There is some problem with the last patch, I have removed the
`ExplainOpenWorker` call to fix.
And also, I have added a test case in explain.sql according to the code change.
From: Jian Guo
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 11:36
To: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.or
Hello, Peter.
> * Instead of avoiding the FPI when this happens, proactively call
> _bt_simpledel_pass() just before _bt_killitems() returns. Accept the
> immediate cost of setting an LP_DEAD bit, just like today, but avoid
> repeated FPIs.
Hm, not sure here
AFAIK current implementation does not
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 2:47 AM Zheng Li wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> >If you don't mind, would you like to share the POC or the branch for this
> >work?
>
> The POC patch is attached. It currently supports the following
> functionalities:
Thanks for sharing, I will look into it.
> >In such cases why do
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 05:36:38PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 9:59 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> > I'll push 0001 today to let the build farm chew on it for a few days
> > before moving to 0002.
>
> Clearly 018_wal_optimize.pl is flapping and causing recoveryCheck to
> f
Hi hackers,
I learned from Tom [1] that we can simplify the code like:
```
char buff[32];
snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), INT64_FORMAT, ...)
ereport(WARNING, (errmsg("%s ...", buf)));
```
... and rely on %lld/%llu now as long as we explicitly cast the
argument to long long int / unsigned long long. T
пн, 21 мар. 2022 г. в 12:52, Aleksander Alekseev :
> Hi hackers,
>
> I learned from Tom [1] that we can simplify the code like:
>
> ```
> char buff[32];
> snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), INT64_FORMAT, ...)
> ereport(WARNING, (errmsg("%s ...", buf)));
> ```
>
> ... and rely on %lld/%llu now as long as w
Hi Pavel,
> Probably you can do (long long) instead of (long long int). It is shorter and
> this is used elsewhere in the code.
Thanks! Here is the updated patch. I also added Reviewed-by: and
Discussion: to the commit message.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
v2-0001-Remove-workarounds-
>
> > Probably you can do (long long) instead of (long long int). It is
> shorter and this is used elsewhere in the code.
>
> Thanks! Here is the updated patch. I also added Reviewed-by: and
> Discussion: to the commit message.
>
Thanks, Alexander!
I suggest the patch is in a good shape to be commi
On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 at 13:52, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 3/19/22 14:48, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2022-03-03 13:37:35 +, Dave Page wrote:
> >> On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 13:28, Pavel Borisov
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different
> moder
On Sat, 2022-03-19 at 01:10 +, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> I have been hacking on it a bit, and attached is an updated version.
> Aside from some general copy editing, the most notable changes are:
> [...]
Thanks for your diligent work on this, and the patch looks good to me.
It is good that you fou
On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 9:10 AM Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 10:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > 3. Can we add a simple test for it in one of the existing test
> > files(say in 001_rep_changes.pl)?
>
> added a simple test.
>
This doesn't verify if the transaction is skipped. I t
On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 at 17:23, Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
>
>> Probably you can do (long long) instead of (long long int). It is shorter
>> and this is used elsewhere in the code.
>
> Thanks! Here is the updated patch. I also added Reviewed-by: and
> Discussion: to the commit message
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 17:58:04 +
Arne Roland wrote:
> I don't think this a bug, but a feature request. I therefore think hackers
> would be more appropriate.
+1
I changed the list destination
> I don't see how an additional syntax to modify the constraint should help.
Me neiher.
> If
On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 4:53 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> On 3/20/22 07:23, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 8:41 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 10:42 PM Tomas Vondra
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> So the question is why those two sync workers never complete - I gues
From: Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 11:36
Subject: Re: Detaching a partition with a FK on itself is not possible
> I changed the list destination
Thanks
> Another solution could be to teach the create partition to detect a self
> referencing FK and actually create a s
Hi Japin,
> After apply the patch, I found pg_checksums.c also has the similar code.
Thanks for noticing it.
> In progress_report(), I'm not sure we can do this replace for this code.
I added the corresponding change as a separate commit so it can be
easily reverted if necessary.
Here is a com
Hi Japin,
> As Tom said in [1], we don't need to touch the *.po files, since those
files
> are managed by the translation team.
