Thanks a lot for the merge. I did some tests and the master branch
runs up to 15% faster than the last
patch I tried (v22). Amazing!
Cheers,
Matthieu Garrigues
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 9:00 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-03-05 21:35:59 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I'll take the w
Hi,
On 2021-03-05 21:35:59 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I'll take the weekend to think about the issue with conn->last_query and
> conn->queryclass that I mentioned yesterday; other than that detail my
> feeling is that this is committable, so I'll be looking at getting this
> pushed early next
On 2021-Mar-15, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Are you going to update the assertion ?
>
> +#if 0
>
>
Are you going to update the assertion ?
+#if 0
Assert((meta == META
Here's what seems a final version of the patch. I renamed one more
function: PQsendPipeline is now PQpipelineSync. I also reworded the
docs in a couple of places, added a few tests to the pgbench patch, and
made it work.
Note the pgbench results in pipeline mode:
./pgbench -r -Mextended -n -f
On 2021-Mar-11, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think the changes in pqParseInput3() are broken. You should have
> kept the else-structure as-is and inserted the check for "not really
> idle" inside the else-clause that reports an error. As it stands,
> after successfully processing an asynchronously-receiv
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> [ v35-libpq-pipeline.patch ]
I think the changes in pqParseInput3() are broken. You should have
kept the else-structure as-is and inserted the check for "not really
idle" inside the else-clause that reports an error. As it stands,
after successfully processing an asynch
On 2021-Mar-05, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I'll take the weekend to think about the issue with conn->last_query and
> conn->queryclass that I mentioned yesterday; other than that detail my
> feeling is that this is committable, so I'll be looking at getting this
> pushed early next weeks, barring opi
v33 was indeed marked a pass by cfbot. However, it only *builds* the
test program, it does not *run* it. I guess we'll have to wait for the
buildfarm to tell us more.
In the meantime, I implemented PQsendQuery() as callable in pipeline
mode; it does that by using the extended-query protocol dire
Hi,
+ \gset and \aset cannot be used
+ pipeline mode, since query results are not immediately
'used pipeline mode' -> 'used in pipeline mode'
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/test/modules/libpq_pipeline/libpq_pipeline.c
@@ -0,0 +1,1144 @@
+/*
+ * src/test/modules/libpq_pipeline/libpq_pipeline.c
On 2021-Mar-04, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I don't know where do __WSAFDIsSet and __imp_select come from or what to
> do about them. Let's see if adding pgport and pgcommon fixes things.
Indeed all those other problems were fixed and these remain. New
failure is:
"C:\projects\postgresql\pgsql.sln
On 2021-Mar-04, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> v31.
Got this:
libpq_pipeline.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __WSAFDIsSet
referenced in function test_pipelined_insert
[C:\projects\postgresql\libpq_pipeline.vcxproj]
5019libpq_pipeline.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __i
On 2021-Mar-04, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I think the problem is that the project is called pipeline and not
> test_libpq, so there's no match in the name. I'm going to rename the
> whole thing to src/test/modules/libpq_pipeline/ and see if the msvc
> tooling likes that better.
v31.
--
Álvaro He
On 2021-Mar-04, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> v30 contains changes to hopefully make it build on MSVC.
Hm, that didn't work -- appveyor still says:
Project "C:\projects\postgresql\pgsql.sln" (1) is building
"C:\projects\postgresql\pipeline.vcxproj" (75) on node 1 (default targets).
PrepareForBuild:
v30 contains changes to hopefully make it build on MSVC.
--
Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml
index 0553279314..c16befa314 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml
@@ -3173,6 +3173,33 @@ ExecStatusType PQr
> I think it's just because you forgot the patch.
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210304142627.GA5978%40alvherre.pgsql
--
Álvaro Herrera39°49'30"S 73°17'W
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml
index 0553279314..c16befa314 100644
---
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 12:01:37PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Apparently, the archives system or the commitfest system is not picking
> up new messages to the thread, so the CF app is trying to apply a
> very old patch version. I'm not sure what's up with that. Thomas, any
> clues on where to
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 8:01 PM Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Apparently, the archives system or the commitfest system is not picking
> up new messages to the thread, so the CF app is trying to apply a
> very old patch version. I'm not sure what's up with that. Thomas, any
> clues on where to look?
>
Apparently, the archives system or the commitfest system is not picking
up new messages to the thread, so the CF app is trying to apply a
very old patch version. I'm not sure what's up with that. Thomas, any
clues on where to look?
--
Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile
"Oh, great altar of pas
On 2021-Mar-04, Ibrar Ahmed wrote:
> The build is failing for this patch, can you please take a look at this?
>
> https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4568547922804736
> https://ci.appveyor.com/project/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/build/1.0.129221
>
>
> I am marking the patch "Waiting on Author"
I don't
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 12:18 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2020-07-10 19:01:49 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Totally unasked for, here's a rebase of this patch series. I didn't do
> > anything other than rebasing to current master, solving a couple of very
> > trivial conflicts, fixin
Hi,
On 2020-07-10 19:01:49 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Totally unasked for, here's a rebase of this patch series. I didn't do
> anything other than rebasing to current master, solving a couple of very
> trivial conflicts, fixing some whitespace complaints by git apply, and
> running tests to v
On 2019-Sep-09, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Thanks for picking up this. However, I noticed that previously
> Horiguchi-San has given some comments on this patch [1] which doesn't
> seem to be addressed or at least not all of them are addressed. It is
> possible that you would have already addressed tho
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 7:06 PM Nikhil Sontakke wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > > This patch has been around for some time now, the last version fails to
> > > apply cleanly and in-depth reviews have happened. I am moving that to
> > > the next CF, waiting on its author.
> >
> > Unfortunately, nothing was c
Hi,
> > This patch has been around for some time now, the last version fails to
> > apply cleanly and in-depth reviews have happened. I am moving that to
> > the next CF, waiting on its author.
>
> Unfortunately, nothing was changed since then, so there is already some amount
> of unaddressed rev
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 8:34 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 02:18:09PM +0100, Daniel Verite wrote:
> > There's a batch mode for pgbench in a patch posted in [1],
> > with \beginbatch and \endbatch commands, but nothing
> > for psql AFAICS.
> > psql is more complicated becau
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 02:18:09PM +0100, Daniel Verite wrote:
> There's a batch mode for pgbench in a patch posted in [1],
> with \beginbatch and \endbatch commands, but nothing
> for psql AFAICS.
> psql is more complicated because currently it uses a
> blocking PQexec() call at its core. Craig m
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> A disucssion on psql batch mode was held in another branch of
> this thread. How do we treat that?
There's a batch mode for pgbench in a patch posted in [1],
with \beginbatch and \endbatch commands, but nothing
for psql AFAICS.
psql is more complicated because c
Hello.
At Fri, 12 Jan 2018 10:12:35 +1100, Vaishnavi Prabakaran
wrote in
> Corrected compilation error in documentation portion of patch with latest
> postgres code. Attached the corrected patch.
My understanding of this patch is that it intends to do the
following things without changing the
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 4:55 PM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran <
vaishnaviprabaka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Michael Paquier <
> michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran
>> wrote:
>> > Thanks for the suggestion and, OK I w
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran
> wrote:
> > Thanks for the suggestion and, OK I will create a new patch in upcoming
> > commitfest with attached patch addressing above review comments.
>
> The patch still applies an
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran
wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion and, OK I will create a new patch in upcoming
> commitfest with attached patch addressing above review comments.
The patch still applies and there has been no updates for the last
month, as well as no reviews.
32 matches
Mail list logo
