* Christian Ullrich wrote:
* Noah Misch wrote:
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:45:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Oh, OK. In that case, we need to get some representatives of these
more modern builds into the buildfarm while we're at it.
Yep. Among machines already in the buildfarm, the one runnin
Hello, Alexander!
> 16 янв. 2018 г., в 21:42, Andrey Borodin написал(а):
> Please find README patch attached.
Here's v2 version. Same code, but x2 comments. Also fixed important typo in
readme BFS->DFS. Feel free to ping me any time with questions.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
0001-Delete-pa
On 21 January 2018 at 07:26, John Naylor wrote:
> I spent a few hours hacking on this, and it turns out calculating the
> right number of MCVs taking into account both uniform and highly
> non-uniform distributions is too delicate a problem for me to solve
> right now. The logic suggested by Dean
> 21 янв. 2018 г., в 3:36, Peter Geoghegan написал(а):
>
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:45 AM, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>> Unfortunately, amcheck_next does not work currently on HEAD (there are
>> problems with AllocSetContextCreate() signature), but I've tested
>> bt_index_check() before, during
Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 2:33 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
>> wrote:
>> > From: Thomas Munro [mailto:thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com]
>> >> I hope Tsunakawa-san doesn't mind me post
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 01:42:13PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> We have traditionally supported older versions of Windows as long as people
> build from source. But perhaps I'm way overreading that and we should just
> bite the bullet, commit this patch, and declare those platforms as
> complete
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 12:45 AM, Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 1/20/18 17:39, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:30:43PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:34 AM, Michael Paquier <
> michael.paqu...@gmail.com>
> >> wro
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 02:44:43PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Fair enough. And since you do the translation merging at least, I'll go
> with that.
>
> Thus, applied and backpatched to 10.
>
> Thanks!
OK, thanks all!
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:29 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> I've gone through and cleaned up our GSoC 2018 Wiki page:
>
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/GSoC_2018
>
> Please review! If you have any last-minute items, please add them!
>
How about adding a project to support Unique c
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 2:30 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 01:42:13PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > We have traditionally supported older versions of Windows as long as
> people
> > build from source. But perhaps I'm way overreading that and we should
> just
> > bite th
I feel sorry for the noise, switching this patch there and back. But the patch
needs rebase again. It still applies with -3, but do not compile anymore.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
The new status of this patch is: Waiting on Author
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 02:54:25PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hmm ... so there's a small problem with this idea of dropping and
> recreating template1:
>
> pg_restore: connecting to database for restore
> pg_restore: dropping DATABASE template1
> pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error while PROCESSING TO
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 02:54:25PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Command was: DROP DATABASE "template1";
> Uh, the oid of the template1 database is 1, and I assume we would want
> to preserve that too.
I don't feel any huge attachment to that. In the first place, under
this
Magnus Hagander writes:
> With that, I'm pushing this. Let's see what the buildfarm thinks of it. And
> if others end up complaining about the platform drop, but I doubt that.
frogmouth:
pg_shmem.c: In function 'PGSharedMemoryCreate':
pg_shmem.c:205:3: warning: implicit declaration of function
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 6:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > With that, I'm pushing this. Let's see what the buildfarm thinks of it.
> And
> > if others end up complaining about the platform drop, but I doubt that.
>
> frogmouth:
>
> pg_shmem.c: In function 'PGSharedMemoryCreat
There is a convention in pg_dump/pg_restore that the "tag" field in a
COMMENT TOC entry should be exactly what you'd write after COMMENT ON
to specify the comment's target; for example it might be "INDEX foo".
This is depended on in _tocEntryRequired, which wants to know which
comments are for larg
I've been hacking away at this patch, and attached is what I've got
so far. I think this is committable, but if anyone wants to do
further review and testing, that'd be fine.
Per discussion, I got rid of the separate --set-db-properties switch:
additional database properties are now applied if an
Hi,
On 2018-01-21 13:42:13 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> To add some more notes on this. Again, the API appears in Vista/2003.
> Windows Vista went EOL (out of extended support even) in April 2017,
> Windows 2003 did so in July 2015. Those are the versions that it's *in* --
> obviously the versi
On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 8:38 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> It would have been better if there were some comments besides that
> field, but I think it has been covered at another place in the code.
> See comments in LaunchParallelWorkers().
>
> /*
> * Start workers.
> *
> * The caller must be able to to
Hi,
We've still some support for building the backend with PARTIAL_LINKING /
SUBSYS.o instead of the current objfiles.txt approach.
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=9956ddc19164b02dc1925fb389a1af77472eba5e
Any objections to removing that? Seems that's largely just rem
Andres Freund writes:
> We've still some support for building the backend with PARTIAL_LINKING /
> SUBSYS.o instead of the current objfiles.txt approach.
> Any objections to removing that?
+1. I think the reason for holding onto the old code was mainly fear of
hitting command-line length limits
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 1:43 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> Committed with a bunch of mostly-cosmetic revisions.
>
> Buildfarm member skink has been unhappy since this patch went in.
> Running the regression tests under valgrind easily reproduces the
> failure. Now, I might be wron
Hi!
