Hi, everyone
I am writing to ask if the recently introduced RWF_DONTCACHE [0] (originally
named RWF_UNCACHE) in the Linux kernel will be or is already supported by
PostgreSQL?
I am not sure if RWF_DONTCACHE will improve PostgreSQL performance. In fact, I
think it may even degrade performance.
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 6:56 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 3:09 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > cases like UPDATE_MISSING, DELETE_MISSING, the existing code
> > ERRCODE_NO_DATA_FOUND seems to be an exact match. The LOG message
> > appears when we don't find the row to be updated or
On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 7:14 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> I was reviewing the code for conflict reporting and became curious
> about the choice of ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE. This error code
> typically signifies a serialization failure within a transaction under
> serializable isolation, so it
On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 8:02 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 7:33 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 2:09 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > Can we instead try to use other suitable existing error codes?
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > I mean, I'm not 100% against using existi
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 3:09 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> cases like UPDATE_MISSING, DELETE_MISSING, the existing code
> ERRCODE_NO_DATA_FOUND seems to be an exact match. The LOG message
> appears when we don't find the row to be updated or deleted while
> applying changes. This can happen if someone d
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 12:39 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 7:33 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 2:09 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > Can we instead try to use other suitable existing error codes?
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > I mean, I'm not 100% against using exist
On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 7:33 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 2:09 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Can we instead try to use other suitable existing error codes?
>
> Why?
>
> I mean, I'm not 100% against using existing error codes, but I feel
> like we might be distorting the meanings
On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 7:33 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 2:09 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Can we instead try to use other suitable existing error codes?
>
> Why?
>
> I mean, I'm not 100% against using existing error codes, but I feel
> like we might be distorting the meanings
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 2:09 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> Can we instead try to use other suitable existing error codes?
Why?
I mean, I'm not 100% against using existing error codes, but I feel
like we might be distorting the meanings of the existing error codes.
If we used new error codes, then peop
On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 11:05 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 12:14 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 11:39 AM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 7:14 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I was reviewing the code for conflict report
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 12:14 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 11:39 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 7:14 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > >
> > > I was reviewing the code for conflict reporting and became curious
> > > about the choice of ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 1:25 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 9:45 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > I was reviewing the code for conflict reporting and became curious
> > about the choice of ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE. This error code
> > typically signifies a serialization failur
On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 7:14 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> I was reviewing the code for conflict reporting and became curious
> about the choice of ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE. This error code
> typically signifies a serialization failure within a transaction under
> serializable isolation, so it
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 11:39 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 7:14 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > I was reviewing the code for conflict reporting and became curious
> > about the choice of ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE. This error code
> > typically signifies a serialization f
On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 9:45 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> I was reviewing the code for conflict reporting and became curious
> about the choice of ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE. This error code
> typically signifies a serialization failure within a transaction under
> serializable isolation, so its
Hi,
I was reviewing the code for conflict reporting and became curious
about the choice of ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE. This error code
typically signifies a serialization failure within a transaction under
serializable isolation, so its use here for a different type of
conflict seems somewh
On Fri, 6 Jun 2025 at 07:49, Ayush Vatsa wrote:
> That said, I’m wondering if this might not be necessary, given that
> Gather Merge already accomplishes similar functionality. Would
> love to hear your thoughts on whether there’s a distinct advantage to
> adding parallelism to Merge Append or if
> The input node to the Gather Merge needs to be sorted by
> something, and the output of the Gather Merge will be sorted by the
> same thing.
Ok now I got that. Thanks for the clarification.
Last small question:
As of now parallelism in merge append is not supported, but it could
be som
On Fri, 6 Jun 2025 at 01:47, Ayush Vatsa wrote:
> A small follow-up question - Gather merge won't gather and merge the
> output from child in sorted order, but will always need an explicit Sort
> node beneath it to do so. Correct?
Incorrect. The input node to the Gather Merge need
> Merge Append does not support parallelism.
Thanks for the confirmation.
> We have Gather Merge, which handles executing some
sub-nodes and making sure the results get output in the correct order
A small follow-up question - Gather merge won't gather and merge the
output from chil
On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 at 07:31, Ayush Vatsa wrote:
> Are these Index Scans executed sequentially (one after the other as the Merge
> Append requests tuples)?
