On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 at 14:46, Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 1:13 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > Yes, that makes sense to me. For HEAD and PG18, we can still add a new
> > argument to the API. For other bank branches, it is better to use a
> > new Ex function as suggested by Kurod
On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 at 14:46, Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 1:13 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > Yes, that makes sense to me. For HEAD and PG18, we can still add a new
> > argument to the API. For other bank branches, it is better to use a
> > new Ex function as suggested by Kurod
On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 at 11:45, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 11:44 PM shveta malik wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 5:03 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, I agree. The main patch focuses on the part where we
> > > automatically change the effective WAL lev
On Thu, 24 Jul 2025 at 17:45, Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 8:01 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Ajin,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the patch. Firstly let me confirm my understanding. While
> > > altering the
> > > subscription, locks are acquired with below orderi
On Thu, 24 Jul 2025 at 22:28, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2025-Jul-24, Laurenz Albe wrote:
>
> > I just happened to look into https://commitfest.postgresql.org/52/
> > and saw plenty of "Active patches" there.
> >
> > I guess that's a consequence of the new rule established in [1].
>
> I don't kn
On Tue, 22 Jul 2025 at 18:43, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 9:49 PM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
> > On 2025-Jul-22, Fujii Masao wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 8:47 PM Álvaro Herrera
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > > Oh yeah, I should have remembered this -- see commit 213c959a29
On Mon, 21 Jul 2025 at 11:15, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 10:36 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > I was just trying a different test, so I realized that ALTER
> > PUBLICATION ADD SEQUENCE is not supported, any reason for the same?
> >
> > postgres[154731]=# ALTER PUBLICATION pub AD
On Mon, 21 Jul 2025 at 10:36, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> I was just trying a different test, so I realized that ALTER
> PUBLICATION ADD SEQUENCE is not supported, any reason for the same?
>
> postgres[154731]=# ALTER PUBLICATION pub ADD sequence s1;
> ERROR: 42601: invalid publication object list
> L
On Mon, 21 Jul 2025 at 11:04, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 5:11 PM Alexander Korotkov
> wrote:
> >
> > While working on the patch fixing the situation when slot's
> > restart_lsn ends up pointing to a removed WAL segment [1], we
> > discovered that sometimes slot's restart_lsn
On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 at 14:11, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 10:44 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 4:52 PM vignesh C wrote:
> > >
>
> I was looking at the high level idea of sequence sync worker patch
> i.e. 0005, so far
On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 at 01:39, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2025-Jul-18, vignesh C wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/contrib/postgres_fdw/connection.c
> > b/contrib/postgres_fdw/connection.c
> > index 304f3c20f83..c1ce6f33436 100644
> > --- a/contrib/postgres_f
oop() around the string
> > they pass as "arg", for gettext to collect.
>
> Agreed. Thanks!
The attached v6 version patch has the changes for these comments.
Regards,
Vignesh
From 4d40ae938e97f5d1b4dc8ec99f6bc0adde57ed2e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vignesh C
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 21:07:3
Regards,
Vignesh
From 8a0d5392f482572ebd57a6eae30c715c81b31963 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vignesh C
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 15:26:12 +0530
Subject: [PATCH v5 1/3] Add custom PQsetNoticeReceiver handlers for
replication connection
This patch introduces a custom notice receiver for replication
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 at 21:30, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2025/07/16 19:45, vignesh C wrote:
> > If we don't trim the trailing newline, an extra blank line will appear
> > after the message is printed, like this:
> > 2025-07-16 12:44:20.076 IST [5343
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 at 09:09, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> >
> > Included it for dblink and fdw
>
> Thanks! It's better to submit each change for dblink and postgres_fdw
> as separate patches, and first focus on the patch that sets the notice
> processor for replication connections.
