Hi all,
I am catching up with new features so I have begun going through
Covering indexes. While reading the code, I have noticed a couple of
things:
1) Some typos.
2) An inconsistent variable name in pg_dump.
The thing and structure of the code is pretty interesting by the way.
That's nice work
Hi all,
The documentation of covering indexes is incorrect for CREATE and ALTER
TABLE:
- ALTER TABLE's page is missing the call.
- Exclusion constraints can use INCLUDE clauses.
In order to simplify the documentation, please let me suggest the
attached which moves the definition of the INCLUDE cl
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:47 PM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:26 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2018-04-11 12:17:14 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
>>> I arrived at this idea via the realisation that the closest thing to
>>> prctl(PR_SET_PDEATHSIG) on BSD-family systems today is
>
Thank you for the comments.
At Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:51:55 +0900, Amit Langote
wrote in
<3d0fda29-986c-d970-a22c-b4bd44f56...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
> Horiguchi-san,
>
> Thanks for working on this.
>
> On 2018/04/11 13:20, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> > At Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:27:17 +0900, Amit Langote wr
Re: Tom Lane 2018-04-10 <24426.1523387...@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> The short-term solution seems to be to put that back, but that's sort
> of annoying because it means this isn't a bulletproof solution. It
> will only work for builds started in one of the directories that we
> take the trouble to put this
On 11 April 2018 at 18:04, Amit Langote wrote:
> Updated patch attached.
Thanks for the updated patch.
The only thing I'm not sure about is the chances you've made to the
COALESCE function.
+CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION pp_hashint4_noop(int4, int8) RETURNS int8 AS
+$$SELECT coalesce($1, $2)::int8
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 at 4:17 pm, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Mark Rofail wrote:
> I meant for the GIN operator. (Remember, these are two patches, and each
> of them needs its own tests.)
Yes, you are right. I have been dealing with the code as a single patch
that I almost forgot.
True. So my impres
Hi David.
Thanks for the review.
On 2018/04/11 17:59, David Rowley wrote:
> On 11 April 2018 at 18:04, Amit Langote wrote:
>> Updated patch attached.
>
> Thanks for the updated patch.
>
> The only thing I'm not sure about is the chances you've made to the
> COALESCE function.
>
> +CREATE OR R
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Amit Langote
wrote:
>>
>> I've attached a delta patch that applies to your v2 which does this.
>> Do you think it's worth doing?
>
> We can see check by inspection that individual values are in appropriate
> partitions, which is the point of having the inserts and
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:14 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Jeevan Chalke
> wrote:
> > I actually wanted to have rel->consider_parallel in the condition (yes,
> for
> > additional safety) as we are adding a partial path into rel. But then
> > observed that it is same
On 10/04/18 04:36, Thomas Munro wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
I coincidentally got pinged about our current approach causing
performance problems on FreeBSD and started writing a patch. The
problem there appears to be that constantly attaching events to the read
I have discovered that:
make clean; make check
fails with:
/bin/mkdir -p '/pgtop'/tmp_install/log
make -C '.' DESTDIR='/pgtop'/tmp_install install
>'/pgtop'/tmp_install/log/install.log 2>&1
src/Makefile.global:388: recipe for target 'temp-install' failed
Hi all,
This is gisdb and my POSTGIS VERSION
-
*gisdb=# SELECT PostGIS_version();*
*postgis_version*
*---*
* 2.4 USE_GEOS=1 USE_PROJ=1 USE_STATS
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 10/04/18 04:36, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> Just an idea, not tested: what about a reusable WaitEventSet with zero
>> timeout? Using the kqueue patch, that'd call kevent() which'd return
>> immediately and tell you if any postmaster deat
On 09/04/18 11:13, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
At Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:59:58 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote in
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
Hello.
At Wed, 04 Apr 2018 17:26:46 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote in
<20180404.172646.238325981.horiguchi.
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 7:24 PM, Pavan Deolasee
wrote:
> Hi Heikki,
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 7:07 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>> It would seem more straightforward to add a snapshot parameter to
>> GetNewOidWithIndex(), so that the this one caller could pass SnapshotToast,
>> whi
On 4/11/18 2:36 AM, Haozhou Wang wrote:
>
> Thanks for your email.
