On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 11:55 PM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 1:49 PM David G. Johnston
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 8:35 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I really dislike the user experience this provides, and given it is
> new in v15 (and right now this tabl
On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 06:34:32PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-01-23 18:10:07 -0800, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 05:40:54PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > Test::more's description: "If it's something the programmer hasn't done
> > > yet,
> > > use TODO. This is for a
Hi,
On 2022-01-23 23:44:11 -0800, samay sharma wrote:
> I also see many more error messages in config.log when I grep for error.
> So, I've attached the entire file in case any other output is useful.
The important lines seem to be:
configure:4591: gcc -c -g -O2 conftest.c >&5
In file included
On 23.01.22 17:29, Tom Lane wrote:
While chasing something else, I was surprised to learn that the
Autoconf project has started to make releases again. There are
2.70 (2020-12-08) and 2.71 (2021-01-28) versions available at
https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/autoconf/
I have patches ready for this at
ht
Hi,
On 2022-01-23 11:29:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Right now, I'm not sure we care; there seems to be more
> enthusiasm for switching to meson. But if that idea falls
> through, we should update to a newer autoconf release.
Depending on the number of portability fixes in those releases the
back
At Sat, 22 Jan 2022 12:56:14 +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote
in
> I've took a look into the patch. The idea seems reasonable to me:
> clearing\evicting old buffer and placing new one seem to be
> different units of work, there is no need to couple both partition
> locks together. And the claimed per
Thanks for all the patches!
Here are my review comments for v69-0001
~~~
1. src/backend/executor/execReplication.c CheckCmdReplicaIdentity
call to RelationBuildPublicationDesc
+ /*
+ * It is only safe to execute UPDATE/DELETE when all columns, referenced in
+ * the row filters from publication
Rebased patch set
On 13.01.22 14:42, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Another modest update, because of the copyright year update preventing
the previous patches from applying cleanly.
I also did a bit of work on the ecpg scanner so that it also handles
some errors on par with the main scanner.
Ther
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 1:19 PM Greg Nancarrow wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 5:09 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > But that is not what I am seeing in Logs with a test case where the
> > row filter column has NULL values. Could you please try that see what
> > is printed in LOG?
> >
> > You can cha
On 20.01.22 08:37, tanghy.f...@fujitsu.com wrote:
1. The downcasing logic in the patch bears very little resemblance
to the backend's actual downcasing logic, which can be found in
src/backend/parser/scansup.c's downcase_identifier(). Notably,
the patch's restriction to only convert all-ASCII st
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 1:30 PM David G. Johnston
wrote:
>
> That said, at present my two dislikes:
>
> 1) ALTER SYSTEM SKIP accepts any xid value (I need to consider further the
> timing of when this resets to zero)
>
I think this is required for future extension of this feature wherein
I think
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 5:00 PM David G. Johnston
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 11:55 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>>
> >Similarly, the same is true
> >for clearing subskipxid.
>
> I'm confused - pg_subscription is a catalog, not a stat view. Why is it
> affected?
Sorry, I mistook last_er
Hi,
I am using Dynamic shared memory areas(DSA) to manage some variable
length shared memory, I've found that in some cases allocation fails even
though there are enough contiguous pages.
The steps to reproduce are as follows:
1. create a dsa area with a 1MB DSM segment
2. set its size limit to 1
>
> d2ddfa681db27a138acb63c8defa8cc6fa588922 removed global variables
> ReadRecPtr and EndRecPtr. This is rebased version that reads the LSNs
> directly from xlogreader instead of the removed global variables.
>
Hi, hackers!
I've checked the latest version of a patch. It applies cleanly, check-wo
Hi,
The new version is attached.
Tom Lane wrote:
> I tried to read 0001 but really couldn't make sense of the logic
> at all, because it's seriously underdocumented. At minimum you
> need an API spec comment for canonicalize_path_sub, explaining
> what it's supposed to do and why.
I have adde
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 11:21:12AM +, wangsh.f...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I concur with the upthread comments that there's little chance
>>> we'll commit 0003 as-is; the code-to-benefit ratio is too high.