Modified
> > > +no
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 at 21:36, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2025/04/15 13:37, vignesh C wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Currently, when a warning is emitted by the publisher, the
> > corresponding log message does not include the log prefix. This makes
> > it ha
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 at 16:15, vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 at 15:46, Ajin Cherian wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 8, 2025 at 8:41 PM Ajin Cherian wrote:
> > >
> > > Patch with fix attached.
> > > I'll continue investigating whether
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 at 15:46, Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2025 at 8:41 PM Ajin Cherian wrote:
> >
> > Patch with fix attached.
> > I'll continue investigating whether this issue also affects HEAD.
> >
>
> While debugging if this problem can occur on HEAD, I found out that on
> head, it
On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 at 11:47, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 11:18 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 11:11 AM vignesh C wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 at 17:47, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > > >
>
On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 at 11:47, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 11:18 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 11:11 AM vignesh C wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 at 17:47, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > > >
>
On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 at 17:47, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2025 at 5:29 PM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
> > On 2025-Jul-09, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jul 9, 2025 at 9:07 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > > > After further consideration, I believe your proposed method is
> > > > super
On Wed, 2 Jul 2025 at 13:21, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 2:42 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I encountered an invalid pointer access issue. Below are the steps to
> > reproduce the issue:
> ...
> > The error o
Hi,
I encountered an invalid pointer access issue. Below are the steps to
reproduce the issue:
-- Create table
CREATE TABLE t1(c1 int, c2 int);
-- Create publications with each publication selecting a different column
CREATE PUBLICATION pub1 for TABLE t1(c1);
CREATE PUBLICATION pub2 for TABLE t1
On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 at 03:21, Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > Ugh... Turns out it was a bug, there definitely should be a "New
> > patch" button on both the 19-1 and on the Drafts page. And there
> > was... but only if you were logged in as a staff user.
>
> There is now a "New patch" but
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 at 17:41, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> Dear Vignesh,
>
> > I was unable to reproduce the same test failure on the PG17 branch,
> > even after running the test around 500 times. However, on the master
> > branch, the failure consistently reproduces approximately once in
>
On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 at 07:05, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 05:25:42PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 at 06:22, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> So you are suggesting the addition of an extra ReadPageInternal() that
> >> forces a
On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 at 07:05, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 05:25:42PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 at 06:22, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> So you are suggesting the addition of an extra ReadPageInternal() that
> >> forces a
On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 at 06:22, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 10:19:55PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > Currently, the logic attempts to read the complete WAL record based on
> > the size obtained before the crash—even though only a partial record
> > was
Hi,
Buildfarm identified one issue at [1] where it could not identify a
partial WAL record spanning across 2 pages was written due to
immediate shutdown.
Consider a scenario where a WAL record is split across multiple WAL
pages. If the server crashes before the entire WAL record is written,
the r
On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 at 04:36, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 2:24 PM vignesh C wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 at 05:54, Alexander Korotkov
> > wrote:
> > > Dear Kuroda-san,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at
On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 at 14:35, Vitaly Davydov wrote:
>
> Dear Hayato,
>
> > To confirm, can you tell me the theory why the walsender received old LSN?
> > It is sent by the walreceiver, so is there a case that
> > LogstreamResult.Flush can go backward?
> > Not sure we can accept the situation.
>
>
Hi Alexander,
While tracking buildfarm for one of other commits, I noticed this failure:
TRAP: failed Assert("s->data.restart_lsn >=
s->last_saved_restart_lsn"), File:
"../pgsql/src/backend/replication/slot.c", Line: 1813, PID: 3945797
postgres: standby: checkpointer (ExceptionalCondition+0x83) [0
On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 at 01:50, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> On 04.06.25 11:56, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> It's not clear to me how this change now would substantially improve the
> >> user experience. The number of characters you type is approximately the
> >> same. You still need to support the old m
On Mon, 26 May 2025 at 13:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 11:27:05AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 6:07 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> Yes, agreed that your suggested fix looks sensible with an extra check
> >> for pg_prepared_xacts on the subscriber
Hi,
The 021_twophase test has failed on Kestrel at [1] with the following error:
# Failed test 'should be no prepared transactions on subscriber'
# at
/home/bf/bf-build/kestrel/HEAD/pgsql/src/test/subscription/t/021_twophase.pl
line 438.