> Just wondering will I need to re-submit this patch?
No need to resubmit, the CF entry has been moved here:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/18/1499/
You should have a look at Nikita's patch, though.
Regards,
--
-David
da...
On 11 April 2018 at 21:22, Amit Langote wrote:
>> Also just wondering if it's worth adding some verification that we've
>> actually eliminated the correct partitions by backing the tests up
>> with a call to satisfies_hash_partition.
>>
>> I've attached a delta patch that applies to your v2 which
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 17:40:05 +0200
Anthony Iliopoulos wrote:
> LSF/MM'18 is upcoming and it would
> have been the perfect opportunity but it's past the CFP deadline.
> It may still worth contacting the organizers to bring forward
> the issue, and see if there is a chance to have someone from
> Pg
On 10 April 2018 at 19:58, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> You can't unmount the file system --- that requires writing out all of the
> pages
> such that the dirty bit is turned off.
I always wondered why Linux didn't implement umount -f. It's been in
BSD since forever and it's a major annoyance that i
2018-04-11 10:16 GMT+09:00 Masahiko Sawada :
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 7:57 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > Attached an updated test patch added the above test(0002 patch). Since
> > for this test case it's enough to use existing test functions I didn't
> > create new test functions. Also I
Here's an idea. Why don't we move the function/opclass creation lines
to insert.sql, without the DROPs, and use the same functions/opclasses
in the three tests insert.sql, alter_table.sql, hash_part.sql and
partition_prune.sql, i.e. not recreate what are essentially the same
objects three times?
On 3/30/18 03:30, Edmund Horner wrote:
> On 30 March 2018 at 19:26, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>> Thanks for the check. You might consider turning the patch as ready in the
>> cf app.
>
> Ok, I have done so, since the patch is small and simple.
>
>>> Fixing the abs/hash bracketing seems clear. The wa
On 3/3/18 07:35, Shinoda, Noriyoshi wrote:
> Hi, Hackers,
>
> The attached patch adds the following information to the document on Logical
> Replication.
> About the requirement of connection role of Logical Replication, written in
> 31.7 of the manual is as follows.
> --
> The role used for th
On 3/16/18 11:40, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 11:35:13AM +0530, Prabhat Sahu wrote:
>>> postgres=# CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION func1() RETURNS VOID
>>> LANGUAGE SQL
>>> AS $$
>>> select 10;
>>> $$;
>
>> Problem reproducible here, and the bug has been introd
On 2/18/18 22:42, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Okay, I have created a skeleton of page here:
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_11_Open_Items
> Feel free to add any bugs or issues related to v11 that need to be
> tracked before the release.
Do people find it useful to move the resolved item
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:34 AM, Chapman Flack wrote:
> On 04/10/2018 04:03 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> I suspect you want, or maybe need, to use the same snapshot as the
>> scan that retrieved the tuple containing the toasted datum.
>
> I'm sure it's worth more than that, but I don't know if it's
Mark Rofail wrote:
> > In particular: it seemed to me that you decided to throw away the idea
> > of the new GIN operator without sufficient evidence that it was
> > unnecessary.
>
> I have to admit to that. But in my defence @> is also GIN indexable so the
> only difference in performance betwee
Christoph Berg writes:
> It still doesn't work on current HEAD:
*What* still doesn't work on current HEAD? I don't know what commands
you are running to get this.
regards, tom lane
> On Apr 11, 2018, at 4:33 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> wrote:
>
> Thank you for the comments.
>
> At Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:51:55 +0900, Amit Langote
> wrote in
> <3d0fda29-986c-d970-a22c-b4bd44f56...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
>> Horiguchi-san,
>>
>> Thanks for working on this.
>>
>> On 2018/04/11 13:20, K
Thank you, pushed
Amit Langote wrote:
Hi.
On 2018/04/11 0:36, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
Does the attached fix look correct? Haven't checked the fix with
ATTACH
PARTITION though.