It's a fairly simple answer: Merge Append does not support parallelism.
> Or are they possibly executed in parallel, in advance, or concurre
Hello Hackers,
I had a question regarding the execution of the following query plan on a
partitioned table with vector similarity search:
QUERY PLAN
Just to bring this out separately :
Does anybody have any ideas why pipe commands prematurely close inside tests ?
> Re: 003-pg_dump_basic_tests has a few basic validation tests for
> correctmflag combinations. We need to write more automated tests in
> 002_pg_dump.pl but have been running into
On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 10:26 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2025-04-03 09:58:30 +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> > I saw that a new errhint_internal() function was recently committed
> > [1]. I had also posted above asking about this same missing function a
> > month ago [2].
> >
> > But, your
Hi,
On 2025-04-03 09:58:30 +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> I saw that a new errhint_internal() function was recently committed
> [1]. I had also posted above asking about this same missing function a
> month ago [2].
>
> But, your patch only added the new function -- it does not make any
> use of it
(I added Andres to this thread)
Hi Andres,
I saw that a new errhint_internal() function was recently committed
[1]. I had also posted above asking about this same missing function a
month ago [2].
But, your patch only added the new function -- it does not make any
use of it for existing code tha
Hi,
While working on [1], I found the internal error "tuple concurrently updated"
is raised by simple_heap_update and other similar functions, and the comments
on them says "Any failure is reported via ereport()". However, I could not
understand
the intension of this comments because I suppose th
Please see attached a few minor edits to README.tuplock, which I feel
make an improvement over the current version.
Reading through that, though, I could not see a functional difference
between FOR NO KEY UPDATE and FOR KEY SHARE mode of locks. I understand
they are of different strength, exclusiv
Thanks for the quick fix. I was able to reproduce the assertion
failure and to confirm that it's resolved with the patch. Looks good
to me.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 21:40 Álvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2025-Mar-12, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > Patch look good for committing?
>
> Ah sorry, I should have said so -- yes, it looks good to me.
Thanks (Maciek, Tender too) for the review.
I feel a
> slight dislike for using URL-escaped charact
On 2025-Mar-12, Amit Langote wrote:
> Patch look good for committing?
Ah sorry, I should have said so -- yes, it looks good to me. I feel a
slight dislike for using URL-escaped characters in the mailing list link
you added, because it means I cannot directly copy/paste the message-id
string into
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 7:09 PM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2025-Mar-12, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > I was able to construct a test case that crashes due to this bug:
> >
> > CREATE TYPE mood AS ENUM ('happy', 'sad', 'neutral');
> > CREATE FUNCTION mood_to_json(mood) RETURNS json AS $$
> > SELECT t
On 2025-Mar-12, Amit Langote wrote:
> I was able to construct a test case that crashes due to this bug:
>
> CREATE TYPE mood AS ENUM ('happy', 'sad', 'neutral');
> CREATE FUNCTION mood_to_json(mood) RETURNS json AS $$
> SELECT to_json($1::text);
> $$ LANGUAGE sql IMMUTABLE;
> CREATE CAST (mood
against
> >> JSONTYPE_JSON twice. There's no reason for that, right?
> >
> > Yeah, the second JSONTYPE_JSON seems redundant.
> >>
> >> Ok, so, to try to answer my own question, I went looking at the
> >> history, and this comes from "Unify JSO
ight?
>
> Yeah, the second JSONTYPE_JSON seems redundant.
>>
>> Ok, so, to try to answer my own question, I went looking at the
>> history, and this comes from "Unify JSON categorize type API and
>> export for external use" [0]. Specificall
.
>
> Ok, so, to try to answer my own question, I went looking at the
> history, and this comes from "Unify JSON categorize type API and
> export for external use" [0]. Specifically, the change was
>
> -(tcategory == JSONBTYPE_ARRAY
noticed that in
> datum_to_jsonb_internal, the tcategory checks compares against
> JSONTYPE_JSON twice. There's no reason for that, right?
>
> ...