>
> [1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1110708.1647623560%40sss.pgh.pa.us
True, but I figured that simplifying the work of the translation team would
not harm eit
On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 8:13 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> Ah, thanks for reminding me - it's hard to keep track of all the issues
> in threads as long as this one.
>
> BTW do you have any opinion on the SET COLUMNS syntax? Peter Smith
> proposed to get rid of it in [1] but I'm not sure that's a good
On 2022-Mar-04, Michael Paquier wrote:
> d6d317d as solved the issue of tablespace paths across multiple nodes
> with the new GUC called allow_in_place_tablespaces, and is getting
> successfully used in the recovery tests as of 027_stream_regress.pl.
OK, but that means that the test suite is now
On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 3:56 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> On 3/18/22 15:43, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >
>
> As for the issue reported by Shi-San about replica identity full and
> column filters, presumably you're referring to this:
>
> create table tbl (a int, b int, c int);
> create publication pub
>
> Afaics offset etc can't be negative, so I don't think this really improves
> matters. I think there's quite a few other places where we use %u to print
> integers that we know aren't negative.
>
> If anything I think we should change the signed integers to unsigned ones.
> It
> might be worth d
2022년 3월 20일 (일) 03:13, Fabrízio de Royes Mello 님이
작성:
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 1:18 PM Dong Wook Lee wrote:
> >
> > > Well, my guess is that you basically just care about being able to
> > > detect if there is free space in the map or not, which goes down to
> > > detecting if pg_freespace(
Hello,
Please add me to the list of authors of this patch. I made a large
number of nontrivial changes to it early on. Thanks. I have modified
the entry in the CF app (which sorts alphabetically, it was not my
intention to put my name first.)
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer —
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022, at 12:25 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> I have fixed all the above comments as per your suggestion in the
> attached. Do let me know if something is missed?
Looks good to me.
> > src/test/subscription/t/029_disable_on_error.pl | 94 --
> > src/test/subscription/t/029_on_err
On Mon, 2022-03-21 at 18:09 +0800, Japin Li wrote:
> After apply the patch, I found pg_checksums.c also has the similar code.
>
> In progress_report(), I'm not sure we can do this replace for this code.
>
> snprintf(total_size_str, sizeof(total_size_str), INT64_FORMAT,
> total_si
On 20.03.22 23:55, Tomas Vondra wrote:
Attached is a rebased patch, addressing most of the remaining issues.
This looks okay to me, if the two FIXMEs are addressed. Remember to
also update protocol.sgml if you change LOGICAL_REP_MSG_SEQUENCE.
On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 09:38:44PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > This patch also needs to update the other user-facing docs.
>
> Which ones exactly?
I mean pg_basebackup -Z
-Z level
-Z [{client|server}-]method[:level]
--compress=level
--compress=[{client|server}-]method[:level]
On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 at 20:40, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-03-21 at 18:09 +0800, Japin Li wrote:
>> After apply the patch, I found pg_checksums.c also has the similar code.
>>
>> In progress_report(), I'm not sure we can do this replace for this code.
>>
>> snprintf(total_size_str, siz
On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 1:34 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> I thought that way because IIUC, when we are locking the database
> tuple we are ensuring that we are calling
> ReceiveSharedInvalidMessages() right? And IIUC
> ReceiveSharedInvalidMessages(), is designed such a way that it will
> consume all
Aleksander Alekseev writes:
>> As Tom said in [1], we don't need to touch the *.po files, since those
>> files are managed by the translation team.
> True, but I figured that simplifying the work of the translation team would
> not harm either.
It would not simplify things for them at all, just
On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 11:11 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> On 3/19/22 18:11, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > Fix a compiler warning reported by cfbot.
>
> Apologies, I failed to actually commit the fix. So here we go again.
>
Few comments:
===
1.
+/*
+ * Gets a list of OIDs of all partial-colum
Hi Tom,
> It would not simplify things for them at all, just mess it up.
> The master copies of the .po files are kept in a different repo.
> Also, I believe that extraction of new message strings is automated
> already.