Attached patch seems to fix the problem. However, I would rather get
rid of modifying stmt->indexParams. T
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:53 PM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 2/18/18 22:42, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Okay, I have created a skeleton of page here:
>> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_11_Open_Items
>> Feel free to add any bugs or issues related to v11 that need to be
>> tracked before
_bt_mark_page_halfdead() looked like it had a problem, but it now
looks like I was wrong. I also verified every other
BTreeInnerTupleGetDownLink() caller. It now looks like everything is
good here.
Right - it tries to find right page by conlsulting in parent page, by taking of
next key.
--
Hi,
On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 09:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> *What* still doesn't work on current HEAD? I don't know what commands
> you are running to get this.
I think my build and Christoph's builds fail because of the same reason again
(the same as yesterday):
=
Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=FCnd=FCz?= writes:
> On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 09:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> *What* still doesn't work on current HEAD? I don't know what commands
>> you are running to get this.
> I think my build and Christoph's builds fail because of the same reason again
> (the same as
On 04/10/2018 10:17 PM, Jan Wieck wrote:
> If your session has a transaction snapshot that protects the old toast
> slices from being vacuumed away, you are fine.
That harks back to my earlier (naïve?) thought that, as long as
my lazy datum doesn't have to outlive the transaction, lazy
detoasting
Hi,
On 2018-04-11 06:05:27 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> The event is April 23-25 in Park City, Utah. I bet that room could be
> found for somebody from the postgresql community, should there be
> somebody who would like to represent the group on this issue. Let me
> know if an introduction or
On 4/10/18 07:33, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> 1) both the jsonb_plperl and jsonb_plperlu extensions contain the SQL
>functions jsonb_to_plperl and plperl_to_jsonb, so can't be installed
>simultaneously
>
> 2) jsonb scalar values are passed to the plperl function wrapped in not
>o
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:29:09 -0700
Andres Freund wrote:
> If that room can be found, I might be able to make it. Being in SF, I'm
> probably the physically closest PG dev involved in the discussion.
OK, I've dropped the PC a note; hopefully you'll be hearing from them.
jon
Chapman Flack writes:
> On 04/10/2018 10:17 PM, Jan Wieck wrote:
>> If your session has a transaction snapshot that protects the old toast
>> slices from being vacuumed away, you are fine.
> That harks back to my earlier (naïve?) thought that, as long as
> my lazy datum doesn't have to outlive th
Pavan Deolasee writes:
> Or may be we simply err on the side of caution and scan the toast table
> with SnapshotAny while looking for a duplicate? That might prevent us from
> reusing an OID for a known-dead tuple, but should save us a second index
> scan and still work.
+1. We really don't want
Ashutosh Bapat writes:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:53 PM, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
>> Do people find it useful to move the resolved items to a separate
>> section on the page, instead of just removing them? I'm not sure that
>> the resolved sections are useful, compared to just using the git lo
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I have discovered that:
> make clean; make check
> fails with:
No doubt this is related to the generated-headers changes I've been
making, but I find your recipe confusing. "make clean" should not
have removed the generated headers from the previous build. I can
be
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ashutosh Bapat writes:
>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:53 PM, Peter Eisentraut
>> wrote:
>>> Do people find it useful to move the resolved items to a separate
>>> section on the page, instead of just removing them? I'm not sure that
>>> the resol
On 04/11/2018 10:41 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> The core of the problem now is that in a READ COMMITTED transaction, we
> may not be holding any snapshot at all between statements. So if you're
> hanging onto a toast pointer across statements you're at risk.
>
> On the other hand, it's also arguable th
Chapman Flack writes:
> On 04/11/2018 10:41 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So maybe we need to take two steps back and talk about the semantics
>> of what you're doing.
> The mission is to implement java.sql.SQLXML, which has long been
> missing from PL/Java.
> This is the class of object your Java code
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> What *does* take time is adding a link to the commit, so I'd happily
>> drop that step. As Peter says, you can usually look in the commit
>> log if you care.
> The trouble is that sometimes it's not very obvious which co
On 2018-03-12 20:44:01 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 10:15 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> > Then when I create in index, I get a warning:
> >
> > jjanes=# create index on pgbench_accounts (foobar(filler));
> > WARNING: cannot set parameters during a parallel operation
> > WARNI
Hi,
On 2017-12-07 12:51:56 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> 1. Removing es_query_dsa and injecting the right context into the
> executor tree as discussed.