# got: '1'
# expected: '0'
# Looks like yo
the feedback begin. ;-)
Regarding the following:
Change the default CREATE SUBSCRIPTION streaming option from "off" to
"parallel" (Hayato Kuroda, Masahiko Sawada, Peter Smith, Amit Kapila)
The author name was incorrectly listed in the commit; it should be
"Vignesh C". This co
On Tue, 20 May 2025 at 09:54, shveta malik wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 8:35 AM Nisha Moond wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks for the comments, these are handled in the attached v20250516
> > > version patch.
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for the patches. Here are my review comments -
> >
> > Patch-0004
On Tue, 20 May 2025 at 03:16, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 11:19:48AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > The advantage of Fujii-san's proposal is that it is very simple to
> > implement. A subscription option would indeed be better, but it would
> > also be considerably more compl
On Wed, 14 May 2025 at 09:55, Nisha Moond wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 7:28 PM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> >
> > There was one pending open comment #6 from [1]. This has been
> > addressed in the attached patch.
>
> Thank you for the patches, here are my co
On Fri, 2 May 2025 at 09:23, vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2 May 2025 at 06:30, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > vignesh C writes:
> > > I agree with your analysis. I was able to reproduce the issue by
> > > delaying the invalidation of the subscription until the w
On Fri, 2 May 2025 at 10:11, Xuneng Zhou wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Is this an expected behavior?
>
> A race between subscriber LSN feedback and publisher subscription change
> processing allows the walsender to restart decoding past relevant WAL
> records, bypassing the updated subscription rules for tho
On Fri, 2 May 2025 at 06:30, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> vignesh C writes:
> > I agree with your analysis. I was able to reproduce the issue by
> > delaying the invalidation of the subscription until the walsender
> > finished decoding the INSERT operation following the ALTER
&g
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 at 17:41, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 11:22 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Xuneng Zhou pointed out on Discord that the test case added by
> > 7c99dc587 has caused repeated failures in CI --- though oddly,
> > it's not failed in the buildfarm so far as I can find
Hi,
Currently, when a warning is emitted by the publisher, the
corresponding log message does not include the log prefix. This makes
it harder to correlate such messages with other log entries. For
example, in a simulated error scenario where directory removal fails,
the notice message lacks the s
On Sat, 12 Apr 2025 at 01:56, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>
> The Core Team would like to extend our congratulations to Jacob
> Champion, who has accepted an invitation to become our newest PostgreSQL
> committer.
>
> Please join us in wishing Jacob much success and few reverts!
Many Congratulations,
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 at 20:37, vignesh C wrote:
>
Thanks a lot to all the members who participated in the commitfest.
Here are the final numbers at the end of the commitfest:
status | End of Commitfest
+---
Needs rev
Hi,
Thanks a lot to all the members who participated in the commitfest.
Here are the final numbers at the end of the commitfest:
status | End of Commitfest
+---
Needs review: |54
Waiting on Author: |
On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 08:34, vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 at 10:07, vignesh C wrote:
Here's a quick commitfest status report as of today:
status | start | 17th | 24th | 31
On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 at 15:49, Kirill Reshke wrote:
>
> On Tue, 1 Apr 2025, 11:45 vignesh C, wrote:
>>
>>
>> One thing I noticed was that if the materialized view is not refreshed
>> user will get stale data
>>
>> Should we document this?
>
> Doe
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 at 09:26, jian he wrote:
>
> changed based on this.
>
> also minor documentation tweaks.