>>> Instead, you might consider adding test_canonicalize_path in
>>> src
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 9:28 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 06:14:55PM +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > Right
>
> Amit, are you planning to look more at this patch? It has been a
> couple of months since the last update, and this is still a bug as far
> as I understand.
>
> FW
Hi!
> From: Zhihong Yu
> Subject: Re: missing indexes in indexlist with partitioned tables
>
> Hi,
>
> - if (indexRelation->rd_rel->relkind == RELKIND_PARTITIONED_INDEX)
> + if (inhparent && (!index->indisunique ||
> indexRelation->rd_rel->relkind != RELKIND_PARTITIONED_INDEX
В Вс, 23/01/2022 в 14:56 +0300, Yura Sokolov пишет:
> В Чт, 20/01/2022 в 09:32 +1300, David Rowley пишет:
> > On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 at 00:14, Yura Sokolov wrote:
> > > Suggested quick (and valid) fix in the patch attached:
> > > - If Append has single child, then copy its parallel awareness.
> >
>
On 22.01.22 03:54, Amit Kapila wrote:
Won't we already do that for Alter Subscription command which means
nothing special needs to be done for this? However, it seems to me
that the idea we are trying to follow here is that as this option can
lead to data inconsistency, it is good to allow only s
On 22.01.22 10:41, Amit Kapila wrote:
Additionally, the description for pg_stat_subscription_workers should describe what
happens once the transaction represented by last_error_xid has either been successfully
processed or skipped. Does this "last error" stick around until another error
happe
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> I have patches ready for this at
> https://github.com/petere/postgresql/tree/autoconf-updates.
> My thinking was to wait until Autoconf 2.71 has trickled down into the
> OS versions that developers are likely to use.
I find that kind of irrelevant, because we expect p
Hi,
> Here is a more detailed review.
Thanks for the feedback, I have incorporated the suggestions
and updated a new version of the patch (v3-0001).
The required documentation changes are also incorporated in
updated patch (v3-0001).
> Interesting approach. This unfortunately has the effect of
Julien Rouhaud writes:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 12:41:49PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Honestly, I am not sure that this worth bothering about. This comes
>> down to a balance between the code complexity and the likelihood of a
>> failure, and the odds are not in favor of the later IMO. No
On Monday, January 24, 2022, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 1:30 PM David G. Johnston
> wrote:
> >
> > That said, at present my two dislikes:
> >
> > 1) ALTER SYSTEM SKIP accepts any xid value (I need to consider further
> the timing of when this resets to zero)
> >
>
> I think thi
Rebased patch to resolve some merge conflicts
On 29.12.21 12:08, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 12.10.21 15:52, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I haven't been through the whole thing, but I did notice this: the
comment stripping code looks rather fragile. I think it would blow up if
there were a continuation
On 13.01.22 19:36, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I wonder if the logic for setting BTScanInsertData.anynullkeys inside
_bt_mkscankey() is the place to put your test for
rel->rd_index->indnullsnotdistinct -- not inside _bt_doinsert(). That
would probably necessitate renaming anynullkeys, but that's okay.
On 24.01.22 15:14, Tom Lane wrote:
Do these versions fix any bugs that affect us (i.e., that we've
not already created workarounds for)?
The only thing that could be of interest is that the workaround we are
carrying in config/check_decls.m4 was originally upstreamed by Noah, but
was then lat
On 24.01.22 04:23, Justin Pryzby wrote:
There are many Makefile rules like
foo: bar
./tool $< > $@
If the rule is interrupted (due to ^C or ENOSPC), foo can be 0 bytes or
partially written, but won't be rebuilt until someone runs distclean or debugs
it and removes the individual file, a
On 2022/01/24 16:35, torikoshia wrote:
On 2022-01-14 19:48, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 11:50 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 4:07 PM vignesh C wrote:
> The Attached v15 patch has the fixes for the same.
Thanks. The v15 patch LGTM and the cf bot i
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 04:25:04PM -0800, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 1:32 PM Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Besides that the new patch version contains some cleaning up and
> > addresses commentaries around leaf page pinning from [1]. The idea
> > behind the ser
Hi, Andrey!