>
> 2. Another idea mentioned by Robert in an off-list chat: We could
> consolidate all DSM segments in a multi-gather plan into one. See the
Hi Peter, Pavel,
On 2018-03-22 15:19:12 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> attached patch should to fix it
This is still broken, and has been an open item for a bit. Peter, Could
you check whether Pavel's fix resolves the issue for you?
Regards,
Andres
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:59:45AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > I have discovered that:
> > make clean; make check
> > fails with:
>
> No doubt this is related to the generated-headers changes I've been
> making, but I find your recipe confusing. "make clean" should not
Hi,
On 2018-01-26 18:57:03 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> I noticed that relispartition isn't set for index's partitions.
>
> create table p (a int) partition by list (a);
> create table p12 partition of p for values in (1, 2);
> create index on p (a);
> select relname, relkind from pg_class where
Hello
Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-01-26 18:57:03 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > I noticed that relispartition isn't set for index's partitions.
> > Is that intentional?
>
> This appears to be a question about
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=8b08f7d4820fd7a8ef
> "Tom" == Tom Lane writes:
Tom> No doubt this is related to the generated-headers changes I've
Tom> been making, but I find your recipe confusing. "make clean" should
Tom> not have removed the generated headers from the previous build. I
Tom> can believe that if you started from a bare g
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2018-03-12 20:44:01 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> I wonder why DefineCustomStringVariable() does not set var->reset_val.
>> We see that within DefineCustomEnumVariable(),
>> DefineCustomRealVariable(), DefineCustomIntVariable(), etc.
> Peter, have you investigated th
Andrew Gierth writes:
> Tom> Please be more explicit about what state you're starting from.
> This is consistently failing for me, on FreeBSD with GNU Make 4.2.1,
> clang 3.9.1, at commit 651cb90941:
> git clean -dfx
> ./configure '--prefix=/home/andrew/work/pgsql/head' \
> '--with-includes=/u
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:35:41PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Gierth writes:
> > Tom> Please be more explicit about what state you're starting from.
>
> > This is consistently failing for me, on FreeBSD with GNU Make 4.2.1,
> > clang 3.9.1, at commit 651cb90941:
>
> > git clean -dfx
> > ./
Tom Lane wrote:
> We can fix this by making submake-generated-headers be a recursive
> prerequisite for "check" as well as "all" and "install". I wonder
> whether anybody is expecting any other shortcuts to work.
check-world certainly, but presumably that depends on check?
--
Álvaro Herrera
Patch makes buildfarm almost red, patch is temporary reverted.
Actually, discovered bug is not related to patch except new test faces with it,
problem is: CompareIndexInfo() checks rd_opfamily for equality for all
attributes, not only for key attribute.
Obviously, CompareIndexInfo() needs more
> On Apr 11, 2018, at 11:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> What *does* take time is adding a link to the commit, so I'd happily
>>> drop that step. As Peter says, you can usually look in the commit
>>> log if you care.
>
>
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> We can fix this by making submake-generated-headers be a recursive
>> prerequisite for "check" as well as "all" and "install". I wonder
>> whether anybody is expecting any other shortcuts to work.
> check-world certainly, but presumably that depends on
Just had someone report that pg_partman wasn't handling tablespaces for
native partitioning.
https://github.com/keithf4/pg_partman/issues/212
I'd assumed that that was a property that was being inherited from the
parent table, but apparently the TABLESPACE flag to CREATE TABLE is
completely ignor
Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> During some RMT discussions I had proposed formatting the open items
> into a table on the Wiki page with some useful info to help track the status
> and surface the necessary info to track down the open item.
The other proposal was that we could have a simple web app to
On 2018-04-11 13:54:34 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> The other proposal was that we could have a simple web app to track open
> items. After all, we now know what we need from it. A wiki page seems
> more laborious. (The commitfest app also sprung from a wiki page.)
Growing a number of non-iss
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:57 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-04-11 13:54:34 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > The other proposal was that we could have a simple web app to track open
> > items. After all, we now know what we need from it. A wiki page seems
> > more laborious. (The commitfest
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:35:41PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We can fix this by making submake-generated-headers be a recursive
>> prerequisite for "check" as well as "all" and "install". I wonder
>> whether anybody is expecting any other shortcuts to work.