>
> Ok, so, to try to answer my own question, I went looking at the
> history, and this comes from "Unify JSON categorize type API and
&g
While exploring the jsonb code, I noticed that in
datum_to_jsonb_internal, the tcategory checks compares against
JSONTYPE_JSON twice. There's no reason for that, right?
...
Ok, so, to try to answer my own question, I went looking at the
history, and this comes from "Unify JSON categ
On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 8:35 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 03:59:45PM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> > I noticed the pg_sequences system-view DOCS page [1] has a note about
> > the 'last_value' field. But the note is not within the row for that
> > field. Indeed, it is not even
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 03:59:45PM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> I noticed the pg_sequences system-view DOCS page [1] has a note about
> the 'last_value' field. But the note is not within the row for that
> field. Indeed, it is not even within the table.
>
> Is it deliberate? Apparently, this change
Hi,
I noticed the pg_sequences system-view DOCS page [1] has a note about
the 'last_value' field. But the note is not within the row for that
field. Indeed, it is not even within the table.
Is it deliberate? Apparently, this changed in commit 3cb2f13 [2], so
CC-ing author Nathan.
My attached pat
On 2025/02/08 8:44, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
Hi,
I have a question about the comment of UpdateFullPageWrites() called
at the end of recovery (in StartupXLOG()):
/*
* Update full_page_writes in shared memory and write an XLOG_FPW_CHANGE
* record before resource manager writes
Hi,
I have a question about the comment of UpdateFullPageWrites() called
at the end of recovery (in StartupXLOG()):
/*
* Update full_page_writes in shared memory and write an XLOG_FPW_CHANGE
* record before resource manager writes cleanup WAL records or checkpoint
* record is
Peter Smith writes:
> I noticed today that there is no 'errhint_internal' function partner
> for the 'errhint' function.
> Now, it might seem that hints are always intended for user output so
> of course, you'll always want them translated...
Yeah, I think that was the reasoning. If it needs a
wondered if such code as in those examples might prefer to call
errhint_internal to avoid making an unnecessary gettext lookup of
"%s".
OTOH, was an errhint_internal function deliberately omitted because
calling a superfluous gettext was not considered important enough to
bother?
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 4:57 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> LGTM. I'll push this tomorrow unless there are more comments. I am
> planning to push this to HEAD as this is an improvement in existing
> docs and not any bug fix.
>
Pushed.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
It seems the issue was related to some misconfiguration of my postgresql
server,
I've migrated from pg 14 to 17 and now the issue has disappeared.
Also, I replaced relation_open with table_open
Le mar. 14 janv. 2025 à 15:40, Tom Lane a écrit :
> Giampaolo Capelli writes:
> > The function relat
hi Rahila, thank you for your response,
I mean Segmentation fault, this is what I see in psql
SSL SYSCALL error: EOF detected
The connection to the server was lost. Attempting reset: Failed.
!?>
this is the content of
in /var/log/postgresql/postgresql-14-main.log when a segmentation fault
happens
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 7:11 PM Robert Treat wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 1:24 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 4:46 PM Robert Treat wrote:
> >
> > --
> > Tables with a replica identity defined as NOTHING,
> > DEFAULT without a primary key, or USING
> > INDEX with a drop
I recommend you to review the documentation in
backend/executor/README. It explains in good detail how
the executor works. Specifically the section "Query Processing Control Flow"
explains what each of the hooks you reference are responsible for.
Also, be aware that there are operations, called uti
Giampaolo Capelli writes:
> The function relation_open returns a non NULL pointer in my extension, but
> then the last line in the following snippet crashes postgres.
> Relation rel;
> rel = relation_open(relid, AccessShareLock);
> Assert(rel != NULL);
> Assert(rel->rd_rel != NULL);
> Assert(rel
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 1:24 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 4:46 PM Robert Treat wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 8:07 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 8:22 AM Robert Treat wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 3:55 AM Amit Kapila
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 5:08 PM Luca Ferrari wrote:
>
> In the file backend/executor/execMain.c there are the following hook types:
>
> /* Hooks for plugins to get control in ExecutorStart/Run/Finish/End */
> ExecutorStart_hook_type ExecutorStart_hook = NULL;
> ExecutorRun_hook_type ExecutorRun_ho
Hi,
>
>
> I want to call the function ReadBufferExtended
> to get the raw data of a given buffer
> and I've read in some examples that I need to call relation_open
> first, in order to get a Relation variable and also lock the relation.
