Hello,
It seems you are not the first to be interested in such feature.
There was a similar extension used in "incremental view maintenance"
testing:
https://github.com/nuko-yokohama/pg_fraction
didn't tryed it myself.
Regards
PAscal
--
Sent from: https://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQ
On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 05:25:43PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 09:22:20PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
At Thu, 6 Feb 2020 11:57:07 +0100, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote
in
> > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 10:24:50AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > At Wed, 5
Greetings,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Julien Rouhaud writes:
> >>> Probably NO, if only because you'd need additional privileges
> >>> to use these anyway:
> >>> pg_stat_statements
>
> > But the additional privileges are global, so assuming the extension
> > has been properly setup
Hi,
I've done some testing and benchmarking of the v31 patch, looking for
regressions, costing issues etc. Essentially, I've ran a bunch of SELECT
DISTINCT queries on data sets of various size, number of distinct values
etc. The results are fairly large, so I've uploaded them to github
https
OK,
A couple more comments based on quick review of the patch, particularly
the part related to planning:
1) create_skipscan_unique_path has one assert commented out. Either it's
something we want to enforce, or we should remove it.
/*Assert(distinctPrefixKeys <= list_length(pathnode->path.pa
Forking this thread
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20181227132417.xe3oagawina7775b%40alvherre.pgsql
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 01:09:39PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> ALTER TABLE already has a lot of logic that is oriented towards being
> able to do multiple things at the same time. If we adde
On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 02:48:54PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 03:24, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2020-02-07 20:44:31 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Yeah I'm not going to use pgcrypto for transparent data encryption.
> The KMS patch includes the new basic infrastructu
Hi,
I wonder if this is meant to support external KMS systems/services like
Vault (from HashiCorp) or CloudHSM (from AWS) or a hardware HSM. AFAICS
the current implementation does not allow storing keys in such external
systems, right? But it seems kinda reasonable to want to do that, when
alread
> On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 03:22:17PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> I've done some testing and benchmarking of the v31 patch, looking for
> regressions, costing issues etc. Essentially, I've ran a bunch of SELECT
> DISTINCT queries on data sets of various size, number of distinct values
> etc. The
Hi,
On February 8, 2020 7:08:26 AM PST, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 02:48:54PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 03:24, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 2020-02-07 20:44:31 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> > Yeah I'm not going to use pgcrypto fo
On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 07:47:24AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On February 8, 2020 7:08:26 AM PST, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 02:48:54PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 03:24, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2020-02-07 20:44:31 +0900, Masahiko Sawada
Justin Pryzby writes:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 10:24:17AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I think it would be valuable to have those ALTER TABLE variants that rewrite
>> the table do so using the cluster order, if there is one, instead of the heap
>> order, which is what it does today.
> That's
On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 04:24:40PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 03:22:17PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
I've done some testing and benchmarking of the v31 patch, looking for
regressions, costing issues etc. Essentially, I've ran a bunch of SELECT
DISTINCT queries on data set
Tomas Vondra writes:
> On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 07:47:24AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On February 8, 2020 7:08:26 AM PST, Tomas Vondra
>> wrote:
I don't think it's very likely we'll ever merge any openssl code into
our repository, e.g. because of licensing. But we already have AES
>
Stephen Frost writes:
> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> Our previous
>> discussions about what privilege level is needed to look at
>> pg_stat_statements info were all made against a background assumption
>> that you needed some extra privilege to set up the view in the first
>> place.
On Sat, Feb 8, 2020 at 10:24 AM Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 03:22:17PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > So in this case the skip scan is ~15x slower than the usual plan (index
> > only scan + unique). The reason why this happens is pretty simple - to
> >
On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 01:53, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 07:47:24AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >On February 8, 2020 7:08:26 AM PST, Tomas Vondra
> > wrote:
> >>On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 02:48:54PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >>>On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 03:24, Andr
On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 1:56 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> I agree that teaching opclasses to say whether this is okay is a
> reasonable approach.
I've begun working on this, with help from Anastasia.
My working assumption is that I only need to care about
opclass-declared input data types (pg_opclass.op
On Sat, Feb 8, 2020 at 12:10 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2020-02-04 10:15:01 +0530, Kuntal Ghosh wrote:
> > I performed the same test in pg11 and reproduced the issue on the
> > commit prior to a4ccc1cef5a04 (Generational memory allocator).
> >
> > ulimit -s 1024
> > ulimit -v 30
>
On Sat, Feb 8, 2020 at 8:05 AM Ranier Vilela wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I am migrating my applications that use postgres client from msvc 2010
> (32bits) to msvc 2019 (32 bits).
> Compilation using msvc 2019 (64 bits), works very well.
> But the build using msvc 2019 (32 bit) is not working.
> The 32-bit P
20 matches
Mail list logo
