On 2018/10/30 4:48, Tom Lane wrote:
> I was confused about why the memory leak in Bruno's example is so much
> larger in HEAD than v11; spgbeginscan does allocate more stuff than
> before, but only if numberOfOrderBys > 0, which surely doesn't apply for
> the exclusion-check code path. Eventually
Dear Hackers,
I've started working on something I've ended up calling "Super
PathKeys". The idea here is to increase the likelihood of a Path with
PathKeys being used for a purpose that requires a less strict sort
order due to ordering being required from the return value of some
precision loss f
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 12:08:49AM +0100, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
> The installation instructions (short version) are not consistent with the
> "initdb" output. The first one still uses "postgres -D", even mentions
> "check initdb output", but "initdb" emits "pg_ctl" commands.
>
> The
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 9:31 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 5:54 AM, Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> >> Yeah, I was thinking the commit is relevant with this issue but as
> >> Amit mentioned this error is emitted
Hello Tatsuo-san,
pgbench doc (and some comments in pgbench.c) regarding "-M prepared"
option is not quite correct. [...] Actually "extended" mode uses
prepared statements too.
Ok, I understand that you mean that PQsendQueryParams uses an unamed query
internally to separate parsing & execu
Hi,
I create a first libpq trace log patch.
In this patch,
- All message that PQtrace() gets are output to the libpq trace log file
(I maybe select more effective message in the future patch)
- Trace log output style is changed slightly from previously proposed
This patch not include document
Hi Michael
> > In Pro*C, the data should be represented as hex format C string.
>
> Just to clarify, there is no special datatype for binary data?
I apology for lack of research again.
Since it's a little difficult to answer, I explain by samples.
The following works.
unsigned char buffer[12
Thanks for both clarifications!
I skimmed through the commits related to Inserts with partitioning
since 10 and indeed - while not impossible it seems like quite some
work to merge them into PG 10 codebase.
We might consider preparing the patch in-house as otherwise PG 10
based partitioning is a ma
On 2018/10/30 4:48, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>>> How about modifying SysScanDescData to have a memory context member,
>>> which is created by systable_beginscan and destroyed by endscan?
>
>> I think it would still have problems, in that it would affect in which
>> con
On 30.10.18 04:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
That is not the first file people looking at. Especially not people looking
at the GitHub copy:
https://github.com/postgres/postgres
I understand that there is documentation, but
On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 at 17:31, Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 9/12/17 15:35, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> > On 10 September 2017 at 00:08, Jaime Casanova
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> During my own tests, though, i found some problems:
>
> Here is an updated patch that should a
> On 31 Jul 2018, at 14:23, Andrew Dunstan
> wrote:
>> I’m not sure it’s worth adding this much to the code just to be able to test
>> it, but it seemed like a good excercise to write to have something to reason
>> about.
>
> I think it probably is, buit I'm not very happy about the hack, so I
On 10/30/2018 06:14 AM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
On 30.10.18 04:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
That is not the first file people looking at. Especially not people
looking
at the GitHub copy:
https://github.com/postg
Hi
út 30. 10. 2018 v 7:52 odesílatel Amit Langote <
langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> napsal:
> Hi Mathias, Pavel,
>
> On 2018/08/17 12:26, Mathias Brossard wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 12:46 AM Pavel Stehule
> >>
> >> This is question - maybe we can support older partitioning based on only
>
On 30.10.18 11:49, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 10/30/2018 06:14 AM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
On 30.10.18 04:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum
wrote:
That is not the first file people looking at. Especially not people
looking
at t
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:04 PM Pavel Stehule wrote:
> út 30. 10. 2018 v 7:52 odesílatel Amit Langote
> napsal:
>> The patch to add the pg_partition_tree() function was just committed:
>>
>> Add pg_partition_tree to display information about partitions
>> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pos
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 7:11 PM Amit Langote
wrote:
>
> On 2018/10/30 4:48, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I wrote:
> >> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> >>> How about modifying SysScanDescData to have a memory context member,
> >>> which is created by systable_beginscan and destroyed by endscan?
> >
> >> I think i
On 10/05/2018 10:30 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> Hello.
>
> At Tue, 02 Oct 2018 16:06:51 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> wrote in
> <20181002.160651.117284090.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
>> It doesn't work nor even compile since I failed to include some
>> changes. Th
Hi,
We have migrated from Oracle to Postgres, there because of the replication
requirements we used UUID columns.