>
> The function relation_open returns a non NULL pointer in
In the file backend/executor/execMain.c there are the following hook types:
/* Hooks for plugins to get control in ExecutorStart/Run/Finish/End */
ExecutorStart_hook_type ExecutorStart_hook = NULL;
ExecutorRun_hook_type ExecutorRun_hook = NULL;
ExecutorFinish_hook_type ExecutorFinish_hook = NULL;
Hi there,
I'm trying to write an extension to study the internals of Postgresql, and
I face a server crash after calling the function relation_open.
I want to call the function ReadBufferExtended
to get the raw data of a given buffer
and I've read in some examples that I need to call relation_open
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 8:22 AM Robert Treat wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 3:55 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 10:22 AM Robert Treat wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 11:00 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 7:28 PM Robert Treat wrote:
> > >
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 3:55 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 10:22 AM Robert Treat wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 11:00 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 7:28 PM Robert Treat wrote:
> > > +If a table with replica identity set to NOTHING
> > > +
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 10:22 AM Robert Treat wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 11:00 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 7:28 PM Robert Treat wrote:
> > >
> > > Definitely couldn't hurt; Updated patch cleans that up a bit and
> > > tweaks the link to alter table replica statu
On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 11:00 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 7:28 PM Robert Treat wrote:
> >
> > Definitely couldn't hurt; Updated patch cleans that up a bit and
> > tweaks the link to alter table replica status.
> >
>
> IIUC, we have changed following to clarify the REPLICA ID
On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 7:28 PM Robert Treat wrote:
>
> Definitely couldn't hurt; Updated patch cleans that up a bit and
> tweaks the link to alter table replica status.
>
IIUC, we have changed following to clarify the REPLICA IDENTITY usage:
If a table without a replica identity is
- added to
On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 12:58 AM Robert Treat wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 10:41 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > Hi Robert.
> >
> > The content and rendering of patch v2 LGTM.
> >
> > Should the word wrapping within the file
> > doc/src/sgml/logical-replication.sgml be tidied up though?
> >
>
On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 10:41 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Hi Robert.
>
> The content and rendering of patch v2 LGTM.
>
> Should the word wrapping within the file
> doc/src/sgml/logical-replication.sgml be tidied up though?
>
Definitely couldn't hurt; Updated patch cleans that up a bit and
tweaks the
Hi Robert.
The content and rendering of patch v2 LGTM.
Should the word wrapping within the file
doc/src/sgml/logical-replication.sgml be tidied up though?
==
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 2:46 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2025 at 4:23 AM Robert Treat wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 5:56 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 9:57 AM Laurenz Albe
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 2024-02-08 at 13:40 +1100, Peter Smit
On Sat, Jan 4, 2025 at 4:23 AM Robert Treat wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 5:56 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 9:57 AM Laurenz Albe
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2024-02-08 at 13:40 +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> > > > - how to set the replica identity. If a table wit
On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 5:56 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 9:57 AM Laurenz Albe wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2024-02-08 at 13:40 +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> > > - how to set the replica identity. If a table without a replica
> > > identity is
> > > + how to set the replica iden
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 at 04:50, px shi wrote:
>>
>> You will find other places where relpathperm() is called without having
>> a FileTag structure available, e.g. ReorderBufferProcessTXN().
>
>
> I apologize for the confusion. What I meant to say is that in the
> mdunlinkfiletag() function, the for
On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 9:57 AM Laurenz Albe wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2024-02-08 at 13:40 +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> > - how to set the replica identity. If a table without a replica identity
> > is
> > + how to set the replica identity. If a table without a replica identity
> > + (or with repl
On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 7:24 PM James Coleman wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 4:47 AM Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 9:57 AM Laurenz Albe
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2024-02-08 at 13:40 +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> > > > - how to set the replica identity. If a tabl
On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 2:50 AM James Coleman wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 6:17 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > While revisiting some old threads, I found this one that seemed to
> > reach a conclusion, but then it seemed nothing happened.
