On 2022-02-15 13:02:41 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> + @regress_command = (@regress_command, @extra_opts);
> >> +
> >> + $oldnode->command_ok(@regress_command,
> >> + 'regression test run on old instance');
> >
> > I also think this should take EXTRA_REGRESS_OPTS into account - tes
Hi,
On 2022-03-02 15:57:23 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Do others have an opinion about a backpatch of the bugfix? Nobody has
> complained about that since pg_upgrade exists, so I have just done the
> change on HEAD.
WFM.
> +++ b/src/bin/pg_upgrade/t/001_basic.pl
> @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
> +use s
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 12:01:17AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> But in a bad way, because EXTRA_REGRESS_OPTS now always wins, even for stuff
> we want to override. Note how test.sh explicitly specifies port, bindir etc
> after the pre-existing EXTRA_REGRESS_OPTS.
Ah, right. Will fix.
--
Michael
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 4:07 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Wed, 2 Mar 2022 14:39:54 +0900, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote in
> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 11:55 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 5:46 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I've attached two patches:
On 01.03.22 23:05, Jacob Champion wrote:
On Tue, 2022-03-01 at 19:56 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
This patch contains no documentation. I'm having a hard time
understanding what the name "session_authn_id" is supposed to convey.
The comment for the Port.authn_id field says this is the "system
At Wed, 2 Mar 2022 16:46:01 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote
in
> Hi all,
>
> In my hunt looking for incorrect SRFs, I have noticed a new case of a
> system function marked as proretset while it builds and returns only
> one record. And this is a popular one: pg_stop_backup(), labelled
> v2.
>
>
On 01.03.22 22:17, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
If you're moving to a newer version of PostgreSQL, you likely have to
update your connection drivers anyway (rebuilt against new libpq,
supporting any changes in the protocol, etc). I would prefer more data
to support that argument, but this is general
Hi,
A comments on the v26 patch.
The following document about pg_stat_subscription_stats view only says that
"showing statistics about errors", should we add something about transactions
here?
pg_stat_subscription_statspg_stat_subscription_stats
One row per subscription, show
On 01.03.22 22:34, Andres Freund wrote:
The cases I've heard about are about centralizing auth across multiple cloud
services. Including secret management in some form. E.g. allowing an
application to auth to postgres, redis and having the secret provided by
infrastructure, rather than having to
At Fri, 25 Feb 2022 10:48:47 -0800, Andres Freund wrote in
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-02-14 18:18:47 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > > If I give an empty file to the tool it complains as the follows.
> > >
> > > > pg_waldump: fatal: could not read file "hoge": No such file or directory
> > >
> > >
At Wed, 02 Mar 2022 15:37:19 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> The CI was confused by the mixed patches for multiple PG versions. In
> this version the patchset for master are attached as .patch and that
> for PG13 as .txt.
Yeah It is of course the relevant check should be fixed. T
Hi Yugo and Fabien,
It seems the patch is ready for committer except below. Do you guys
want to do more on below?
>> # TESTS
>>
>> I suggested to simplify the tests by using conditionals & sequences. You
>> reported that you got stuck. Hmmm.
>>
>> I tried again my tests which worked fine when
Hi Peter,
> PSA a PG docs patch that is associated with the logical replication
> Row Filters feature which was recently pushed [1].
The patch looks mostly OK, but I have several nitpicks.
```
By default, all data from all published tables will be replicated to the
appropriate subscriber
Hi again,
> The second sentence seems to be redundant.
Actually, I'm wrong on this one.
>
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 2:37 PM Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
>
>
> I see that a large part of the documentation is commented and marked as TBA
> (Column Filters, Combining Different Kinds of Filters). Could you please
> clarify if it's a work-in-progress patch? If it's not, I believe the
> comment
On 01.03.22 20:50, Brar Piening wrote:
Patch is attached. I don't think it should get applied this way, though.
The fact that you only get links for section headers that have manually
assigned ids would be pretty surprising for users of the docs and in
some files (e.g. protocol-flow.html) only ev
On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 12:47 PM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
> After more thoughts, should we do both AbortOutOfAnyTransaction() and error
> message handling while holding interrupts? That is,
>
> HOLD_INTERRUPTS();
> EmitErrorReport();
> FlushErrorState();
> AbortOutOfAny Transaction();
> RESUME
On 01.03.22 18:27, Brar Piening wrote:
Also I'm not sure how well the autogenerated ids are reproducible over
time/versions/builds, and if it is wise to use them as targets to link
to from somewhere else.