Few comments:
1) I felt this is wrong:
diff --git a/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.in.c b/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.in.c
index 9a4d993e2bc..7980513a9bd 100644
--- a/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.in
On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 18:35, Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 08:41:20AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 04:00:49PM +0800, Xuneng Zhou wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > Moving the other two provides a more complete view of the settings. For
> > > newcomer
On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 at 00:20, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2025-03-17 12:16:11 +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 at 10:50, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Jeff pointed out to me that the case conversion functions
On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 at 13:49, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 10:31 PM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2025-Apr-01, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> >
> > > Just today morning, I found something which looks like another bug in
> > > statistics dump/restore [1]. As Daniel has expressed
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 at 10:31, Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 03:23:31PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > Can we add it to one of the subscription tests, such as 001_rep_changes.pl?
>
> Yeah that sounds like a good place for it. Done in the attac
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 at 09:36, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> A few comments:
> *
> pg_createsubscriber.exe -D ..\..\data_standby -d db1 -d db2 -d db1
> --publication pub1 --publication pub1 -P "dbname=postgres port=5432"
> -p 5444 --dry-run
> pg_createsubscriber: error: database "db1" specified more than o
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 at 12:54, Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 09:25:02AM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 18:35, Bertrand Drouvot
> > wrote:
> > >
> > Couple of suggestions:
>
> Thanks for looking at
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 at 09:07, Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I was away for the last few weeks when this feature got committed, so
> I missed the chance to post my comments earlier.
>
> It seems the final SGML docs are mostly from this [1] suggestion, but
> I think there are one or two more improve
On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 at 16:02, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 2025-04-01 Tu 5:16 AM, vignesh C wrote:
> > On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 at 00:52, Lars Kanis wrote:
> >> This patch limits the workaround of using __buildin_setjmp on the
> >> Windows MINGW platform. This workar
On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 at 08:43, jian he wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 11:27 PM Fujii Masao
> wrote:
> >
> > Regarding the patch, here are some review comments:
> >
> > + errmsg("cannot copy from
> > materialized view when the materialized view is n
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 at 00:52, Lars Kanis wrote:
>
> This patch limits the workaround of using __buildin_setjmp on the
> Windows MINGW platform. This workaround is only necessary for legacy
> MSVCRT based toolchain, but not for UCRT based. It is not available at
> all on clang on ARM64 resulting in
On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 at 06:31, jian he wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 4:05 PM Kirill Reshke wrote:
>
> Thanks for doing the benchmark.
Few comments to improve the comments, error message and remove
redundant assignment:
1) How about we change below:
/*
* partition's rowtype might differ from
On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 at 10:07, vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 09:26, vignesh C wrote:
>
Here's a quick commitfest status report as of today:
status | start | 10th | 17th |
On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 at 12:08, jian he wrote:
>
>
> I consolidated it into a new function: CopyThisRelTo.
Few comments:
1) Here the error message is not correct, we are printing the original
table from where copy was done which is a regular table and not a
foreign table, we should use childreloid
On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 08:39, jian he wrote:
>
> hi.
>
> I made a mistake.
> The regress test sql file should have a new line at the end of the file.
Couple of suggestions:
1) Can you add some comments here, this is the only code that is
different from the regular table handling code:
+
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 18:12, David Rowley wrote:
>
> On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 23:22, Ilia Evdokimov
> wrote:
> > Everything seems fine with the ANALYZE command autocompletion. Regarding
> > VACUUM, I'm not entirely convinced we should provide autocompletion in
> > every case. I'd prefer to keep
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 05:49, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Jelte Fennema-Nio writes:
> > On Sun, 15 Dec 2024 at 10:00, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
> >> shows that the subscription and publication tests are not concurrent-safe,
> >> because modifying the same pg_database entry might fail with the "tuple
> >>
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 at 16:09, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 5:44 PM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2025-Mar-24, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> >
> > > One concern I have with directory format is the dumped database is not
> > > readable. This might make investigating a but ident
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 21:05, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > On 31 Jan 2025, at 16:29, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> >> #ifdef ENABLE_GSS
> >> -#if defined(HAVE_GSSAPI_H)
> >> -#include
> >> -#else
> >> -#include
> >> -#endif /* HAVE_GSSAPI_H */
> >> +#include "libpq/pg-gssapi.h"
> >> #endif /* ENAB
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 at 00:03, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 8:04 AM Yasir wrote:
> > Please ignore the above 4 lines in my review. See my comments in blue.
