On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 at 09:46, Anton A. Melnikov
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Rebased existing patch on current master to have an actual working version.
> There is an inconsistency with commit 5bf748b86.
>
> Reproduction:
> CREATE TABLE test (a int4);
> INSERT INTO test VALUES (2), (3);
> CREATE INDEX test_
Hi, Andrey!
On 31.03.2024 12:22, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
On 15 Jan 2024, at 13:11, Anton A. Melnikov wrote:
If there are any ideas pro and contra would be glad to discuss them.
Hi, Anton!
This is kind of ancient thread. I've marked CF entry [0] as "Needs review" and
you as an author (s
> On 15 Jan 2024, at 13:11, Anton A. Melnikov wrote:
>
> If there are any ideas pro and contra would be glad to discuss them.
Hi, Anton!
This is kind of ancient thread. I've marked CF entry [0] as "Needs review" and
you as an author (seems like you are going to be a point of correspondence
On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 2:39 PM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 4:58 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 1:27 PM Alexander Korotkov
> > wrote:
> > > I've rebased the patchset to the current master and made some
> > > refactoring. I hope it would be possible to
On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 4:58 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 1:27 PM Alexander Korotkov
> wrote:
> > I've rebased the patchset to the current master and made some
> > refactoring. I hope it would be possible to bring it to committable
> > shape during this CF. This need more r
On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 1:27 PM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> I've rebased the patchset to the current master and made some
> refactoring. I hope it would be possible to bring it to committable
> shape during this CF. This need more refactoring though.
This patch doesn't change anything about the
On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:00 AM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 11:28 PM Alexander Korotkov
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 11:35 PM Alexander Korotkov
> > wrote:
> > > I'm going to push 0001 changing "attno >= 1" to assert.
> >
> > Pushed. Rebased patchset is attached. I
On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 11:28 PM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 11:35 PM Alexander Korotkov
> wrote:
> > I'm going to push 0001 changing "attno >= 1" to assert.
>
> Pushed. Rebased patchset is attached. I propose to limit
> consideration during this commitfest to this set of
On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 11:35 PM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> I'm going to push 0001 changing "attno >= 1" to assert.
Pushed. Rebased patchset is attached. I propose to limit
consideration during this commitfest to this set of 7 remaining
patches. The rest of patches could be considered later.
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 2:19 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2019-Sep-03, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>
> > I think patches 0001-0008 are very clear and extends our index-AM
> > infrastructure in query straightforward way. I'm going to propose
> > them for commit after some further polishing.
>
> Hm
On 2019-Sep-03, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> I think patches 0001-0008 are very clear and extends our index-AM
> infrastructure in query straightforward way. I'm going to propose
> them for commit after some further polishing.
Hmm. Why is 0001 needed? I see that 0005 introduces a call to that
f
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 9:11 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2019-Jul-12, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
>
> > Attached 13th version of the patches.
>
> Hello Nikita,
>
> Can you please rebase this again?
Nikita is on vacation now. Rebased patchset is attached.
I think patches 0001-0008 are very clear an
On 2019-Jul-12, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> Attached 13th version of the patches.
Hello Nikita,
Can you please rebase this again?
Thanks,
--
Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 5:32 AM Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> Attached 13th version of the patches.
While moving this to the next CF, I noticed that this needs to be
adjusted for the new pg_list.h API.
--
Thomas Munro
https://enterprisedb.com
Attached 13th version of the patches.
On 08.07.2019 21:09, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
I have more thoughts about planner/executor infrastructure. It
appears that supporting "ORDER BY col1, col2 <-> val" is too complex
for initial version of patch. Handling of "ORDER BY col" and "ORDER
BY col <-
On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 8:47 PM Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> On 01.07.2019 13:41, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 4:30 AM Nikita Glukhov
> > wrote:
> Fixed two bugs in patches 3 and 10 (see below).
> Patch 3 was extracted from the main patch 5 (patch 4 in v9).
> >>> This patc
On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 5:47 AM Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> Attached 12th version of the patches rebased onto the current master.
