Hello Joel,
My 0.02€:
If such a feature gets considered, I'm not sure I'd like to actually edit
pg configuration file to change the message.
For the ALTER SYSTEM case, the value would be written to postgresql.auto.conf,
and that file we shouldn't edit manually anyway, right?
Sure. I meant
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021, at 09:16, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> If other cases are indeed pointers. For pgbench, all direct "if (xxx &&"
> cases are simple booleans or integers, pointers seem to have "!= NULL".
> While looking quickly at the grep output, ISTM that most obvious pointers
> have "!= NULL" an
Hi Alvaro,
On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 12:01 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Apr-02, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 10:21 PM Amit Langote
> > wrote:
> > > Updated patches attached. Sorry about the delay.
> >
> > Rebased over the recent DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY work.
> > A
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 11:55 PM Zhihong Yu wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> + skip = !ExecLockTableTuple(erm->relation, &tid, markSlot,
> + estate->es_snapshot, estate->es_output_cid,
> + lockmode, erm->waitPolicy, &epq_needed);
> + i
Hi
so 13. 3. 2021 v 7:01 odesílatel Pavel Stehule
napsal:
> Hi
>
> fresh rebase
>
only rebase
Regards
Pavel
>
> Pavel
>
schema-variables-20210404.patch.gz
Description: application/gzip
On 03.04.21 21:01, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On 2021-Apr-03, Jürgen Purtz wrote:
On 03.04.21 15:39, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Yes, there is. AFAICS Heikki committed a small wordsmithing patch --
not the large patch with the additional chapter.
What can i do to move the matter forward?
Please post a
Hello,
just a quick patch for a single-letter typo in a comment
in src/backend/commands/collationcmds.c
...
* set of language+region combinations, whereas the latter only returns
-* language+region combinations of they are distinct from the language's
+* language+region combinations
It reminded me of this thread, but nothing ever came of it.
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200328223052.GK20103%40telsasoft.com
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/87pmzaq4gx.fsf%40news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Andrew:
Can you chime in which direction to go ?
Once consensus is reached, I can provide a new patch, if needed.
Cheers
On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 9:54 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 10:13:26AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > +1 to remove it and the patch LGTM.
>
> Indeed
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 01:33:28PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 03:27:11PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > OK, I am happy with your design decisions, thanks.
>
> Thanks! While double checking I noticed that I failed to remove a (now)
> useless include of pgstat.h in
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 10:20 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Langote writes:
> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 3:12 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Amit Langote writes:
> > [ v14-0002-Initialize-result-relation-information-lazily.patch ]
> >> Needs YA rebase over 86dc90056.
>
> > Done.
>
> I spent some time looking
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 12:48 PM Kazutaka Onishi wrote:
>
> v9 has also typo because I haven't checked about doc... sorry.
I think v9 has some changes not related to the foreign table truncate
feature. If yes, please remove those changes and provide a proper
patch.
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/p
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 6:13 PM wrote:
> Status updated to RfC in the commitfest app.
Patch fails to apply per cfbot, so rebased.
--
Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
v3-0001-Allow-batching-of-inserts-during-cross-partition-.patch
Description: Binary data
On 4/3/21 10:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Gierth writes:
>> I just got through diagnosing a SEGV crash with someone on IRC, and the
>> cause turned out to be exactly this - a table had (for some reason we
>> could not determine within the available resources) lost its pg_attrdef
>> record for
On 4/4/21 9:39 AM, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> Andrew:
> Can you chime in which direction to go ?
>
> Once consensus is reached, I can provide a new patch, if needed.
>
> Cheers
>
>
[ please don't top-post ]
I don't think we need a new patch. We'll clean this up one way or
another as part of the clean
Oops... sorry.
I haven't merged my working git branch with remote master branch.
Please check this v11.
2021年4月4日(日) 23:56 Bharath Rupireddy :
>
> On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 12:48 PM Kazutaka Onishi wrote:
> >
> > v9 has also typo because I haven't checked about doc... sorry.