>
> OK, so I think it's unclear what the next steps are for this patch.
>
> 1. On June 3rd, Michael Paquier said that Tom La
On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 at 05:25, Noah Misch wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 03:44:48PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 11:43 PM Noah Misch wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 05:29:12PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 4:46 PM Thomas Munro
> > >
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 at 02:05, Euler Taveira wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025, at 8:07 AM, Shubham Khanna wrote:
>
> The following code is not accurate. If I specify --all, --database and
> --subscription, it will report only --database. The user will remove it and
> run
> again. At this time, --su
On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 at 13:21, jian he wrote:
>
> I am not sure this is what we want.
> Anyway, I attached both two version
Few comments
1) I understood the problem, your first approach is ok for me.
2) Here in error we say column c1 violates not-null constraint and in
the context we show column
On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 at 16:44, Nisha Moond wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 3:38 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 1:48 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 12:50 PM Nisha Moond wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks, Hou-san, for the review and fix pa
On Sat, 1 Mar 2025 at 04:35, Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2024-12-16 at 20:05 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > On Wed, 2024-10-30 at 08:08 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> >
>
> Rebased v14.
>
> The approach has changed multiple times. It starte off with more in-
> core code, but in response to review feed
On Sat, 1 Mar 2025 at 04:35, Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2024-12-16 at 20:05 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > On Wed, 2024-10-30 at 08:08 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> >
>
> Rebased v14.
>
> The approach has changed multiple times. It starte off with more in-
> core code, but in response to review feed
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 09:26, vignesh C wrote:
>
Here's a quick commitfest status report as of today:
status | start | 10th | 17th | 24th
+-+-+-+-
Needs review: | 198 | 182
Hi,
Currently, error reports for database, publication, subscription, and
replication slots do not include the option name. This has been
addressed by including the option name in the error messages, ensuring
consistency similar to remove option. Additionally, pg_log_error and
exit(1) have been re
On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 at 18:59, Shubham Khanna
wrote:
>
>
> During the recent testing, I observed that the tests were failing when
> using wait_for_slot_catchup(). To address this, I reverted to using
> wait_for_subscription_sync(), which was employed previously and has
> proven to be more reliable
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 18:24, jian he wrote:
>
> after my change:
>
> COPY TO can be used only with plain tables, not views, and does not
> copy rows from child tables,
> however COPY TO can be used with partitioned tables.
> For example, in a table inheritance hierarchy, COPY table T
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 18:10, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>
> Hmm, this problem isn't limited to this one pg_upgrade test, right? It
> could happen with any pg_upgrade invocation. And perhaps in a running
> server too, if a relfilenumber is reused quickly. In dropdb() and
> DropTableSpace() we do
On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 at 22:09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2025-Mar-20, vignesh C wrote:
>
> > Will it help the execution time if we use --jobs in case of pg_dump
> > and pg_restore wherever supported:
>
> As I said in another thread, I think we should enable this test
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 17:13, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 6:10 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think the fix is to explicitly pass --lc-monetary to the old cluster
> > > and the restored cluster. 003 patch in the attached patch set does
> > > that. Please check if i
On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 at 10:25, Shubham Khanna
wrote:
>
>
> I have created two patches, v16-0001 and v16-0002, to address the
> performance issue. I conducted performance testing, and here are the
> results:
> - The difference in execution time between HEAD and the v15 patch was 53.2%.
> - After rem
On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 at 09:06, Shubham Khanna
wrote:
>
> The attached patch contains the suggested changes.
Couple of minor comments:
1) The second and third line comments can be in same line:
+# Create user-defined publications, wait for streaming replication to sync them
+# to the standby, then
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 14:46, Ilia Evdokimov
wrote:
>
> Looks good overall. However, after pressing Tab, ONLY appears in the
> completion list, but it doesn't autocomplete after typing the first letter.