Autogenerated ids are stable across builds of the same source. They
would change if the
Hi hackers,
> I see that a large part of the documentation is commented and marked as
> TBA (Column Filters, Combining Different Kinds of Filters). Could you
> please clarify if it's a work-in-progress patch? If it's not, I believe the
> commented part should be removed before committing.
> >
>
>
Hi hackers,
> I don't see what else can be done either. Here is the corresponding patch.
Here is an updated patch that includes the commit message.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
v2-0001-Use-synchronous_commit-on-in-test_setup.sql.patch
Description: Binary data
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 05:22:35PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> But the patch forgets to remove an useless variable.
Indeed. I forgot to look at stderr.
>> /* Initialise attributes information in the tuple descriptor */
>> tupdesc = CreateTemplateTupleDesc(PG_STOP_BACKUP_V2_COLS);
On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 16:40, Christoph Heiss
wrote:
>
> That is also the main reason I preferred naming it "security_invoker" -
> it is consistent with other databases and eases transition from such
> systems.
>
> I kept "check_permissions_owner" for now. Constantly changing it around
> with each
Hi,
with reference to the discussion in docs:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/2221339.1645896597%40sss.pgh.pa.us#5a346c15ec2edbe8fcc93a1ffc2a7c7d
Here is a patch that changes "Hot Standby" to "hot standby" in
high-availability.sgml, so we have a consistent wording.
Thoughts?
There a
> On 1 Mar 2022, at 09:44, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
> I propose a reduced patch that just removes the "bits" display, since that is
> redundant with the "cipher"
No objections from me.
--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
Hi Michael,
```
Datum
pg_stop_backup_v2(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
{
-ReturnSetInfo *rsinfo = (ReturnSetInfo *) fcinfo->resultinfo;
+#define PG_STOP_BACKUP_V2_COLS 3
TupleDesctupdesc;
-Tuplestorestate *tupstore;
-MemoryContext per_query_ctx;
-MemoryContext oldcontext;
-Datum
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 11:59 AM vignesh C wrote:
>
...
...
> I have attached a basic patch for this, if the idea is accepted, I
> will work further to test more scenarios, add documentation, and test
> and post an updated patch.
> For the second problem, Table synchronization of table including l
At Wed, 02 Mar 2022 16:59:09 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> At Thu, 20 Jan 2022 17:19:04 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote in
> > At Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:07:22 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > wrote in
> > CI now likes this version for all platforms.
>
> An xlog.c refacto
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 1:26 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > > While rebasing, I was wondering why pgstat_reset_subscription_counter()
> > > has
> > > "all subscription counters" support. We don't have a function to reset all
> > > function stats or such either.
> > >
> >
> > We have similar thing f
Dean Rasheed:
That is also the main reason I preferred naming it "security_invoker" -
it is consistent with other databases and eases transition from such
systems.
[...]
For my part, I find myself more and more convinced that
"security_invoker" is the right name, because it matches the
terminol
Thanks for reviewing.
> > > I suggested upthread to store the starting timeline instead. This way
> > > you can
> > > deduce whether it's a restartpoint or a checkpoint, but you can also
> > > deduce
> > > other information, like what was the starting WAL.
> >
> > I don't understand why we need
Hello Tatsuo-san,
It seems the patch is ready for committer except below. Do you guys want
to do more on below?
I'm planning a new review of this significant patch, possibly over the
next week-end, or the next.
--
Fabien.
Hi,
While working on the column filtering patch, which touches about the
same places, I noticed two minor gaps in testing:
1) The regression tests do perform multiple ALTER PUBLICATION commands,
tweaking the row filter. But there are no checks the row filter was
actually modified / stored in the
Hi,
I have noticed that the CHECKPOINT_REQUESTED flag information is not
present in the log message of LogCheckpointStart() function. I would
like to understand if it was missed or left intentionally. The log
message describes all the possible checkpoint flags except
CHECKPOINT_REQUESTED flag. I f
> On 1 Mar 2022, at 17:16, Greg Stark wrote:
> Last November Daniel Gustafsson did a patch triage. It took him three
> emails to get through the patches in the commitfest back then.