>
> I think v9 has some
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 12:00 PM Kazutaka Onishi wrote:
> > 5) Can't we use do_sql_command function after making it non static? We
> > could go extra mile, that is we could make do_sql_command little more
> > generic by passing some enum for each of PQsendQuery,
> > PQsendQueryParams, PQsendQueryPr
On 4/4/21 9:19 AM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> It reminded me of this thread, but nothing ever came of it.
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200328223052.GK20103%40telsasoft.com
>
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/87pmzaq4gx.fsf%40news-spur.riddles.org.uk
>
>
I don't recall seeing thi
Hello,
in src/backend/utils/adt/formatting.c, in icu_convert_case() I see:
if (status == U_BUFFER_OVERFLOW_ERROR)
{
/* try again with adjusted length */
pfree(*buff_dest);
*buff_dest = palloc(len_dest * sizeof(**buff_dest));
...
Is there any reason why thi
Andrew:
Can you let me know which thread you were referring to?
I navigated the thread mentioned in your commit. It has been more than 3
years since the last response:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA8%3DA7-OPsGeazXxiojQNMus51odNZVn8EVNSoWZ2y9yRL%2BBvQ%40mail.gmail.com
Can you let me kn
I found the recent thread under 'ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN fast default' which
hasn't appeared in the message chain yet.
I will watch that thread.
Cheers
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 8:47 AM Zhihong Yu wrote:
> Andrew:
> Can you let me know which thread you were referring to?
>
> I navigated the thre
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 4/3/21 10:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Looking around at the other touches of AttrDefault.adbin in the backend
>> (of which there are not that many), some of them are prepared for it to be
>> NULL and some are not. I don't immediately have a strong opinion whether
>> that
Zhihong Yu writes:
> Andrew:
> Can you let me know which thread you were referring to?
I assume he meant
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/31e2e921-7002-4c27-59f5-51f08404c858%402ndQuadrant.com
whih was last added to just moments ago.
regards, tom lane
Hi,
In the description:
cross-partition update of partitioned tables can't use batching
because ExecInitRoutingInfo() which initializes the insert target
'which' should be dropped since 'because' should start a sentence.
+-- Check that batched inserts also works for inserts made during
inserts
Anton Voloshin writes:
> in src/backend/utils/adt/formatting.c, in icu_convert_case() I see:
> if (status == U_BUFFER_OVERFLOW_ERROR)
> {
> /* try again with adjusted length */
> pfree(*buff_dest);
> *buff_dest = palloc(len_dest * sizeof(**buff_dest));
>
Amit Langote writes:
> On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 10:20 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> In some desultory performance testing here, it seemed like a
>> significant part of the cost is ExecOpenIndices, and I don't see
>> a reason offhand why we could not delay/skip that. I also concur
>> with delaying construc
Thank you for checking v11!
I've updated it and attached v12.
> I usually follow these steps:
> 1) write code 2) git diff --check (will give if there are any white
> space or indentation errors) 3) git add -u 4) git commit (will enter a
> commit message) 5) git format-patch -1 <> -v
> <> 6) to app
On 4/4/21 12:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
>> On 4/3/21 10:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Looking around at the other touches of AttrDefault.adbin in the backend
>>> (of which there are not that many), some of them are prepared for it to be
>>> NULL and some are not. I don't immed
On 2021-Apr-04, Jürgen Purtz wrote:
> The small patch 'arch-dev.sgml.20210121.diff' contains only some clearing up
> concerning the used terminology and its alignments with the glossary. The
> patch was rejected by Heikki.
This comment is not helpful, because it's not obvious where would I find
t
Hi,
Thanks for the cleanup.
if (found != ncheck)
elog(ERROR, "%d constraint record(s) missing for rel %s",
ncheck - found, RelationGetRelationName(relation));
Since there is check on found being smaller than ncheck inside the loop,
the if condition can be written as:
On 4/4/21 7:25 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> ...
> Changing to using month of 30 days on the formula fixed it.
>
I've pushed fixes for all the bugs reported in this thread so far
(mostly distance calculations, ...), and one bug (swapped operator
parameters in one place) I discovered while working o
BTW, for the inet data type, I considered simply calling the "minus"
function, but that does not work because of this strange behavior:
int4=# select '10.1.1.102/32'::inet > '10.1.1.142/24'::inet;
?column?