I've checked the 5th version of the patch and there are some remarks.
>I've created a new view named pg_stat_statements_aux. But for now both
>views are using the same function pg_stat_statements which returns all
>fields. It seems reasonable to me - if sampling solution will need al
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 4:59 AM Dongming Liu wrote:
> Maybe we can use one of the following methods to fix it:
> 1. re-bin segment to suitable segment index when called dsa_free
> 2. get_best_segment search all bins
(2) is definitely the wrong idea. The comments say:
/*
* What is the lowest bin
On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 12:47:35PM +0530, Shruthi Gowda wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 12:27 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Robert Haas writes:
> > > It seems to me that what this comment is saying is that OIDs in the
> > > second and third categories are doled out by counters. Therefore, we
> > >
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 12:39:30PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 10:59:40AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 07:51:37PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > Neat idea. That would work fine for my case. So I am fine to stick
> > > with this suggestio
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 10:59:40AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 07:51:37PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Neat idea. That would work fine for my case. So I am fine to stick
> > with this suggestion.
>
> I have been looking at this idea, and the result is quite nice
I'm renaming this thread for better visibility, since buffers is a small,
optional part of the patches I sent.
I made a CF entry here.
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/36/3409/
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 06:58:20PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 01:09:54PM -0600, Justin Pryzb
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 8:51 AM Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 04:25:04PM -0800, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 1:32 PM Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > Besides that the new patch version contains some cleaning up and
> >
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 3:41 AM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> Rebased patch set
What if someone finds this new behavior too permissive?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022, at 12:58 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> FWIW, I find the API changes of HeapDetermineModifiedColumns() and
> ExtractReplicaIdentity() a bit grotty. Shouldn't we try to flatten
> the old tuple instead? There are things like
> toast_flatten_tuple_to_datum() for this purpose if a
On 1/23/22 22:52, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 4:09 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> The most common issues we get are around this issue of virtualized paths
>> in the TAP tests. If people followed the rule I suggested upthread, 99%
>> of those problems would go away.
> Well, that mak
On 1/22/22 16:20, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> Subject: [PATCH v4 1/5] Add tests of the CREATEROLE attribute.
> No particular issue with this one.
>
>
I'm going to commit this piece forthwith so we get it out of the way.
That will presumably make the cfbot unhappy until Mark submits a new
patch set.
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 2:01 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Well if we can get Andres' suggestion to work all this might go away,
> which would keep everyone happy, especially me. You're right that I was
> a little careless upthread. Mea culpa. Meanwhile I am committing a
> minimal one line fix.
I in
On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 2:20 AM Shruthi Gowda wrote:
> Agree. In the latest patch, the template0 and postgres OIDs are fixed
> to unused manually assigned OIDs 4 and 5 respectively. These OIDs are
> no more listed as unused OIDs.
Thanks. Committed with a few more cosmetic changes.
--
Robert Haa
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 11:41:17AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 12:39:30PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 10:59:40AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 07:51:37PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > > Neat idea. That would
Hi,
On 2022-01-24 08:41:39 -0800, samay sharma wrote:
> I've also attached the test.i file.
The problem is that you got a stdint.h in /usr/local/include/. And that
stdint.h doesn't match the system one. Which explains why there's a
compilation failure and also explains why others don't see this p
Hi,
On 2022-01-14 17:51:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> FWIW, I'm just fine with reverting, particularly in the back branches.
> It seems clear that this dank corner of Windows contains even more
> creepy-crawlies than we thought.
Seems we should revert now-ish? There's a minor release coming up and
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 1:20 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> It seems to me this problem exists from the time we introduced
> wal_level = logical in the commit e55704d8b2 [1], or another
> possibility is that logical replication commit didn't consider
> something to make it work. Andres, Robert, Petr, can
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 9:30 AM Dipesh Pandit wrote:
> v13 patch does not apply on the latest head, it requires a rebase. I have
> applied
> it on commit dc43fc9b3aa3e0fa9c84faddad6d301813580f88 to validate gzip
> decompression patches.
It only needed trivial rebasing; I have committed it after
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 2:27 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> I really hate committing stuff that turns out to be broken. It's such
> a fire drill when the build farm turns red.