It should be noted that I only powered through the patches that had been in 3+
commitfests at the time..
> Since
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022, at 8:45 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> While working on the column filtering patch, which touches about the
> same places, I noticed two minor gaps in testing:
>
> 1) The regression tests do perform multiple ALTER PUBLICATION commands,
> tweaking the row filter. But there are no ch
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 5:41 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have noticed that the CHECKPOINT_REQUESTED flag information is not
> present in the log message of LogCheckpointStart() function. I would
> like to understand if it was missed or left intentionally. The log
> message describes all th
Hi hackers,
> In this part, I suppose you've found a definite bug. Thanks! There are a
> couple
> of ways how it could be fixed:
>
> 1. If we enforce checkpoint at replica promotion then we force full-page
> writes after each page modification afterward.
>
> 2. Maybe it's worth using BufferDesc
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 1:01 PM shiy.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> 4.
> @@ -1617,9 +1829,21 @@ pgoutput_stream_prepare_txn(LogicalDecodingContext
> *ctx,
> ReorderBufferTXN *txn,
> XLogRec
Hi Daniel,
> Here is a patch that changes "Hot Standby" to "hot standby" in
high-availability.sgml, so we have a consistent wording.
> Thoughts?
```
- Hot Standby Parameter Reference
+ hot standby Parameter Reference
```
Pretty sure that for titles we should keep English capitalization rules
Greetings,
* Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
> On 2022-02-28 11:26:06 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > We already have a variety of authentication mechanisms that support central
> > management: LDAP, PAM, Kerberos, Radius.
>
> LDAP, PAM and Radius all require cleartext passwords, so
Greetings,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com) wrote:
> On 01.03.22 22:34, Andres Freund wrote:
> >The cases I've heard about are about centralizing auth across multiple cloud
> >services. Including secret management in some form. E.g. allowing an
> >application to auth to postg
On 3/2/22 3:24 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 01.03.22 22:17, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
If you're moving to a newer version of PostgreSQL, you likely have to
update your connection drivers anyway (rebuilt against new libpq,
supporting any changes in the protocol, etc). I would prefer more data
t
On 02.03.22 05:47, Peter Smith wrote:
This patch introduces a new "Filtering" page to give a common place
where all kinds of logical replication filtering can be described.
(e.g. It is envisaged that a "Column Filters" section can be added
sometime in the future).
The pending feature to select
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 5:25 AM Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
> ```
> Datum
> pg_stop_backup_v2(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
> {
> -ReturnSetInfo *rsinfo = (ReturnSetInfo *) fcinfo->resultinfo;
> +#define PG_STOP_BACKUP_V2_COLS 3
> TupleDesctupdesc;
> -Tuplestorestate *tupstore;
> -Memory
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 5:25 AM Aleksander Alekseev
> wrote:
>> Declaring a macro inside the procedure body is a bit unconventional.
>> Since it doesn't seem to be used for anything except these two array
>> declarations I suggest keeping simply "3" here.
> I think we do thi
Chris Bandy writes:
> On 3/1/22 3:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Anyway, I'd be happier about back-patching if we could document
>> actual requests to make it work like the server side does.
> PGO runs PostgreSQL 10 through 14 in Kubernetes, and we have to work
> around this issue when using certifica
Hi Tom.
Yeah, there's plenty of precedent for that coding if you look around.
> I've not read the whole patch, but this snippet seems fine to me
> if there's also an #undef at the end of the function.
>
No, there is no #undef. With #undef I don't mind it either.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alek
Some review comments on v5 patch (v5-0001-pg_walinspect.patch)
+--
+-- pg_get_wal_records_info()
+--
+CREATE FUNCTION pg_get_wal_records_info(IN start_lsn pg_lsn,
+IN end_lsn pg_lsn,
+IN wait_for_wal boolean DEFAULT false,
+OUT lsn pg_lsn,
What does the wait_for_wal flag mean here whe
Hi hackers!
Hi! Here is the rebased version.