Hi Nikita,
make check-world fails for me, and in tmp_install/log/install.log I see:
btree_int2.c:97:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'int2dist'
is invalid in C9
On 01.07.2019 13:41, Thomas Munro wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 4:30 AM Nikita Glukhov wrote:
Fixed two bugs in patches 3 and 10 (see below).
Patch 3 was extracted from the main patch 5 (patch 4 in v9).
This patch no longer applies so marking Waiting on Author.
Attached 11th version of the
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 4:30 AM Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> >> Fixed two bugs in patches 3 and 10 (see below).
> >> Patch 3 was extracted from the main patch 5 (patch 4 in v9).
> >
> > This patch no longer applies so marking Waiting on Author.
> >
> Attached 11th version of the patches rebased onto cu
On 25.03.2019 11:17, David Steele wrote:
On 3/15/19 2:11 AM, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
Attached 10th versions of the patches.
Fixed two bugs in patches 3 and 10 (see below).
Patch 3 was extracted from the main patch 5 (patch 4 in v9).
This patch no longer applies so marking Waiting on Author.
On 3/15/19 2:11 AM, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
Attached 10th versions of the patches.
Fixed two bugs in patches 3 and 10 (see below).
Patch 3 was extracted from the main patch 5 (patch 4 in v9).
This patch no longer applies so marking Waiting on Author.
Regards,
--
-David
da...@pgmasters.net
Attached 10th versions of the patches.
Fixed two bugs in patches 3 and 10 (see below).
Patch 3 was extracted from the main patch 5 (patch 4 in v9).
On 11.03.2019 20:42, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
Hi!
I've some questions regarding this patchset.
1) This comment needs to be revised. Now, B-tre
Hi!
I've some questions regarding this patchset.
1) This comment needs to be revised. Now, B-tree supports both
ammatchorderby and amcanbackward. How do we guarantee that kNN is not
backwards scan?
/*
* Only forward scan is supported with reordering. Note: we can get away
* with just Assert
Attached 9th version of the patches.
On 03.03.2019 12:46, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, passed
Documentatio
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, passed
Documentation:tested, passed
Hi,
thank you for your work on this patch.
Patch #1 is ready
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 2:18 PM Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> On 04.02.2019 8:35, Michael Paquier wrote:
> This patch set needs a rebase because of conflicts caused by the
> recent patches for pluggable storage.
Hi Nikita,
>From the department of trivialities: according to cfbot the
documentation doesn
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 04:01:51PM +0300, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> All new distance functions except oiddist() are not leakproof,
> so I had to relax condition in opr_sanity.sql test:
This patch set needs a rebase because of conflicts caused by the
recent patches for pluggable storage.
--
Michael
Hi!
I've couple more notes regarding this patch.
1) There are two loops over scan key determining scan strategy:
existing loop in _bt_first(), and in new function
_bt_select_knn_search_strategy(). It's kind of redundant that we've
to process scan keys twice for knn searches. I think scan keys
pr
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 1:19 AM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 5:46 AM Alexander Korotkov
> wrote:
> > * 0006-Remove-distance-operators-from-btree_gist-v04.patch
> >
> > I see you provide btree_gist--1.6.sql and remove btree_gist--1.2.sql.
> > Note, that in order to better ch
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 5:46 AM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> * 0006-Remove-distance-operators-from-btree_gist-v04.patch
>
> I see you provide btree_gist--1.6.sql and remove btree_gist--1.2.sql.
> Note, that in order to better checking of extension migrations, we're
> now providing just migration sc
Hi!
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 3:02 PM Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> On 29.11.2018 18:24, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:41 PM Nikita Glukhov
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Attached 3rd version of the patches rebased onto the current master.
> >>
> >> Changes from the previous version:
> >>
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:41 PM Nikita Glukhov
> wrote:
>
> Attached 3rd version of the patches rebased onto the current master.
>
> Changes from the previous version:
> - Added support of INCLUDE columns to get_index_column_opclass() (1st patch).
> - Added parallel kNN scan support.
> - amcano
32 matches
Mail list logo