> In case it w
Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-04-11 13:54:34 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > The other proposal was that we could have a simple web app to track open
> > items. After all, we now know what we need from it. A wiki page seems
> > more laborious. (The commitfest app also sprung from a wiki page.)
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> (And of course, if we want to go in *any* direction away from the wiki,
> it's not going to happen in time for *this* release..)
Absolutely. But if we never start, it'll never get done.
--
Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Developmen
On 04/11/2018 10:06 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2018-04-11 13:54:34 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
The other proposal was that we could have a simple web app to track open
items. After all, we now know what we need from it. A wiki page seems
more laborious. (The commitfes
On 04/11/2018 11:33 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Chapman Flack writes:
>> The mission is to implement java.sql.SQLXML, which has long been
>> missing from PL/Java.
>> This is the class of object your Java code can retrieve from a
>> ResultSet row from a query with an XML column type. (It's also
>> what c
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:04:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:35:41PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> We can fix this by making submake-generated-headers be a recursive
> >> prerequisite for "check" as well as "all" and "install". I wonder
> >> wheth
Chapman Flack writes:
> On 04/11/2018 11:33 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> OK, but if this object only lives within a single function call,
>> what's the problem? The underlying row must be visible to the
>> calling query, and that condition won't change for the duration
>> of the call.
> Well, the devi
I wrote:
> The WARNING seems to indicate that the error check in set_config_option
> is too aggressive. I kind of wonder why it was placed there at all,
> rather than in SQL-level operations like ExecSetVariableStmt.
BTW, looking back at the thread, nobody seems to have posted an analysis
of why
On 04/11/2018 01:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Chapman Flack writes:
>> Well, the devilsAdvocate() function would stash the object
>> in a static, then try to look at it some time in a later call
>> in the same transaction.
>
> If you're worried about that, you should also worry about what happens
> i
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 8:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Pavan Deolasee writes:
> > Or may be we simply err on the side of caution and scan the toast table
> > with SnapshotAny while looking for a duplicate? That might prevent us
> from
> > reusing an OID for a known-dead tuple, but should save us a s
Thanks for the discussion. Per your suggestions, I changed the check
for default partition OID to an assert instead of the 'if' condition,
and removed the code that attempted vainly to verify the constraint when
attaching a foreign table as a partition. And pushed.
I think we're done here, so ma
Hi
I noticed new merge conflict, updated version attached.
regards, Sergeidiff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/alter_table.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/alter_table.sgml
index bd22627..db98a98 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/alter_table.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/alter_table.sgml
@@ -215,8 +215,15 @@ WITH ( MOD
Pavan Deolasee writes:
> Ok. I propose attached patches, more polished this time.
I'll take these, unless some other committer is hot to do so?
regards, tom lane
Chapman Flack writes:
> But let me return to the earlier idea for a moment: are you saying
> that it might *not* be sufficient to find an applicable snapshot at
> the time of constructing the object, and register that snapshot
> on TopTransactionResourceOwner?
The problem is to know which snapsho
On 04/11/2018 03:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Chapman Flack writes:
>> that it might *not* be sufficient to find an applicable snapshot at
>> the time of constructing the object, and register that snapshot
>> on TopTransactionResourceOwner?
>
> The problem is to know which snapshot is applicable; if
Actually, discovered bug is not related to patch except new test faces
with it,
problem is: CompareIndexInfo() checks rd_opfamily for equality for all
attributes, not only for key attribute.
Patch attached. But it seems to me, field's names of
IndexInfo structure are a bit confused now:
int
Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> Patch attached.
I wonder why this is a problem in opfamilies but not collations.
If we don't compare collations, wouldn't it make more sense to break out
of the loop once the number of keys is reached?