>
I'd like to add a description of what was done in v9:
- The patch is rebased on current master branch
- In-memory tuple storage format was refactored as promised to have
pre-calculated 64bit xmin and xmax, not just copies of pd_xid_base and
pd_multi_b
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 08:31:19AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > The last time I played with this area is the recent error handling
> > improvement with cryptohashes but MD5 has actually helped here in
> > detecting the problem as a patched OpenSSL would complain if trying to
> > use MD5 as hash
Greetings,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 08:31:19AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > The last time I played with this area is the recent error handling
> > > improvement with cryptohashes but MD5 has actually helped here in
> > > detecting the problem as a pa
Stephen Frost writes:
> * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
>> What is the logic to removing md5 but keeping 'password'?
> I don't think we should keep 'password'.
I don't see much point in that unless we deprecate *all* the
auth methods that transmit a cleartext password.
Greetings,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> >> What is the logic to removing md5 but keeping 'password'?
>
> > I don't think we should keep 'password'.
>
> I don't see much point in that unless we deprecate *all* the
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:09:31AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I'm not sure that it's quite so simple. Perhaps we should also drop
> LDAP and I don't really think PAM was ever terribly good for us to have,
> but at least PAM and RADIUS could possibly be used with OTP solutions
> (and maybe LDAP?
On 3/1/22 16:41, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 2/1/22 14:11,I wrote:
>> 2. The new GUC "sql_json" is a bit of a worry. I understand what it's
>> trying to do, but I'm trying to convince myself it's not going to be a
>> fruitful source of error reports, especially if people switch it in the
>> middle
Hi Aleksander,
> Pretty sure that for titles we should keep English capitalization rules.
Done like that. Thanks for taking a look.
Regards
Danieldiff --git a/doc/src/sgml/high-availability.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/high-availability.sgml
index b5b6042104..08eb1ad946 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/high-ava
On 02.03.22 15:16, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
I find that a lot of people are still purposely using md5. Removing
it now or in a year would be quite a disruption.
What are the reasons they are still purposely using it? The ones I have
seen/heard are:
- Using an older driver
- On a pre-v10 PG
Greetings,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:09:31AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I'm not sure that it's quite so simple. Perhaps we should also drop
> > LDAP and I don't really think PAM was ever terribly good for us to have,
> > but at least PAM and RADIU
Greetings,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com) wrote:
> On 02.03.22 15:16, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> >>I find that a lot of people are still purposely using md5. Removing it
> >>now or in a year would be quite a disruption.
> >
> >What are the reasons they are still purposely u
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 9:58 AM Joshua Brindle
wrote:
>
> This is not intended for PG15.
>
> Attached are a proof of concept patchset to implement multiple valid
> passwords, which have independent expirations, set by a GUC or SQL
> using an interval.
>
> postgres=# select * from pg_auth_passwor
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:29 AM Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:09:31AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > I'm not sure that it's quite so simple. Perhaps we should also drop
> > > LDAP and I don't really think PAM wa
On 3/2/22 10:30 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
Greetings,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com) wrote:
On 02.03.22 15:16, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
I find that a lot of people are still purposely using md5. Removing it
now or in a year would be quite a disruption.
What are the reas
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:29:45AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> We don't require SSL to be used with them..? Further, as already
> discussed on this thread, SSL only helps with on-the-wire, doesn't
> address the risk of a compromised server. LDAP, in particular, is
> terrible in this regard beca
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 9:05 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > I agree. My question is: why shouldn't every case where we can deduce
> > an implied inequality be reasonably likely to show a benefit?
>
> Maybe it will be, if we can deal with the issue you already mentioned
> about not mi
Greetings,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:29:45AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > We don't require SSL to be used with them..? Further, as already
> > discussed on this thread, SSL only helps with on-the-wire, doesn't
> > address the risk of a compromised s
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:54:27AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> It's our decision what we want to support and maintain in the code base
> and what we don't. Folks often ask for things that we don't or won't
> support and this isn't any different from that. We also remove things
> on a rather reg
Robert Haas writes:
> So the questions in my mind here are all
> about whether we can detect this stuff cheaply and whether anybody
> wants to do the work to make it happen, not whether we'd get a benefit
> in the cases where it kicks in.