> >
> > After multiple suggestions AFAICT James prefe
On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 6:17 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> While revisiting some old threads, I found this one that seemed to
> reach a conclusion, but then it seemed nothing happened.
>
> After multiple suggestions AFAICT James preferred the docs [1]
> modification suggested [2] by Laurenz.
>
> Shoul
While revisiting some old threads, I found this one that seemed to
reach a conclusion, but then it seemed nothing happened.
After multiple suggestions AFAICT James preferred the docs [1]
modification suggested [2] by Laurenz.
Should we make a CF entry for this with the status RfC, or was the
whol
Hi,
I was looking into this function, especially this block of code[1], so
what I have noticed is that we always try to combine the sequential
block when the lookahead blocknum is higher than the
pending_read_blocknum, that's fine for ForwardScan. My question is
should we do somethin
disable_timeout(IDLE_STATS_UPDATE_TIMEOUT, false);
}
Inside procedures, when _SPI_commit is called in db/src/backend/executor/spi.c,
the main command responsible for completing a transaction is
CommitTransactionCommand(). My question is the following:?
1. Is it expected behavior that system table updates
disable_timeout(IDLE_STATS_UPDATE_TIMEOUT, false);
}
Inside procedures, when _SPI_commit is called in db/src/backend/executor/spi.c,
the main command responsible for completing a transaction is
CommitTransactionCommand(). My question is the following:?
1. Is it expected behavior that system table updates
On Monday, October 21, 2024, Кириллов Вячеслав wrote:
> I have a question regarding the behavior of the auto VACUUM in PostgreSQL
> in the context of using stored procedures with sub-transactions.
>
>
This is a general usage inquiry not suited to discussion on -hackers. We
hav
Hi hackers,,
I have a question regarding the behavior of the auto VACUUM in PostgreSQL in
the context of using stored procedures with sub-transactions.
As I understand it, the parameters that control the initiation of VACUUM are
set in the configuration file, such as
>
> You will find other places where relpathperm() is called without having
> a FileTag structure available, e.g. ReorderBufferProcessTXN().
>
I apologize for the confusion. What I meant to say is that in the
mdunlinkfiletag() function, the forknum is currently hardcoded as
MAIN_FORKNUM when calli
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 10:43:17AM +0800, px shi wrote:
> Hi, hackers
>
> When calculating the path, forknum is hardcoded as MAIN_FORKNUM:
>
> /* Compute the path. */
> p = relpathperm(ftag->rnode, MAIN_FORKNUM);
>
>
> But since the ftag structure already contains forknum:
>
> typedef struct F
*Hi, hackers*
*When calculating the path, *forknum* is hardcoded as *MAIN_FORKNUM*:*
/* Compute the path. */
p = relpathperm(ftag->rnode, MAIN_FORKNUM);
*But since the *ftag* structure already contains *forknum*:*
typedef struct FileTag
{
int16 handler; /* SyncRequestHandler value, saving space
Hi Andres:
> On 2024-09-20 17:38:40 +0800, Andy Fan wrote:
>> static inline void
>> FullTransactionIdAdvance(FullTransactionId *dest)
>> {
..
>> }
>>
>> I understand this functiona as: 'dest->value++' increases the epoch when
>> necessary and we don't want use the TransactionId which is smaller
Hi,
On 2024-09-20 17:38:40 +0800, Andy Fan wrote:
> static inline void
> FullTransactionIdAdvance(FullTransactionId *dest)
> {
> dest->value++;
>
> /* see FullTransactionIdAdvance() */
> if (FullTransactionIdPrecedes(*dest, FirstNormalFullTransactionId))
> return;
Hi,
static inline void
FullTransactionIdAdvance(FullTransactionId *dest)
{
dest->value++;
/* see FullTransactionIdAdvance() */
if (FullTransactionIdPrecedes(*dest, FirstNormalFullTransactionId))
return;
while (XidFromFullTransactionId(*dest) < Fi
On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 at 19:06, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > Yes, sorry, I should have said one can not create a with hold portal
> using
> > the BIND command
>
> Ok.
>
> It would be possible to add a new parameter to the BIND command to
> create such a portal. But it needs some changes to the existing
> Yes, sorry, I should have said one can not create a with hold portal using
> the BIND command
Ok.