And there's a good chance it's about to break again, because I just
committed the next patch in the series which, shockingly, al
On 21.01.22 01:05, Greg Nancarrow wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 12:55 PM Greg Nancarrow wrote:
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:56 AM Tom Lane wrote:
Removing this is not good:
if (relation->rd_pubactions)
- {
pfree(relation->rd_pubactions);
- rel
On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 4:20 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
> Whoah, really? No, I don't agree with this, it's throwing away the
> entire concept around inheritance of role rights and how you can have
> roles which you can get the privileges of by doing a SET ROLE to them
> but you don't automatically h
On 27.09.2021 11:30, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
Thank you for the comments! (Sorry for the late resopnse.)
At Tue, 10 Aug 2021 14:14:05 -0400, Robert Haas wrote in
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 10:01 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
The patch assumed that CHKPT_START/COMPLETE barrier are exclusively
use
Hi,
Right now we run tap tests separately in each directory. Which is one of the
reasons the make output is so unreadable - instead of having one 'prove'
output listing all tests, we get a lot of different prove outputs, all
interspersed. And it severely limits parallelism on windows right now.
I
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2022-01-14 17:51:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> FWIW, I'm just fine with reverting, particularly in the back branches.
>> It seems clear that this dank corner of Windows contains even more
>> creepy-crawlies than we thought.
> Seems we should revert now-ish? There's a min
Thanks for taking a look!
On 1/23/22, 7:31 PM, "Michael Paquier" wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 06:12:54PM +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>> I was looking at the --check switch for the postgres binary recently
>> [0], and this sounds like something that might fit in nicely there.
>> In the attac
Andres Freund writes:
> It's currently not possible to just run all tap tests in one prove run,
> because a number of tests assume that they are run from specific directories
> and/or with per-directory parameters.
> For meson I "solved" this by running each individual test in a wrapper that
> cha
On 24.01.22 03:53, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2022-01-23 21:31:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund writes:
No, not really. There generally seems to be very little documentation about
what one is supposed to use when embedding python (rather than building a
python module). The only thing I rea
Hi,
On 2022-01-24 21:48:21 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Also note that python-config is itself a Python script that uses sysconfig
> and includes code like this:
Huh. It's a shell script on my debian system. Looks like the python source
tree has both. Not sure what / who decides which is used
On 1/24/22 15:33, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 4:20 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
>> Whoah, really? No, I don't agree with this, it's throwing away the
>> entire concept around inheritance of role rights and how you can have
>> roles which you can get the privileges of by doing a SET
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Also note that python-config is itself a Python script that uses
> sysconfig and includes code like this:
> elif opt in ('--includes', '--cflags'):
> flags = ['-I' + sysconfig.get_path('include'),
> '-I' + sysconfig.get_path('platinclude
On 1/24/22 15:17, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 2:27 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>> I really hate committing stuff that turns out to be broken. It's such
>> a fire drill when the build farm turns red.
> And there's a good chance it's about to break again, because I just
> committed the
Hi,
On 2022-01-24 15:10:05 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think we realized when we were working on the logical decoding stuff
> that the key columns of the old tuple would have to be detoasted in
> order for the mechanism to work, because I remember worrying about
> whether it would potentially be
Greetings,
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 15:33 Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 4:20 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Whoah, really? No, I don't agree with this, it's throwing away the
> > entire concept around inheritance of role rights and how you can have
> > roles which you can get the pr
Hi,
On 2022-01-24 15:35:25 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2022-01-14 17:51:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> FWIW, I'm just fine with reverting, particularly in the back branches.
> >> It seems clear that this dank corner of Windows contains even more
> >> creepy-crawlies than
On 1/22/22, 4:43 PM, "Tomas Vondra" wrote:
> There's a bug in ProcArrayApplyRecoveryInfo, introduced by 8431e296ea,
> which may cause failures when starting a replica, making it unusable.