I did a POC(in postgres) with sequential UUID against Non sequential which
has shown lot of different in space utilization and index size. Sql server
has "newsequentialid" which gener
Hi Fabien,
> Ok, I understand that you mean that PQsendQueryParams uses an unamed
> query internally to separate parsing & execution, which seems indeed
> to be the case by looking at the libpq client-side code.
>
> However, if I'm not mistaken, the params version always sends and
> possibly repa
I don't think PostgreSQL has anything like that at the moment. It would
not be difficult to tweak the UUID generator to generate sequential (or
monotonic) values, the tricky part seems to be durability requirements.
One idea would be to simply store the value in (shared) memory, but that
would mea
Hi Fabien,
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 10:16:03AM +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> >New version 5 attached.
>
> Patch does not seem to apply anymore.
Thanks, rebased version attached.
> Moreover, ISTM that some discussions about behavioral changes are not fully
> settled.
>
> My current opinion is th
On 26 October 2018 at 11:40, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 9:30 AM David Rowley
> wrote:
>>
>> For a long time, we documented our table size, max columns, max column
>> width limits, etc. in https://www.postgresql.org/about/ , but that
>> information seems to have now been remov
Hi
I attached new version of this patch due merge conflict with pg_promote
function.
regards, Sergeidiff --git a/contrib/pg_standby/pg_standby.c b/contrib/pg_standby/pg_standby.c
index ee1fbd7..946239c 100644
--- a/contrib/pg_standby/pg_standby.c
+++ b/contrib/pg_standby/pg_standby.c
@@ -611,7 +
Thanks Tomas! I will try.
Regards,
Uday
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 6:43 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> I don't think PostgreSQL has anything like that at the moment. It would
> not be difficult to tweak the UUID generator to generate sequential (or
> monotonic) values, the tricky part seems to be durabi
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 09:24:01PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>> It is based on Mathias's patch. Although we can use
>> pg_partition_tree on PostgreSQL, we still should to support
>> PostgreSQL 10, 11 where this function is not available
>
> Ah, I forgot that psql will need to consider 10 and 11
On 30.10.18 09:04, Michael Banck wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 12:08:49AM +0100, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
The installation instructions (short version) are not consistent with the
"initdb" output. The first one still uses "postgres -D", even mentions
"check initdb output", but "initd
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 at 07:58, David Rowley
wrote:
> I've started working on something I've ended up calling "Super
> PathKeys". The idea here is to increase the likelihood of a Path with
> PathKeys being used for a purpose that requires a less strict sort
> order due to ordering being required
On 2018-10-30 09:35, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
[v5-0001-Generated-columns.patch ]
Hi,
I couldn't get this to apply to current head.
I tried:
patch --dry-run --ignore-whitespace -p 0 -F 5 <
v5-0001-Generated-columns.patch
and varied both -p and -F paramaters to no avail. Am I doing it wrong
Hi
> patch --dry-run --ignore-whitespace -p 0 -F 5 <
> v5-0001-Generated-columns.patch
>
> and varied both -p and -F paramaters to no avail. Am I doing it wrong?
I am able apply patch by command
patch -p1 < v5-0001-Generated-columns.patch
or by "git apply v5-0001-Generated-columns.patch", but only
Hi,
Thank you for looking at it .
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 7:19 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> 1) I think this deserves at least some regression tests. Plenty of tests
> already use COPY, but there's no coverage for the new piece. So let's
> add a new test suite, or maybe add a couple of tests into co
Heikki mentioned the rr recorder/debugger during his recent pgConf.EU
talk. It was recommended as a general debugging tool. I can now second
that recommendation. See https://rr-project.org for general background
information. It's a framework that extends gdb, so it's largely
compatible with existin
Hi
I applied this patch on top 2fe42baf7c1ad96b5f9eb898161e258315298351 commit and
found a bug while adding STORED column:
postgres=# create table test(i int);
CREATE TABLE
postgres=# insert into test values (1),(2);
INSERT 0 2
postgres=# alter table test add column gen_stored integer GENERATED
Axel Rau writes:
>> Am 30.10.2018 um 16:04 schrieb Tom Lane :
>> That is ... odd. Is it possible that you have cpu_operator_cost set
>> to zero, or some very tiny number?
> Yes:
> cpu_index_tuple_cost = 0.01
> cpu_operator_cost = 0
Ah, well that explains why the clauses are seen as being the s
I would be very interested in a extension which generated sequential uuids.
My entire db is key'd with uuids, and I have measured some index bloat
related specifically to random uuid generation.
Thanks for bringing this up.
