Hi,
On 4/4/23 12:08 AM, Gregory Stark (as CFM) wrote:
This looks like it was a good discussion -- last summer. But it
doesn't seem to be a patch under active development now.
It sounds like there were some design constraints that still need some
new ideas to solve and a new patch will be needed
This looks like it was a good discussion -- last summer. But it
doesn't seem to be a patch under active development now.
It sounds like there were some design constraints that still need some
new ideas to solve and a new patch will be needed to address them.
Should this be marked Returned With Fe
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 3:16 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 1:55 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 8/16/22 10:10 AM, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 1:31 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
> > > wrote:
> > >> On 8/14/22 7:52 AM, Gurjeet Singh w
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 1:55 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 8/16/22 10:10 AM, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 1:31 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
> > wrote:
> >> On 8/14/22 7:52 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 3:51 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
> >>> wrote:
Hi,
On 8/16/22 10:10 AM, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 1:31 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
On 8/14/22 7:52 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 3:51 AM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
I think we can reduce the number of places the hook is called, if we
call the hook from
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 1:31 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
>
> On 8/14/22 7:52 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 3:51 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
> > wrote:
>
> > I think we can reduce the number of places the hook is called, if we
> > call the hook from proc_exit(), and at all the othe
(reposting the same review, with many grammatical fixes)
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 3:51 AM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> Please find attached v2-0004-connection_hooks.patch
/*
* Stop here if it was bad or a cancel packet. ProcessStartupPacket
* already did any appropriate error repor
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 3:51 AM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> Please find attached v2-0004-connection_hooks.patch
/*
* Stop here if it was bad or a cancel packet. ProcessStartupPacket
* already did any appropriate error reporting.
*/
if (status != STATUS_OK)
+{
+#ifnd
On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 6:55 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
>
> Hi Bharath,
>
> On 7/14/22 11:43 AM, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 5:54 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> > wrote:
> >> Looking at v2-0003 patch and emit_log_hook, how about we filter out
> >> for those connectivity errors eit
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 5:54 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> Looking at v2-0003 patch and emit_log_hook, how about we filter out
> for those connectivity errors either based on error codes and if they
> aren't unique, perhaps passing special flags to ereport API indicating
> that it's a connectivit
Bharath Rupireddy writes:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 1:40 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> It doesn't seem like a great place for a hook, because the list of stuff
>> you could safely do there would be mighty short, possibly the empty set.
> I agree with this. But, all of the areas that v2-0003 touched for
>
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 1:40 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Joe Conway writes:
> > It isn't clear to me if having a hook in the timeout handler is a
> > nonstarter -- perhaps a comment with suitable warning for prospective
> > extension authors is enough? Anyone else want to weigh in on this issue
> > spe
Joe Conway writes:
> It isn't clear to me if having a hook in the timeout handler is a
> nonstarter -- perhaps a comment with suitable warning for prospective
> extension authors is enough? Anyone else want to weigh in on this issue
> specifically?
It doesn't seem like a great place for a hook
On 7/6/22 04:13, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
On 7/6/22 12:11 AM, Joe Conway wrote:
On 7/5/22 03:37, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
2. Timeout Handler is a signal handler, called as part of SIGALRM
signal handler, most of the times, signal handlers ought to be doing
small things, now that we are handing
Hi,
On 7/6/22 12:11 AM, Joe Conway wrote:
On 7/5/22 03:37, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 6:23 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
On 7/2/22 1:00 AM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Could we model this after fmgr_hook? The first argument in that hook
> indicates where it is being called fr
On 7/5/22 03:37, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 6:23 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
On 7/2/22 1:00 AM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Could we model this after fmgr_hook? The first argument in that hook
> indicates where it is being called from. This doesn't alleviate the need
> for se
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 6:23 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 7/2/22 1:00 AM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > Could we model this after fmgr_hook? The first argument in that hook
> > indicates where it is being called from. This doesn't alleviate the need
> > for several calls to the hook in
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 6:29 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
>
> On 7/2/22 2:49 AM, Roberto Mello wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 5:00 PM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>>
>> That being said, I don't see why this information couldn't be provided in a
>> system view. IMO it is generically useful.
>
> +1 f
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 5:54 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 7/2/22 1:00 AM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > Could we model this after fmgr_hook? The first argument in that hook
> > indicates where it is being called from. This doesn't alleviate the need
> > for several calls to the hook in t
On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 5:00 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
>
>
> That being said, I don't see why this information couldn't be provided in a
> system view. IMO it is generically useful.
+1 for a system view with appropriate permissions, in addition to the
hooks.
That would make the information easi
On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 09:48:40AM +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
>> However, I'm personally not okay with having multiple hooks
>> as proposed in the v1 patch.
>
> I agree that it would be great to reduce the number of proposed hooks.
>
> But,
>
>> Can we think of having a single hook
>
> T
On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 1:31 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
>
> Hi hackers,
>
> While commit 960869da08 added some information about connections that have
> been successfully authenticated, there is no metrics for connections that
> have not (or did not reached the authentication stage).
>
> Adding
22 matches
Mail list logo