> The commit message for 8431e296ea is not very clear about what exactly
> is being done and why, but the root
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 4:17 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Possibly the root of the problem is that we/I didn't think of cases where the
> primary key is an external toast datum - in moast scenarios you'd an error
> about a too wide index tuple. But of course that neglects cases where toasting
> happe
Hi,
On 2022-01-24 14:01:37 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Well if we can get Andres' suggestion to work all this might go away,
> which would keep everyone happy, especially me.
I successfully tried it for a few tests. But I see tests hanging a lot
independent of the way I run the tests, presumab
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 4:23 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
> The idea behind this patch is to enable creation and dropping of roles, which
> isn’t possible now without being effectively a superuser.
>
> Forcing owners to also implicitly have all rights of the roles they create is
> orthogonal to that
On 2022-01-24 16:31:08 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> That seems consistent with what's been described on this thread so
> far, but I still don't quite understand why the logic that reassembles
> TOAST chunks doesn't solve it.
There are no toast chunks to reassemble if the update didn't change the
pr
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 4:42 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-01-24 16:31:08 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > That seems consistent with what's been described on this thread so
> > far, but I still don't quite understand why the logic that reassembles
> > TOAST chunks doesn't solve it.
>
> There are
On 1/24/22 22:28, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
On 1/22/22, 4:43 PM, "Tomas Vondra" wrote:
There's a bug in ProcArrayApplyRecoveryInfo, introduced by 8431e296ea,
which may cause failures when starting a replica, making it unusable.
The commit message for 8431e296ea is not very clear about what exactly
On 1/24/22 16:39, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-01-24 14:01:37 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Well if we can get Andres' suggestion to work all this might go away,
>> which would keep everyone happy, especially me.
> I successfully tried it for a few tests. But I see tests hanging a lot
On 1/23/22 01:24, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
Hi!
I am glad that you found my very old patch interesting and started to
work on it. We failed to post it in 2016 mostly because we were not
satisfied with JSONB storage. Also we decided to wait for completion
of work on extended statistics as we though
Greetings,
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 16:42 Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 4:23 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
> > The idea behind this patch is to enable creation and dropping of roles,
> which isn’t possible now without being effectively a superuser.
> >
> > Forcing owners to also implici
Hi,
On 2022-01-23 19:49:57 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > To avoid too noisy breakages, we could have python.m4 emit INCLUDEPY and
> > then
> > search the bf logs in a day or three?
>
> Maybe something like the attached? Not particularly nice, but should give us
> most of the relevant informati
Andres Freund writes:
> ... But none of the systems report a get_python_inc(False) differing from
> get_python_inc(True), or from the value of INCLUDEPY. So I don't see a reason
> for why it'd not?
Yeah, I was just noticing that. It looks like the whole business
with checking both get_python_inc
> On Jan 24, 2022, at 2:21 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> Being able to create and drop users is, in fact, effectively a superuser-only
> task today. We could throw out the entire idea of role ownership, in fact,
> as being entirely unnecessary when talking about that specific task.
Wow, tha
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 02:44:21PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> OK, thanks. There are really two cleanups --- first, the "log"
> directory, and second deletion of the old cluster by running
> delete_old_cluster.sh.
Yes, this is the same thing as what's done on HEAD with a two-step
cleanup, excep
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 08:37:31AM +0100, Antonin Houska wrote:
> The changes to buffile.c are not trivial, but we haven't really changed the
> API, as long as you mean BufFileCreateTemp(), BufFileWrite(), BufFileRead().
>
> What our patch affects on the caller side is that BufFileOpenTransient(),
On 1/19/22 09:30, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
So, first of all, would people agree with this course of action?
I don't have a lot of experience with this module, so I don't know if
there are any lingering concerns about whether it is mature enough as a
built-in feature.
While it I like the idea
I wrote:
> Yeah, I was just noticing that. It looks like the whole business
> with checking both get_python_inc(False) and get_python_inc(True)
> has been useless from the start: none of the buildfarm animals report
> more than one -I switch in "checking Python include directories".
Also, that ap
> On Jan 24, 2022, at 2:21 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> Superuser is a problem specifically because it gives people access to do
> absolutely anything, both for security and safety concerns. Disallowing a way
> to curtail that same risk when it comes to role ownership invites exactly
> thos
Andreas Karlsson writes:
> On 1/19/22 09:30, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I don't have a lot of experience with this module, so I don't know if
>> there are any lingering concerns about whether it is mature enough as a
>> built-in feature.
