I made bunch of changes based on Andres' review and I split some more
indisputable 1 line changes from the large commit, hoping it will be easier to
review both. Several bits and pieces of the patch have been applied piecemeal,
but I was hoping to avoid continuing to do that.
I think at least the
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 07:34:10PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> This patch was applied as f73293aba4d4. Thanks, Paul and Michael.
Thanks for the thread update, Alvaro. I completely forgot to mention
the commit on this thread.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
This patch was applied as f73293aba4d4. Thanks, Paul and Michael.
--
Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On 2019-May-20, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:44 PM Amit Langote
> wrote:
> > This sounds more like an open item to me [1], not something that have to
> > be postponed until the next CF.
> >
> > [1] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_12_Open_Items
>
> Oh sorry, I a
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:22 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> If you could clean up the CF entry, and keep only the open item in the
> list, that would be nice. Thanks.
I withdrew the CF entry; hopefully that is all that needs to be done,
but if I should do anything else let me know.
Thanks,
Paul
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 01:55:46PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> You could link the CF entry from the wiki (the open item), but then it
> will have to be closed when the open entry will be closed, so double work
> for whoever does the cleaning up duties. Maybe, it's better to withdraw
> it now.
If
On 2019/05/21 13:47, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:44 PM Amit Langote
> wrote:
>> This sounds more like an open item to me [1], not something that have to
>> be postponed until the next CF.
>>
>> [1] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_12_Open_Items
>
> Oh sorry, I a
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:44 PM Amit Langote
wrote:
> This sounds more like an open item to me [1], not something that have to
> be postponed until the next CF.
>
> [1] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_12_Open_Items
Oh sorry, I already created the CF entry. Should I withdraw it? I'll
a
On 2019/05/21 13:39, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:36 PM Amit Langote
> wrote:
>> Thanks for the patch. To avoid it getting lost in the discussions of this
>> thread, it might be better to post the patch to a separate thread.
>
> Okay, I'll make a new thread and a new CF en
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:36 PM Amit Langote
wrote:
> Thanks for the patch. To avoid it getting lost in the discussions of this
> thread, it might be better to post the patch to a separate thread.
Okay, I'll make a new thread and a new CF entry. Thanks!
Hi Paul,
On 2019/05/21 13:25, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
> I'm sorry if this is the wrong place for this or it's already been
> covered (I did scan though this whole thread and a couple others), but
> I noticed the docs at
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/ddl-partitioning.html still say
> you
Hello,
I'm sorry if this is the wrong place for this or it's already been
covered (I did scan though this whole thread and a couple others), but
I noticed the docs at
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/ddl-partitioning.html still say
you can't create a foreign key referencing a partitioned tabl
Hi,
On 2019/05/21 7:59, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-05-20 13:20:01 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> @@ -3052,7 +3052,7 @@ SCRAM-SHA-256$> count>:&l
>> simplifies ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION operations:
>> the partition dependencies need only be added or removed.
>>
Hi,
On 2019-05-20 13:20:01 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 05:43:33PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Thanks in advance for any review.
I find these pretty tedious to work with. I'm somewhat dyslexic, not a
native speaker. So it requires a lot of concentration to go through
th
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 05:43:33PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I reviewed docs like this:
> git log -p remotes/origin/REL_11_STABLE..HEAD -- doc
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 05:00:26PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> However most of what you are proposing does not seem necessary, and the
> current ph
Hi,
On 2019-04-08 09:18:28 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> From aae1a84b74436951222dba42b21de284ed8b1ac9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Justin Pryzby
> Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 17:24:35 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH v2 03/12] JIT typos..
>
> ..which I sent to Andres some time ago and which I noticed wer
Hi,
On 2019-04-22 14:17:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2019-04-22 13:27:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I wonder
> >> also if it wouldn't be smart to explicitly check that the "guaranteeing"
> >> column is not attisdropped.
>
> > Yea, that probably would be smart. I don
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:10:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> FWIW, I think we generally write this the way Justin suggests. It's
> more precise, at least if you're reading it in a way that makes
> text distinguishable from plain text: what to put into
> the config file is exactly "-1", and not for
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 09:56:47PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> -all autovacuum actions. Minus-one (the default) disables logging
>> +all autovacuum actions. -1 (the default)
>> disables logging
>>
>> There's nothing else that says "minus-one" anywhere
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 09:56:47PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> But here's some one-liner excerpts.
>
> - is 2 bits and maximum is 4095.
> Parameters for
> + is 2 bits and the maximum is
> 4095. Parameters for
>
> Adding "the" makes it a complete sentence and not a fragment.