While working with my big reloption patch,
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/2146419.veIEZdk4E4@x200m#2146419.veIEZdk4E4@x200m
I found out, that all relation options of string type in current postgres, are
actually behaving as "enum" type. But each time this behavior is implemented
as
В письме от 3 сентября 2017 11:45:43 пользователь Alvaro Herrera написал:
> I think we should split this in at least two commits,
Added another part for commit:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/43332102.S2V5pIjXRx@x200m
This one adds an enum relation option type.
--
Do code for fun.
signat
On 01/21/2018 01:02 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-01-21 13:42:13 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> To add some more notes on this. Again, the API appears in Vista/2003.
>> Windows Vista went EOL (out of extended support even) in April 2017,
>> Windows 2003 did so in July 2015. Those a
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 11:34:07AM +0100, Christian Ullrich wrote:
> * Christian Ullrich wrote:
> >* Noah Misch wrote:
> >>On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:45:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>>Oh, OK. In that case, we need to get some representatives of these
> >>>more modern builds into the buildfarm wh
On 16 January 2018 at 06:28, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Here is a rebase. I made some tests use actual expressions instead of just
>>> 0 and 1. No other changes.
>>>
>>
>> Sigh. Better with the attachment. Sorry for the noise.
>>
>
> Here is a very minor rebase.
>
I'm a smidge worried about this.
On 13 January 2018 at 01:57, Christian Rossow
wrote:
> Hi Fabien,
>
> > I think that the probability of getting these useful things into pg is
> > alas small. In the mean time, you may package and register it as an
> > extension?
> I aimed to close the asymmetry between bit vector operations (the
On 11 January 2018 at 09:55, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > But if we add this feature and somebody wants to use it for
> > server_version_num, it's really pretty simple. In the startup packet,
> > you say _pq_.report=server_version_num. Then, you call
> > PQparameterStatus(conn, "s
On 6 January 2018 at 08:28, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I think this should use ReadDirExtended with an elevel less than ERROR,
> and do nothing.
>
> Why have strcmp(.) and strcmp(..)? These are going to be skipped by the
> comparison to "xid" prefix anyway. Looks like strcmp processing power
> was
I wrote:
> What I think we should do is fix pg_dump so that these classes of
> TOC entries do indeed have tags that meet the expectation held by
> _tocEntryRequired, as per the first attached patch.
Some further poking around identified another place that was taking
dubious shortcuts to identify l
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 12:08:03AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> The attached patchset rebases Secure Transport support over HEAD and adds stub
> functions for that the SCRAM support added to make everything compile and run
> the SSL testsuite. There are no new features or bugfixes over the pr
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 3:45 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I got myself a working build env now so I can at least verify it builds,
> which it does.
>
> With that, I'm pushing this. Let's see what the buildfarm thinks of it. And
> if others end up complaining about the platform drop, but I doubt th
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 12:50 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 8:38 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> It would have been better if there were some comments besides that
>> field, but I think it has been covered at another place in the code.
>> See comments in LaunchParallelWorkers().
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 07:16:38PM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> On 20 January 2018 at 23:14, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> If pg_partition_tree_tables() uses the top of the partition as input,
>> all the tree should show up. If you use a leaf, anything under the leaf
>> should show up. If a leaf is
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 6:24 AM, Catalin Iacob wrote:
>> So I tried to redo the second paragraph and ended up with the
>> attached. Rationale for the changes:
>> * changed "this feature" to "explicitly requesting huge pages" to
>> contrast wit
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 6:34 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Why is this okay for Gather nodes, though? nodeGather.c looks at
>> pcxt->nworkers_launched during initialization, and appears to at least
>> trust it to indicate that more than zero actually-launched workers
>> will also show up when "nworker
Helo Craig,
I'm a smidge worried about this. It seems like psql is growing a
scripting language.
The patch is about aligning pgbench with psql, which already has \if.
Do we want to go our own way with a kind of organically grown
scripting system? Or should we be looking at embedding client-
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 03:54:26PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Thomas Munro
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 6:24 AM, Catalin Iacob
> > wrote:
> > I don't know enough about this to make such a strong recommendation
> > myself, which is why I was only trying t
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 6:30 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 03:54:26PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Thomas Munro
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 6:24 AM, Catalin Iacob
>> > wrote:
>> > I don't know enough about this to make such a stro
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 07:10:33PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 6:30 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 03:54:26PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Thomas Munro
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 6:24 AM, Catalin Iac
2018-01-21 23:31 GMT+01:00 Craig Ringer :
> On 16 January 2018 at 06:28, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
>>
>> Here is a rebase. I made some tests use actual expressions instead of
just 0 and 1. No other changes.
>>>
>>> Sigh. Better with the attachment. Sorry for the noise.
>>>
>>
>> Here is a
Hi all,
Per the recent discussions around support of new SSL implementations for
Postgres, it is becoming rather clear to me that the backend needs to be
a bit smarter with the way it needs to decide if it should publish or
not SCRAM-SHA-256-PLUS in the list that the clients can use to choose a
SA
On 22 January 2018 at 02:40, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 1:43 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas writes:
>>> Committed with a bunch of mostly-cosmetic revisions.
>>
>> Buildfarm member skink has been unhappy since this patch went in.
>> Running the regression tests under valgrin
44 matches
Mail list logo