--
t
(1 row)
int4=# select '10.1.1.102/32'::inet - '10.1.1.142/24'::inet;
?colu
On 04.04.2021 19:20, Tom Lane wrote:
repalloc is likely to be more expensive, since it implies copying
data which isn't helpful here. I think this code is fine as-is.
Oh, you are right, thanks. I did not think properly about copying in
repalloc.
--
Anton Voloshin
Postgres Professional: http
On 4/4/21 11:21 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 4/4/21 9:19 AM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> It reminded me of this thread, but nothing ever came of it.
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200328223052.GK20103%40telsasoft.com
>>
>>
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/87pmzaq4gx.fsf%40news-s
On Fri, 2 Apr 2021 at 06:38, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> >> r = (uint64) (pg_erand48(random_state.xseed) * size);
> >>
> >> I do not understand why the random values are multiplied by anything in
> >> the first place…
> >
> > These are just random integers in the range [0,mask] and [0,size-1],
> >
I wrote:
> I propose changing things so that
> (B) We enforce that leafType agrees with the opclass opckeytype,
> ensuring the index tupdesc can be used for leaf tuples.
After looking at PostGIS I realized that a hard restriction of this
sort won't fly, because it'd make upgrades impossible for th
Fabien COELHO writes:
>>> The actual source looks pretty straightforward. I'm wondering whether pg
>>> style would suggest to write motd != NULL instead of just motd.
>>
>> That's what I had originally, but when reviewing my code verifying code
>> style,
>> I noticed the other case it more commo
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 02:18:34PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 4/4/21 11:21 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > On 4/4/21 9:19 AM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> >> It reminded me of this thread, but nothing ever came of it.
> >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200328223052.GK20103%40telsasoft.com
On 4/3/21 9:42 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Thanks for the quick rework. I like this design much better and I think
> this is pretty close to committable. Here's a rebased copy with some
> small cleanups (most notably, avoid calling pgstat_propagate_changes
> when the partition doesn't have a tabs
On 03/04/2021 06:14, Magzum Assanbayev wrote:
Dear Sirs,
Note that there are some females that hack pg!
My name is Magzum Assanbayev, I am a Master Student at KIMEP
University in Kazakhstan, expected to graduate in Spring 2022.
Having made some research into your organization I have dedu
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 02:24:59PM -0700, Dan Lynch wrote:
> Does anyone know details of, or where to find more information about the
> implications of the optimizer on the quals/checks for the policies being
> functions vs inline?
Roughly, the PostgreSQL optimizer treats LANGUAGE SQL functions li
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 9:46 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> Okay, applied and back-patched down to 12 then.
Thank you both. Unfortunately and surprisingly, the test still fails
(perhaps even rarer, once in several hundred runs) under
multimaster. After scratching the head for some more time, it see
On 2021-Apr-04, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> 1) I still don't understand why inheritance and declarative partitioning
> are treated differently. Seems unnecessary nad surprising, but maybe
> there's a good reason?
I suppose the rationale is that for inheritance we have always done it
that way -- similar
On 4/4/21 10:05 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Apr-04, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>> 1) I still don't understand why inheritance and declarative partitioning
>> are treated differently. Seems unnecessary nad surprising, but maybe
>> there's a good reason?
>
> I suppose the rationale is that fo
On 4/9/20 4:39 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 02:36:26PM -0400, Tim Bishop wrote:
>> SELECT attrelid::regclass, * FROM pg_attribute WHERE atthasmissing;
>> -[ RECORD 1 ]-+-
>> attrelid | download
>> attrelid | 22749
>> attname | filetype
> But that tabl
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 09:37:44AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 12:02:45PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Okay. So I have looked at that stuff in details, and after fixing
> > all the issues reported upthread in the code, docs and tests I am
> > finishing with the att
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 4/4/21 12:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I made CheckConstraintFetch likewise not install its array until
>> it's done. I notice that it is throwing elog(ERROR) not WARNING
>> for the equivalent cases of not finding the right number of
>> entries. I wonder if we ought to b
On 2021-Apr-04, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> In fact, one of the first posts in this threads links to this:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4823.1262132964%40sss.pgh.pa.us
>
> i.e. Tom actually proposed doing something like this back in 2009, so
> presumably he though it's desirable back then
> On Apr 1, 2021, at 1:08 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>
>
> - There are a total of two (2) calls in the current source code to
> palloc0fast, and hundreds of calls to palloc0. So I think you should
> forget about using the fast variant and just do what almost every
> other caller does.