On 08/10/18 07:02, Pantelis Theodosiou wrote:
>
> I like this:
>
>> "Postgres does not currently support CHECK constraints containing
> queries, therefore we recommend to avoid them."
>
> Perhaps adding:
>
>> CHECK constraints are currently meant to be used as *row constraints*
> only.
>> Use -
> Am 30.10.2018 um 16:29 schrieb Tom Lane :
>
> Axel Rau writes:
>>> Am 30.10.2018 um 16:04 schrieb Tom Lane :
>>> That is ... odd. Is it possible that you have cpu_operator_cost set
>>> to zero, or some very tiny number?
>
>> Yes:
>
>> cpu_index_tuple_cost = 0.01
>> cpu_operator_cost = 0
I
Greetings,
* Kyotaro HORIGUCHI (horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
> At Wed, 24 Oct 2018 14:31:37 +0900, Michael Paquier
> wrote in <20181024053137.gl1...@paquier.xyz>
> > On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 08:56:32PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > All of this pie-in-the-sky about what pluggable st
On 30/10/2018 15:19, Erik Rijkers wrote:
> On 2018-10-30 09:35, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
>> [v5-0001-Generated-columns.patch ]
>
> Hi,
>
> I couldn't get this to apply to current head.
>
> I tried:
>
> patch --dry-run --ignore-whitespace -p 0 -F 5 <
> v5-0001-Generated-columns.patch
>
> and
The product name, when used in the documentation, is "PostgreSQL" with
appropriate html elements surrounding it.
Some parts that look or read oddly to me:
"you may expect troubles"
Use - if possible - (commas, not hypens, are customary here)
"does not currently" - drop "currently", it doesn't and
Hallo Michael,
Patch v6 applies cleanly, compiles, local make check is ok.
My current opinion is that when offline some errors are not admissible,
whereas the same errors are admissible when online because they may be due
to the ongoing database processing, so the behavior should not be stric
On 2018-10-30 11:51:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:13:04PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I don't think this quite is the problem. ISTM the issue is rather that
> > StartupReplicationSlots() *needs* to check whether wal_level > minimal,
> > and doesn't. So you can cr
On 10/30/18 10:52 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2018-10-30 11:51:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:13:04PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
I don't think this quite is the problem. ISTM the issue is rather that
StartupReplicationSlots() *needs* to check whether wal_level > mi
On 2018-10-30 11:02:04 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 10/30/18 10:52 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2018-10-30 11:51:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:13:04PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > I don't think this quite is the problem. ISTM the issue is rather t
Hi hackers,
I am trying to improve my xdr_fdw (a foreign data wrapper that scan file
systems that keep big data compacted) to scan partitions in parallel.
I have set "IsForeignScanParallelSafe" to true and added path with
"add_partial_path". My "GetForeignPaths" looks like code below:
path = crea
On 10/30/18 11:59 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> * Kyotaro HORIGUCHI (horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
>>
>> So I'm +1 for the Michael's current patch as (I think) we can't
>> make visible or large changes.
>>
>> That said, I agree with Stephen's concern on the point we could
>> omit requried
[ splitting this off to a new thread ]
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2018-10-30 09:30:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> This is all some more fuel for the idea that we need a less messy
>> substitute for CaseTestExpr. As it happens, I was just fooling with
>> that yesterday, and hope to have something t
Hi,
On 2018-10-30 15:04:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2018-10-30 09:30:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> This is all some more fuel for the idea that we need a less messy
> >> substitute for CaseTestExpr. As it happens, I was just fooling with
> >> that yesterday, and hop
David Rowley writes:
> I've started working on something I've ended up calling "Super
> PathKeys". The idea here is to increase the likelihood of a Path with
> PathKeys being used for a purpose that requires a less strict sort
> order due to ordering being required from the return value of some
>
I came across a project for time based UUID ("tuid") a little while back:
https://github.com/tanglebones/pg_tuid
I haven't used in production but skimmed through the code a bit out of
technical curiosity. It handles some of the expected edge cases for
backwards clock drift and concurrent generatio
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2018-10-30 15:04:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The core idea that I'm working on is to invent a new node type
>> LambdaExpr that evaluates an expression and substitutes it as a
>> Param into another expression, notationally sort of like
>> LET($n := expression1 IN ... res
On 2018-10-30 16:23:37 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > How did you deal with the fact that we might extract subset of the LET()
> > into e.g. a RestrictionInfo (and then e.g. an IndexPath), but another
> > part would be e.g. evaluated as part of a qual?
>
> Well, a Lambda expre
Hi all,
There are some reason to don't have a similar function to return how many
levels deep into an event trigger like we have using "pg_trigger_depth"??