Right, my worries are mostly about the first point.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 4:12 PM kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> Hi Vignesh,
>
> > In logical replication, currently Walsender sends the data that is
> > generated locally and the data that are replicated from other
> > instances. This results in infinite recursion in circular logical
> > repli
Greetings,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:54:27AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > It's our decision what we want to support and maintain in the code base
> > and what we don't. Folks often ask for things that we don't or won't
> > support and this isn't any
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 06:43:11PM +0400, Pavel Borisov wrote:
> Hi hackers!
>
> Hi! Here is the rebased version.
The patch doesn't apply - I suppose the patch is relative a forked postgres
which already has other patches.
http://cfbot.cputube.org/pavel-borisov.html
Note also that I mentioned a
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 05:40:00PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> Hi Tom.
>
> Yeah, there's plenty of precedent for that coding if you look around.
> > I've not read the whole patch, but this snippet seems fine to me
> > if there's also an #undef at the end of the function.
>
> No, there is no
On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 at 07:12, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Thanks for picking it up and continuing with recent developments. Let me know
> if you want a hand in triaging patchsets.
While I have the time there may be patches I may need help coming to
the right conclusions about what actions to take
On 03/02/22 02:46, Michael Paquier wrote:
> system function marked as proretset while it builds and returns only
> one record. And this is a popular one: pg_stop_backup(), labelled
> v2.
I had just recently noticed that while reviewing [0], but shrugged,
as I didn't know what the history was.
Is
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 8:12 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Some review comments on v5 patch (v5-0001-pg_walinspect.patch)
Thanks for reviewing.
> +--
> +-- pg_get_wal_records_info()
> +--
> +CREATE FUNCTION pg_get_wal_records_info(IN start_lsn pg_lsn,
> +IN end_lsn pg_lsn,
> +IN wait_for_
On 3/2/22 08:40, Tom Lane wrote:
Chris Bandy writes:
On 3/1/22 3:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Anyway, I'd be happier about back-patching if we could document
actual requests to make it work like the server side does.
PGO runs PostgreSQL 10 through 14 in Kubernetes, and we have to work
around this
On 3/2/22 11:04, Chapman Flack wrote:
On 03/02/22 02:46, Michael Paquier wrote:
system function marked as proretset while it builds and returns only
one record. And this is a popular one: pg_stop_backup(), labelled
v2.
I had just recently noticed that while reviewing [0], but shrugged,
as I d
Greg Stark writes:
> Do I have this right? What is the right state to put a patch in that
> means "this patch doesn't need to be triaged again unless the author
> actually feels progress has been made and needs new feedback or thinks
> its committable"?
But that's not really the goal, is it? IST
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 11:58:28AM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
>
> But I'm unclear exactly what the consequences in the commitfest app
> are of specific state changes. As I understand it there are basically
> two alternatives:
>
> 1) Returned with feedback -- does this make it harder for an author to
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 11:09 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > So the questions in my mind here are all
> > about whether we can detect this stuff cheaply and whether anybody
> > wants to do the work to make it happen, not whether we'd get a benefit
> > in the cases where it kicks in.
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 06:18:09PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 03:55:50PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2022-01-01 18:21:06 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > > Here's an updated patch, rebased and fixing a couple typos reported by
> > > Justin Pryzby directly.
> >
> >
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 11:38:21AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Rebased over 269b532ae and muted compiler warnings.
And attached.
>From 587a5e9fe87c26cdcd9602fc349f092da95cc580 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tomas Vondra
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 14:05:17 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Estimate joins using
On 02.03.2022 at 10:37, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I have applied the part of your patch that adds the id's. The
discussion about the formatting aspect can continue.
Thank you!
I've generated some data by outputting the element name whenever a
section or varlistentry lacks an id. That's how the
On 03/02/22 12:46, Brar Piening wrote:
> With regard to varlistentry I'd suggest to decide whether to add ids or
> not on a case by case base. I already offered to add ids to long lists
> upon request but I wouldn't want to blindly add ~4k ids that nobody
Perhaps there are a bunch of variablelists
>In my observation, very few users require an accurate query plan for
temporary tables to
perform manual analyze.