Done.
>
On 4/4/21 9:08 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 4/3/21 9:42 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Thanks for the quick rework. I like this design much better and I think
>> this is pretty close to committable. Here's a rebased copy with some
>> small cleanups (most notably, avoid calling pgstat_propagate_c
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:59:15AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Please find attached a patch to tighten a bit all that. The errors
> produced by OpenSSL down to 1.0.1 are the same. I have noticed one
> extra place where we just check for a FATAL, where the trust
> authentication failed after a
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 03:49:35PM +0300, Anton Voloshin wrote:
> just a quick patch for a single-letter typo in a comment
> in src/backend/commands/collationcmds.c
> ...
Thanks, fixed. This came from 51e225d.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 2021-04-01 19:13, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/03/31 15:16, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
+ The memory contexts will be logged based on the log configuration
set. For example:
How do you think?
How about "The memory contexts will be logged in the server log" ?
I think "server log" doesn't suggest
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 7:56 PM torikoshia
wrote:
> On 2021-04-01 19:13, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > On 2021/03/31 15:16, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> >>> + The memory contexts will be logged based on the log configuration
> >>> set. For example:
> >>>
> >>> How do you think?
> >>
> >> How about "The mem
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 11:37 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> Attaching v11 patch that removed the wait boolean flag in the
> pg_terminate_backend and timeout 0 indicates "no wait", negative value
> "errors out", positive value "waits for those many milliseconds". Also
> addressed other review comme
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 9:25 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> Here's the v3 patch rebased on the latest master.
Here's the v4 patch reabsed on the latest master, please review it further.
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
v4-0001-Improve-error-message-whil
On 2021/04/04 11:58, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com wrote:
IMO it's better to comment why this server restart is necessary.
As far as I understand correctly, this is necessary to ensure the WAL file
containing the record about the change of wal_level (to minimal) is archived,
so that the subsequen
On 2021/04/05 12:20, Zhihong Yu wrote:
+ * This is just a warning so a loop-through-resultset will not abort
+ * if one backend logged its memory contexts during the run.
The pid given by arg 0 is not a PostgreSQL server process. Which other backend
could it be ?
This is the
On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 3:09 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 10:16 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are memset-ting the special space page that's already set to zeros
> > by PageInit in BloomInitPage, GinInitPage and SpGistInitPage. We have
> > already removed t
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:21 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> Attaching the v4 patch set. Please review it further.
Attaching v5 patch set after rebasing onto the latest master. Please
review it further.
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From 6518212583e24
At Fri, 2 Apr 2021 11:51:26 +0200, Pavel Stehule
wrote in
> with this patch, the formatting is correct
I think the hardest point of this issue is that we don't have a
reasonable authoritative source that determines character width. And
that the presentation is heavily dependent on environment.
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 09:30:25PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Slight rebase for this one to take care of the updates with the SSL
> error messages.
I have been looking again at that and applied it as c50624cd after
some slight modifications. Attached is the main, refactored, patch
that plugs
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 10:23 PM Kazutaka Onishi wrote:
> Sure. I've replaced with the test command "SELECT * FROM ..." to
> "SELECT COUNT(*) FROM ..."
> However, for example, the "id" column is used to check after running
> TRUNCATE with ONLY clause to the inherited table.
> Thus, I use "sum(id)"
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021, at 20:42, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Fabien COELHO mailto:coelho%40cri.ensmp.fr>> writes:
>
> >>> The actual source looks pretty straightforward. I'm wondering whether pg
> >>> style would suggest to write motd != NULL instead of just motd.
> >>
> >> That's what I had o
Hi,
When AV worker items where introduced 4 years ago, i was suggested that
it could be used for other things like cleaning the pending list of GIN
index when it reaches gin_pending_list_limit instead of making user
visible operation pay the price.
That never happened though. So, here is a little
65 matches
Mail list logo