Maybe one called "pg_event_trigger_depth"??
Regards,
--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/
Postgre
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2018-10-30 16:23:37 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, a Lambda expression is not something that can be optimized away
>> (unless perhaps you can get rid of the need for any of its output Params)
>> so I don't see how any of its subexpressions would ever wind up split out
>
Hi,
On 2018-10-30 16:54:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2018-10-30 16:23:37 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Well, a Lambda expression is not something that can be optimized away
> >> (unless perhaps you can get rid of the need for any of its output Params)
> >> so I don't see
On 31 October 2018 at 08:52, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Rowley writes:
>> I've started working on something I've ended up calling "Super
>> PathKeys". The idea here is to increase the likelihood of a Path with
>> PathKeys being used for a purpose that requires a less strict sort
>> order due to ord
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 1:44 AM David Rowley
wrote:
>
> On 28 October 2018 at 03:49, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > I just had a look at your patch. I see that you implemented only a
> > subset of the possible optimizations (only the case for range
> > partitionoing without subpartitions). This has
> On 11 Oct 2018, at 03:29, Michael Paquier wrote:
Hi!,
Thanks for reviewing this patch, and sorry for having been slow lately.
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 02:20:53PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 9 Oct 2018, at 07:38, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> In order to make a test with non-ASCII ch
On 31 October 2018 at 12:24, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 1:44 AM David Rowley
> wrote:
>>
>> On 28 October 2018 at 03:49, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>> > I just had a look at your patch. I see that you implemented only a
>> > subset of the possible optimizations (only the case fo
Hi Nikhil,
Any progress on the issues discussed in the last couple of messages?
That is:
1) removing of the sleep() from tests
2) changes to systable_getnext() wrt. TransactionIdIsInProgress()
3) adding asserts / checks to codepaths not going through systable_*
4) (not) adding this as a per-pl
Hi,
On 10/30/2018 11:41 PM, David Rowley wrote:
> On 31 October 2018 at 08:52, Tom Lane wrote:
>> David Rowley writes:
>>> I've started working on something I've ended up calling "Super
>>> PathKeys". The idea here is to increase the likelihood of a Path with
>>> PathKeys being used for a purpo
On 2018/10/30 21:27, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 7:11 PM Amit Langote
>> I've tried to fix that with the attached patches.
>>
>> 0001 adds the ability for the callers of index_beginscan to specify a
>> memory context. index_beginscan_internals switches to that context before
>> c
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 10:52:54AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-10-30 11:51:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Er... At the same time, shouldn't RestoreSlotFromDisk() *not* use PANIC
>> if more slots are found in pg_replslot than max_replication_slots can
>> handle. A FATAL is fine at s
On 2018/10/30 20:03, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> út 30. 10. 2018 v 7:52 odesílatel Amit Langote <
> langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> napsal:
>> Could one of you please revise the patch to use that function to produce
>> the output of \dP+?
>>
>
> here it is.
>
> It is based on Mathias's patch. Although
On 31 October 2018 at 14:23, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> The other thing likely affecting this is locale / collation. Probably
> not for date_trunc, but certainly for things like substr()/trim(),
> mentioned by Simon upthread.
>
> In some languages the rules are pretty complex, and there's no chance
> i
Hi,
On 2018/10/31 3:25, Sanyo Moura wrote:
> Hi hackers,
>
> I am trying to improve my xdr_fdw (a foreign data wrapper that scan file
> systems that keep big data compacted) to scan partitions in parallel.
>
> But when I execute or analyze I get an error:
>
> EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT * FROM precio
st 31. 10. 2018 v 3:27 odesílatel Amit Langote <
langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> napsal:
> On 2018/10/30 20:03, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > út 30. 10. 2018 v 7:52 odesílatel Amit Langote <
> > langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> napsal:
> >> Could one of you please revise the patch to use that function to
On 2018/10/31 15:30, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> st 31. 10. 2018 v 3:27 odesílatel Amit Langote <
> langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> napsal:
>> +appendPQExpBufferStr(&buf, "\nWHERE c.relkind IN ('p')\n");
>>
>> I wonder if we should list partitioned indexes ('I') as well, because
>> their size informa
On 31 October 2018 at 13:05, David Rowley wrote:
>>> On 28 October 2018 at 03:49, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>> I've registered as a reviewer. I still didn't have a deep look at
>> the patch yet, but thanks a lot for working on it!
>
> Thanks for signing up to review. I need to send another revisio
69 matches
Mail list logo