It would be possible to add a new parameter to the BIND command to
create such a portal. But it needs some changes to the existing
protocol definition and requires protocol version up, which is a m
Dave Cramer writes:
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 at 01:55, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>> So while the API's are "virtually" identical AFAICT there is no way to
>>> create a "WITH HOLD" portal ?
> Yes, sorry, I should have said one can not create a with hold portal using
> the BIND command
Yeah. The two API
Dave Cramer
On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 at 01:55, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > So while the API's are "virtually" identical AFAICT there is no way to
> > create a "WITH HOLD" portal ?
>
> I am not sure if I fully understand your question but I think you ca
> So while the API's are "virtually" identical AFAICT there is no way to
> create a "WITH HOLD" portal ?
I am not sure if I fully understand your question but I think you can
create a portal with "WITH HOLD" option.
BEGIN;
DECLARE c CURSOR WITH HOLD FOR
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 at 17:52, Dave Cramer wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 at 16:19, David G. Johnston <
> david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, July 25, 2024, Dave Cramer wrote:
>>
>> May not make a difference but…
>>
>>
>>> 2024-07-25 15:55:39 FINEST org.postgresql.core.v3.Query
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 at 16:19, David G. Johnston
wrote:
> On Thursday, July 25, 2024, Dave Cramer wrote:
>
> May not make a difference but…
>
>
>> 2024-07-25 15:55:39 FINEST org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl
>> sendSimpleQuery FE=> SimpleQuery(query="declare C_3 CURSOR WITHOUT HOLD
>> FOR
On Thursday, July 25, 2024, Dave Cramer wrote:
May not make a difference but…
> 2024-07-25 15:55:39 FINEST org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl
> sendSimpleQuery FE=> SimpleQuery(query="declare C_3 CURSOR WITHOUT HOLD
> FOR SELECT * FROM testsps WHERE id = 2")
>
You named the cursor c_3 (
Hi Tom,
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 at 06:02, Dave Cramer wrote:
>
> Dave Cramer
>
>
> On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 at 10:26, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Dave Cramer writes:
>> > If we use a Portal it is possible to open the portal and do a describe
>> and
>> > then Fetch N records.
>>
>> > Using a Cursor we open t
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 30/06/2024 12:48, Andy Fan wrote:
>> for example, at the first use of outputTapes[x], it stores (1, 3, 5,
>> 7),
>> and later (2, 4, 6, 8) are put into it. so the overall of (1, 3, 5, 7,
>> 2, 4, 6, 8) are not sorted? Where did I go wrong?
>
> There's a distincti
On 30/06/2024 12:48, Andy Fan wrote:
merge sorts requires all the tuples in each input are pre-sorted (1),
and in tuplesort.c, when the workmem is full, we dumptuples into
destTape. (2). it looks to me that we need a unlimited number of Tapes
if the number of input tuples is big enough. However
Hi,
merge sorts requires all the tuples in each input are pre-sorted (1),
and in tuplesort.c, when the workmem is full, we dumptuples into
destTape. (2). it looks to me that we need a unlimited number of Tapes
if the number of input tuples is big enough. However we set a maxTapes
in 'inittapes'
On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 10:04 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > I added them here with minimal copy editing an no attempt to organize or
> > sort into groups:
> > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Committing_checklist#Policies
> > If someone has thoughts on how to improve I am happy to make more changes.
>
> T
Joe Conway writes:
> On 6/6/24 14:12, Tom Lane wrote:
>> To get a sense of how much of a problem we have, I grepped the git
>> history for comments mentioning project policies. Ignoring ones
>> that are really talking about very localized issues, what I found
>> is attached. It seems like it's l
On 6/6/24 14:12, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas writes:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 4:25 AM Hannu Krosing wrote:
Not absolutely sure, but would at least adding a page to PostgreSQL
Wiki about this make sense ?
I feel like we need to do something. Tom says this is a policy, and
he's made that comme
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 4:25 AM Hannu Krosing wrote:
>> Not absolutely sure, but would at least adding a page to PostgreSQL
>> Wiki about this make sense ?
> I feel like we need to do something. Tom says this is a policy, and
> he's made that comment before about other thing
1 - 100 of 577 matches
Mail list logo