> While it I like the idea on a conceptual level I worry
On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 11:36:41PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 02:19:08PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > + initStringInfo(&ret);
> > > + appendStringInfoChar(&ret, '{');
> > > +
> > > + if (flags & GUC_NO_SHOW_ALL)
> > > + appendStringInfo(&ret, "NO_SHOW_ALL,"
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 04:55:31PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I'm thinking about just removing that at the end.
And done this way, keeping the whole simpler. I have applied most of
the things you suggested, with a backpatch down to 10 for the relevant
user-visible parts in the docs. Thanks!
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 10:28 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-01-24 15:35:25 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > > On 2022-01-14 17:51:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> FWIW, I'm just fine with reverting, particularly in the back branches.
> > >> It seems clear that this dank co
Hi,
On 2022-01-24 16:47:28 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Give me what you can and I'll see what I can do. I have a couple of
> moderately high priority items on my plate, but I will probably be able
> to fit in some testing when those make my eyes completely glaze over.
Steps:
# install msys fr
Thomas Munro writes:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 10:28 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2022-01-24 15:35:25 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Sure. Do we want to revert in HEAD too?
>> Not sure. I'm also OK with trying to go with Thomas' patch to walreceiver and
>> try a bit longer to get all this working.
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 7:36 PM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
>
> On 22.01.22 03:54, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Won't we already do that for Alter Subscription command which means
> > nothing special needs to be done for this? However, it seems to me
> > that the idea we are trying to follow here is that as
Hi,
This is the 4th week of this commitfest.
Since last week, 5 entries were committed. There are still overall 223 active
patches, the vast majority needing review. If you signed up to review patches,
you still have a whole week to help patch making progress and getting
committed!
Status summ
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 10:45:48PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 1/24/22 22:28, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>>> Attached patch is fixing this by just sorting the XIDs logically. The
>>> xidComparator is meant for places that can't do logical ordering. But
>>> these XIDs come from RUNNING_XACTS, so the
Hi,
Thank you for committing a great feature. I have tested the committed features.
The attached small patch fixes the output of the --help message. In the
previous commit, only gzip and none were output, but in the attached patch,
client-gzip and server-gzip are added.
Regards,
Noriyoshi Shin
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 08:40:08PM +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> On 1/23/22, 7:31 PM, "Michael Paquier" wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 06:12:54PM +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>>> I was looking at the --check switch for the postgres binary recently
>>> [0], and this sounds like something that
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 12:54 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> So at a high level, I think that what we ought to do is, first, for
> each table, estimate the time at which we think something bad will
> occur. There are several bad events: too much bloat, XID wraparound,
> MXID wraparound. We need to estim
В Пн, 24/01/2022 в 16:24 +0300, Yura Sokolov пишет:
> В Вс, 23/01/2022 в 14:56 +0300, Yura Sokolov пишет:
> > В Чт, 20/01/2022 в 09:32 +1300, David Rowley пишет:
> > > On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 at 00:14, Yura Sokolov
> > > wrote:
> > > > Suggested quick (and valid) fix in the patch attached:
> > > > -
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 07:09:34PM +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> The patch no longer applied, so I went ahead and rebased it.
This was on the CF stack for some time, so applied. I have also
changed the messages produced for the shutdown and online checkpoint
records as they used the same messag
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 10:08 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 07:09:34PM +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> > The patch no longer applied, so I went ahead and rebased it.
>
> This was on the CF stack for some time, so applied. I have also
> changed the messages produced for the
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 1:14 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 2:20 AM Shruthi Gowda wrote:
> > Agree. In the latest patch, the template0 and postgres OIDs are fixed
> > to unused manually assigned OIDs 4 and 5 respectively. These OIDs are
> > no more listed as unused OIDs.
>
> Th
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 11:04:05AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 10:58 AM Jaime Casanova
> wrote:
>> Now; I do think that the secondd patch, the one that just skips update
>> of the state in control file, is the way to go. The other patch adds too
>> much complexity for
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
