 spaces. Other than that patch looks fine to me. -- Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Error message inconsistency

2020-01-06 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
;t finalized error messages. I verified Robert's point of for partition tables also. With the error, we are adding relation name of "child table" and i think, it is correct. Please review attached patch and let me know feedback. Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor Enterpri

Re: \d is not showing global(normal) table info if we create temporary table with same name as global table

2020-01-03 Thread Mahendra Singh Thalor
On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 at 00:40, Tom Lane wrote: > > Robert Haas writes: > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 12:59 PM Mahendra Singh wrote: > >> While reading code and doing some testing, I found that if we create a > >> temporary table with same name as we created a normal(g

Re: parallel vacuum options/syntax

2020-01-03 Thread Mahendra Singh
> > ) ; > > (b) Vacuum (Parallel ) ; If user specifies > > parallel_degree as 0, then disable parallelism. > > (c) ... Any better ideas? > > IMHO, it's better to keep the parallelism enables by default. Because > if the user is giving an explic

\d is not showing global(normal) table info if we create temporary table with same name as global table

2020-01-02 Thread Mahendra Singh
. If this is a bug, then please let me know. I will be happy to fix this. Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

2019-12-26 Thread Mahendra Singh
porated the review > comments, a few fix and the patch for > PARALLEL_VACUUM_DISABLE_LEADER_PARTICIPATION. 0001 patch is the same > as previous version. I verified my all review comments in v40 patch set. All are fixed. v40-0002-Add-a-parallel-option-to-the-VACUUM-command.patch doesn't apply on HEAD. Please send re-based patch. Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Assert failure due to "drop schema pg_temp_3 cascade" for temporary tables and \d+ is not showing any info after drooping temp table schema

2019-12-26 Thread Mahendra Singh
On Thu, 26 Dec 2019 at 23:21, Tom Lane wrote: > > Mahendra Singh writes: > > I think, we can add a regression test for this. > > postgres=# create temporary table temp(c1 int); > > CREATE TABLE > > postgres=# drop schema pg_temp_3 cascade ; > > ERROR: cannot

Re: Assert failure due to "drop schema pg_temp_3 cascade" for temporary tables and \d+ is not showing any info after drooping temp table schema

2019-12-26 Thread Mahendra Singh
l the temp table schema but it is not drooping. Thanks and Regards Mahendra Singh Thalor EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

  1   2   >