Not s
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 09:44:20AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 12:17:22PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > But I think the biggest part of the patch is still not even reviewed ?
> > I'm referring to ./*review-docs-for-pg12dev.patch
>
> Nope. I looked at the patch, and a
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 12:17:22PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> But I think the biggest part of the patch is still not even reviewed ?
> I'm referring to ./*review-docs-for-pg12dev.patch
Nope. I looked at the patch, and as mentioned upthread the suggested
changes did not seem like improvements a
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 11:50:42AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 12:19:55PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2019-Apr-22, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> I think it'd be better just to fix s/the all/that all/.
> >
> > (and s/if's/if it's/)
>
> FWIW, I have noticed that
On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 12:19:55PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2019-Apr-22, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I think it'd be better just to fix s/the all/that all/.
>
> (and s/if's/if it's/)
FWIW, I have noticed that part when gathering all the pieces for what
became 148266f, still the full paragrap
Hi,
On 2019-04-22 13:18:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> >> (Possibly I'd not think this if I weren't fresh off a couple of days
> >> with my nose in the ALTER TABLE SET NOT NULL code. But right now,
> >> I think that believing that that code does not and never will have
> >>
Hi,
On 2019-04-22 14:17:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2019-04-22 13:27:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I wonder
> >> also if it wouldn't be smart to explicitly check that the "guaranteeing"
> >> column is not attisdropped.
>
> > Yea, that probably would be smart. I don
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2019-04-22 13:27:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I wonder
>> also if it wouldn't be smart to explicitly check that the "guaranteeing"
>> column is not attisdropped.
> Yea, that probably would be smart. I don't think there's an active
> problem, because we remove NOT NULL
Hi,
On 2019-04-22 13:27:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > The computation of that variable above has:
>
> > * If the column is possibly missing, we can't rely on its (or
> > * subsequent) NOT NULL constraints to indicate minimum
> > attributes in
>
Andres Freund writes:
> The computation of that variable above has:
>* If the column is possibly missing, we can't rely on its (or
>* subsequent) NOT NULL constraints to indicate minimum
> attributes in
>* the tuple, so stop here.
>
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2019-04-22 12:33:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But TBH, now that I look at the code, I think the entire optimization
>> is a bad idea and should be removed. Am I right in thinking that the
>> presence of a wrong attnotnull marker could cause the generated code to
>> actu
Hi,
On 2019-04-22 09:43:56 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-04-22 12:33:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > ISTM that Michael's proposed wording change shows that the existing
> > comment is easily misinterpreted. I don't think these minor grammatical
> > fixes will avoid the misinterpretation pro
Hi,
On 2019-04-22 12:33:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> ISTM that Michael's proposed wording change shows that the existing
> comment is easily misinterpreted. I don't think these minor grammatical
> fixes will avoid the misinterpretation problem, and so some more-extensive
> rewording is called for.
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> On 2019-Apr-22, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2019-04-22 14:48:26 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> /*
>>> -* Check if's guaranteed the all the desired attributes are available in
>>> -* tuple. If so, we can start deforming. If not, need to make sure to
>>> -* fet
On 2019-Apr-22, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-04-22 14:48:26 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > /*
> > -* Check if's guaranteed the all the desired attributes are available in
> > -* tuple. If so, we can start deforming. If not, need to make sure to
> > -* fetch the missing column
Hi,
On 2019-04-22 14:48:26 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 09:43:01AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > Thanks for committing those portions.
>
> I have done an extra pass on your patch set to make sure that I am
> missing nothing, and the last two remaining places which nee
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 09:43:01AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Thanks for committing those portions.
I have done an extra pass on your patch set to make sure that I am
missing nothing, and the last two remaining places which need some
tweaks are the comments from the JIT code you pointed out. A
Thanks for committing those portions.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 05:00:26PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I am particularly referring to patches 0005
> (publications use "a superuser" in error messages as well which could
> be fixed as well?),
I deliberately avoided changing thesee "errhint" messa
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 09:18:28AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Find attached updated patches for v12 docs.
Thanks for taking the time to dig into such things.
> Note that Alvaro applied an early patch for log_statement_sample_rate, but
> unfortunately I hadn't sent a v2 patch with additional ch
Find attached updated patches for v12 docs.
Note that Alvaro applied an early patch for log_statement_sample_rate, but
unfortunately I hadn't sent a v2 patch with additional change from myon, so
there's one remaining hunk included here.
If needed I can split up differently for review, or resend a
39 matches
Mail list logo
