On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 12:10:35PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> And pushed. Sorry that this took so long.
Thanks Andres. I have updated the status of the patch in the CF app
accordingly: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/25/2235/.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 2019-11-08 01:22:45 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-11-07 09:25:40 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2019-11-07 17:02:36 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:24:05PM -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> > > > Thanks for reporting, I did indeed missed out contrib. Pleas
Hi,
On 2019-11-07 09:25:40 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-11-07 17:02:36 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:24:05PM -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> > > Thanks for reporting, I did indeed missed out contrib. Please find
> > > attached
> > > the v2 of the patch which
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 09:25:40AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Let me take a look this afternoon. Swapped out of my brain right now
> unfortunately.
Thanks for the update.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
On 2019-11-07 17:02:36 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:24:05PM -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> > Thanks for reporting, I did indeed missed out contrib. Please find attached
> > the v2 of the patch which includes the change required in contrib as well.
>
> Okay, that
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:24:05PM -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> Thanks for reporting, I did indeed missed out contrib. Please find attached
> the v2 of the patch which includes the change required in contrib as well.
Okay, that makes sense. The patch looks good to me so I have switched
it to re
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 1:52 PM Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Sounds OK ... except that Travis points out that Ashwin forgot to patch
> contrib:
>
> make[4]: Entering directory
> '/home/travis/build/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/contrib/amcheck'
> gcc -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
> -Wdeclar
On 2019-Jul-30, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 10:22 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Looks good to me. Planning to apply this unless somebody wants to argue
> > against it soon?
>
> Andres, I didn't yet register this for next commitfest. If its going in
> soon anyways will not do i
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 10:22 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2019-07-11 17:27:46 -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> > Please find attached the patch to remove IndexBuildCallback's dependency
> on
> > HeapTuple, as discussed. Changed to have the argument as ItemPointer
> > instead of HeapTuple.
Hi,
On 2019-07-11 17:27:46 -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> Please find attached the patch to remove IndexBuildCallback's dependency on
> HeapTuple, as discussed. Changed to have the argument as ItemPointer
> instead of HeapTuple. Other larger refactoring if feasible for
> index_build_range_scan API
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 5:38 PM Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 2:56 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
>> > Currently, all AM needs to build HeapTuple in
>> > index_build_range_scan function. I looked into all the callback
>> functions
>> > and only htup->t_self is used from heaptuple
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 2:56 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Currently, all AM needs to build HeapTuple in
> > index_build_range_scan function. I looked into all the callback functions
> > and only htup->t_self is used from heaptuple in all the functions
> (unless I
> > missed something). So, if seem
Hi,
On 2019-06-10 13:48:54 -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> While at it might be helpful and better to also decouple HeapTuple
> dependency for IndexBuildCallback.
Indeed.
> Currently, all AM needs to build HeapTuple in
> index_build_range_scan function. I looked into all the callback functions
>
On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 1:19 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> I spent some time today studying heapam_index_build_range_scan and
> quickly reached the conclusion that it's kind of a mess.
>
While at it might be helpful and better to also decouple HeapTuple
dependency for
IndexBuildCallback. Currently, all
On 2019-Jun-07, Robert Haas wrote:
> Yeah, I wondered whether SnapshotNonVacuumable might've been added
> later, but I was too lazy to check the commit log. I'll try coding up
> that approach and see how it looks.
Thanks.
> But do you have any comment on the question of whether this function
>
On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 4:30 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2019-Jun-07, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I spent some time today studying heapam_index_build_range_scan and
> > quickly reached the conclusion that it's kind of a mess. At heart
> > it's pretty simple: loop over all the table, check each tuple
On 2019-Jun-07, Robert Haas wrote:
> I spent some time today studying heapam_index_build_range_scan and
> quickly reached the conclusion that it's kind of a mess. At heart
> it's pretty simple: loop over all the table, check each tuple against
> any qual, and pass the visible ones to the callback
I spent some time today studying heapam_index_build_range_scan and
quickly reached the conclusion that it's kind of a mess. At heart
it's pretty simple: loop over all the table, check each tuple against
any qual, and pass the visible ones to the callback. However, in an
attempt to make it cater t
18 matches
Mail list logo