Absolutely not true in my observations or personal experience. It's one of
the main reasons I have needed to use (local) temporary tables rather than
just materializing a CTE when deco
st 2. 3. 2022 v 19:02 odesílatel Adam Brusselback
napsal:
> >In my observation, very few users require an accurate query plan for
> temporary tables to
> perform manual analyze.
>
> Absolutely not true in my observations or personal experience. It's one of
> the main reasons I have needed to use
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 4:45 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
> > Also, how about special phases for SyncPostCheckpoint(),
> > SyncPreCheckpoint(), InvalidateObsoleteReplicationSlots(),
> > PreallocXlogFiles() (it currently pre-allocates only 1 WAL file, but
> > it might be increase in future (?)), TruncateS
On Wed, 2022-03-02 at 10:10 +, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> > I kept "check_permissions_owner" for now. Constantly changing it around
> > with each iteration doesn't really bring any value IMHO, I'd rather have
> > a final consensus on how to name the option and *then* change it for good.
>
> Yes ind
On 2022-02-28 11:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 27.02.22 10:42, Jille Timmermans wrote:
I wanted to be able to allocate a bunch of numbers from a sequence at
once. Multiple people seem to be struggling with this
(https://stackoverflow.com/questions/896274/select-multiple-ids-from-a-postgresql-s
On 03/01/22 20:03, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Here is a new version of the patch with the following changes:
I did not notice this earlier (sorry), but there seems to remain in
backup.sgml a programlisting example that shows a psql invocation
for pg_backup_start, then a tar command, then another psql
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 4:40 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-02-22 01:11:21 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I've started to work on a few debugging aids to find problem like
> > these. Attached are two WIP patches:
>
> Forgot to attach. Also importantly includes a tap test for several of these
>
Hi,
On 2022-03-02 14:52:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> - I am having some trouble understanding clearly what 0001 is doing.
> I'll try to study it further.
It tests for the various scenarios I could think of that could lead to FD
reuse, to state the obvious ;). Anything particularly unclear.
>
Hi,
On 2022-03-02 09:32:26 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 01.03.22 22:34, Andres Freund wrote:
> > The cases I've heard about are about centralizing auth across multiple cloud
> > services. Including secret management in some form. E.g. allowing an
> > application to auth to postgres, redis a
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 06:39:39PM +, Chapman Flack wrote:
> This patch is straightforward, does what it says, and passes the tests.
>
> Regarding the duplication of code between plsample_func_handler and
> plsample_trigger_handler, perhaps that's for the best for now, as 3554 in
> the same co
Greetings,
* Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
> On 2022-03-02 09:32:26 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On 01.03.22 22:34, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > The cases I've heard about are about centralizing auth across multiple
> > > cloud
> > > services. Including secret management in some f
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 12:32 AM Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 01.03.22 22:34, Andres Freund wrote:
> > The cases I've heard about are about centralizing auth across multiple
> cloud
> > services. Including secret management in some form. E.g. allowing an
>
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 02:58:02PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I still think that if "Build Docs" is a separate cirrus task, it should
> rebuild
> docs on every CI run, even if they haven't changed, for any patch that touches
> docs/. It'll be confusing if cfbot shows 5 green circles and 4 of t
Hi,
On 2022-03-02 15:26:32 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Part of the point, for my part anyway, of dropping support for plaintext
> transmission would be to remove support for that from libpq, otherwise a
> compromised server could still potentially convince a client to provide
> a plaintext passw
Hi,
On 2022-02-27 06:09:54 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> ne 27. 2. 2022 v 5:13 odesílatel Andres Freund napsal:
> > On 2022-02-27 04:17:52 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > > Without this, the GTT will be terribly slow like current temporary tables
> > > with a lot of problems with bloating of pg_c
Hi,
On 2022-03-02 16:25:33 +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> I agree with Bruce it would be great to deliver this in PG15.
> Please let me know if you believe it's unrealistic for any reason so I will
> focus on testing and reviewing other patches.
I don't see 15 as a realistic target for this
Hi,
On 2022-03-01 08:35:27 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I'm not really sure why we're arguing about this, but clearly the authn
> ID of the leader process is what should be used because that's the
> authentication under which the parallel worker is running, just as much
> as the effective role is
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