When this code was written, there was no question as to what length the
> "Chapman" == Chapman Flack writes:
Chapman> There's precedent for that kind of thing in PL/Java already
Chapman> ... objects that Java considers alive as long as some code
Chapman> holds a reference to them, but proxy for things in PG that may
Chapman> only have function-call lifetime o
On 7 April 2018 at 18:45, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
>> On 6 April 2018 at 17:22, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> My point was that people didn't ask you to work harder on fixing the
>>> patch, but in reverting it. You can work harder on fixing things in the
>>> hope they change their minds
On 11 April 2018 at 19:57, Tom Lane wrote:
> Pavan Deolasee writes:
>> Ok. I propose attached patches, more polished this time.
>
> I'll take these, unless some other committer is hot to do so?
Please go ahead.
--
Simon Riggshttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 2
> On 11 Apr 2018, at 01:53, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:27:19PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 10 Apr 2018, at 06:21, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Does it really imply that? Either way, the tool could potentially be useful
>> for debugging a broken cluster so I’m
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 02:09:48PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I think the new behavior where the GUC only takes effect at next checkpoint
> is OK. It seems quite intuitive.
>
> > [rebased patch version]
>
> Looks good at a quick glance. Assuming no objections from others, I'll take
> a cl
So while looking at this, it suddenly occurred to me that probing with
SnapshotDirty isn't that safe for regular (non-TOAST) Oid assignment
either. SnapshotDirty will consider a row dead the instant the
deleting transaction has committed, but it may remain visible to other
transactions for awhile
Amit Langote wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I noticed that relispartition isn't set for index's partitions.
This patch should fix it.
--
Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
diff --git a/src/backend/catalog/index.c b/
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:21:29PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Right, I misunderstood your initial email but I see what you mean. Yes, you
> are right and with that +1 on your patch.
OK, no problem.
> Naming it pg_checksums, with only verification as an option, seems to me to
> imply futur
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:52:06PM -0400, Keith Fiske wrote:
> Any chance of this being an inheritable property that can simply be
> overridden if the TABLESPACE flag is set when creating a child table? If
> it's not set, just set the tablespace to whatever was set for the parent.
I am wondering h
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 4:04 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> This is an open item for v11:
>
> Tidy up es_query_dsa and possibly ParallelWorkerContext?
> Original commit: e13029a5ce353574516c64fd1ec9c50201e705fd (principal
> author: Thomas Munro; owner: Robert Haas)
> Bug fix: fd7
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:47 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Teodor Sigaev wrote:
>
> > Patch attached.
>
> I wonder why this is a problem in opfamilies but not collations.
> If we don't compare collations, wouldn't it make more sense to break out
> of the loop once the number of keys is reached?
>
On 4/11/18 10:53, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's not that much work to move the items rather than remove them,
Well, toward the end of the cycle, when the list of closed items is
quite long, then it does become a bit of a burden to carefully cut and
paste the item in the little browser window without maki
On 29/03/18 10:46, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 03:47:07PM +1300, Edmund Horner wrote:
I considered whether aux processes really need those strings
(especially st_clienthostname), but decided it was more consistent
just to assume that they might. (It's an extra 3 kB... if we w
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 4/11/18 10:53, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It's not that much work to move the items rather than remove them,
> Well, toward the end of the cycle, when the list of closed items is
> quite long, then it does become a bit of a burden to carefully cut and
> paste the item in the
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 1:58 PM, Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> It appears that INCLUDE columns might have collation defined.
> For instance, following query is working:
>
> create index t_s1_s2_idx on t (s1) include (s2 collate "en_US.UTF-8");
>
> However, I don't see any point in defining collation
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:54 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:52:06PM -0400, Keith Fiske wrote:
> > Any chance of this being an inheritable property that can simply be
> > overridden if the TABLESPACE flag is set when creating a child table? If
> > it's not set, just set th
On 4/11/18 12:06, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-03-22 15:19:12 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> attached patch should to fix it
>
> This is still broken, and has been an open item for a bit. Peter, Could
> you check whether Pavel's fix resolves the issue for you?
Yes, I will work on this.
--
Pet
On 4/11/18 17:08, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> However, I don't see any point in defining collations here, because
>> INCLUDE attributes exist solely for index-only scans. So, index just
>> can return value of INCLUDE attribute "as is", no point to do something
>> with collation.
>>
>> So, I propose
1 - 100 of 123 matches
Mail list logo