In which case you noticed this?
Regards,
Vignesh
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 14:32, Shubham Khanna
wrote:
>
>
> Changed -r to -R based on the shared analysis to avoid conflict with
> the --retain option used in pg_upgrade and to maintain consistency
> across tools.
>
> The attached patch contains the suggested change.
Few suggestions:
1) I felt the
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 11:44, Shubham Khanna
wrote:
>
>
> I agree with you on this; switching to a single query with safe_psql()
> will indeed simplify the test and make the verification logic cleaner.
>
> The attached patch contains the suggested change.
Few comments:
1) I felt we are not doing
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 13:27, Ilia Evdokimov
wrote:
>
> It would be nice if this works with VACUUM VERBOSE ANALYZE ONLY table;
Thanks for the comment, here is an updated v3 version with the change
for the same.
Regards,
Vignesh
v3-0001-psql-Tab-completion-for-VACUUM-and-ANALYZE-.-ONLY.patch
De
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 10:39, Shubham Khanna
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 5:17 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 4:01 PM Shubham Khanna
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 12:07 PM David G. Johnston
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > > It would be good if we c
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 at 17:34, Shubham Khanna
wrote:
>
> I have added an additional test case to 040_pg_createsubscriber.pl as
> suggested.
>
> The attached patch contains the suggested changes.
How about we change the below code:
+# Verify that user databases (postgres, $db1, $db2) got subscript
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 at 20:43, Ilia Evdokimov
wrote:
>
>
> On 18.03.2025 17:57, Ilia Evdokimov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thank you for the patch. However, Is it ok if I can't tab 'ONLY' in
> > VACUUM ANALYZE command?
How about we handle it like in the attached patch?
Apart from this, similar handling
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 at 11:42, vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 16:29, Umar Hayat wrote:
>
> This will include "ONLY" also when we display the tables too:
> + else if (HeadMatches("ANALYZE"))
> +
> COMPLETE_WITH_SCHEMA_QUERY_PLUS(Query_for
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 16:51, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 4:02 PM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 11:28, Shubham Khanna
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 5:43 PM Nisha Moond
> > > wrote
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 at 16:26, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> On 26.02.25 06:15, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
> > > ON DELETE RESTRICT must be specified when PERIOD BUSINESS_TIME is
> > also specified.
> >
> > Here are some patches removing support for RESTRICT
>
> I have committed this.
>
> I think this is
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 23:03, Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2025-03-16 at 19:10 +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > We currently have two Commitfest entries for the same thread at [1]
> > and [2]. Are both still necessary, or can we consolidate tracking
> > into
> > a singl
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 16:57, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 4:46 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 3:44 PM vignesh C wrote:
> > >
> > > While reviewing another patch, I found a couple of typos:
>
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 11:28, Shubham Khanna
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 5:43 PM Nisha Moond wrote:
>
> Fixed.
>
> The attached patch contains the suggested changes.
I feel like we're trying to address two separate tasks in this thread:
a) Enhancing pg_createsubscriber to automatically re
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 18:10, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> Hmm, this problem isn't limited to this one pg_upgrade test, right? It
> could happen with any pg_upgrade invocation. And perhaps in a running
> server too, if a relfilenumber is reused quickly.
Yes, it can happen with these scenarios.
Hi,
While reviewing another patch, I found a couple of typos:
1) subid should have been pubid in AlterPublicationOwner and
AlterPublicationOwner_oid functions.
2) Only tuples with XIDs/MXIDs older than the the
FreezeLimit/MultiXactCutoff are frozen in the common case.
Should have been"
Only tuples
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 13:42, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 12:07:44PM GMT, vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > I noticed that the feedback from Sami at [1] has not yet been
> > addressed, I have changed the status to Waiting on Au
1 - 100 of 1394 matches
Mail list logo