Got it, thanks. Here is the corrected patch. It includes all the
changes by
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 7:07 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 1:34 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > I thought that way because IIUC, when we are locking the database
> > tuple we are ensuring that we are calling
> > ReceiveSharedInvalidMessages() right? And IIUC
> > ReceiveSharedInval
Aleksander Alekseev writes:
> Got it, thanks. Here is the corrected patch. It includes all the
> changes by me and Japin, and doesn't touch PO files.
Pushed. I removed now-unnecessary braces, reflowed some lines
as suggested by Pavel, and pgindent'ed (which insisted on adding
spaces after the ca
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 8:29 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 7:07 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 1:34 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > > I thought that way because IIUC, when we are locking the database
> > > tuple we are ensuring that we are calling
> > > Recei
On 3/17/22 23:21, Mark Dilger wrote:
> Hackers,
>
> Over in [1], Joshua proposed a new set of Object Access Type hooks based on
> strings rather than Oids.
>
> His patch was written to be applied atop my patch for granting privileges on
> gucs.
>
> On review of his patch, I became uncomfortable
On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 11:56 PM Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 4:36 PM Thomas Munro
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 7:58 AM David Christensen
> > wrote:
> > > Attached is V2 with additional feedback from this email, as well as
> the specification of the
> > > ForkNumber and
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 9:18 AM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 09:38:44PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > This patch also needs to update the other user-facing docs.
> >
> > Which ones exactly?
>
> I mean pg_basebackup -Z
>
> -Z level
> -Z [{client|server}-]method[:level]
> --compr
Re: Peter Eisentraut
> > Since the intended usage seems to be that databases should either be
> > using libc, or the ICU locales, but probably not both at the same
> > time, does it make sense to clutter the already very wide `psql -l`
> > output with two new extra columns?
>
> Good point, let me
Updated to include the V3 fixes as well as the unsigned int/enum fix.
>
v4-0001-Add-additional-filtering-options-to-pg_waldump.patch
Description: Binary data
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 12:57:36PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > typo: contain a an
> I searched for the "contain a an" typo that you mentioned but was not able to
> find it. Can you give me a more specific pointer?
Here:
+ * during parsing, and will otherwise contain a an appropriate error messa
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 11:21 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> I tried to debug the case but I realized that somehow
> CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() is not calling the
> AcceptInvalidationMessages() and I could not find the same while
> looking into the code as well. While debugging I noticed that
> AcceptInval
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 2:22 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> + * during parsing, and will otherwise contain a an appropriate error message.
OK, thanks. v4 attached.
> I think "algorithm" could be much more nuanced than "lz4", but I also think
> we've spent more than enough time on it now :)
Oh dear.
Christoph Berg writes:
> A possible solution might be to rip out all the locale columns except
> "Encoding" from \l, and leave them in place for \l+.
I'd rather see a single column summarizing the locale situation.
Perhaps it could be COALESCE(daticulocale, datcollate), or
something using a CASE
On 18.03.22 16:14, Maxim Orlov wrote:
Here is v22. It addresses things mentioned by Tom and Kyotaro. Also
added Aleksander's changes from v21.
The v22-0002-Update-XID-formatting-in-the-.po-files.patch is not
necessary. That is done by a separate procedure.
I'm wondering about things like th
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 2:22 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> + * during parsing, and will otherwise contain a an appropriate error
>> message.
>
> OK, thanks. v4 attached.
I haven't read the whole patch, but I noticed an omission in the
documentation changes:
> diff --git a/d
I had a look at this latest version of the patch, and found some things
to tweak. Attached is v21 with three main changes from Kyotaro's v20:
1. the XLogFlush is only done if consistent state has not been reached.
As I understand, it's not needed in normal mode. (In any case, if we do
call XLogF
Hi,
On 2022-03-21 11:27:15 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 4:39 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > before we further change this (as done in this patch) we should deduplicate
> > these huge statements in a separate patch / commit.
>
> Something like attached
> v6-0001-Dedup
On 2022-Mar-14, Robert Haas wrote:
> 2. Why not instead change the code so that the operation can succeed,
> by creating the prerequisite parent directories? Do we not have enough
> information for that? I'm not saying that we definitely should do it
> that way rather than this way, but I think we
> On Mar 18, 2022, at 3:04 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> I haven't looked at it in detail, but regarding the test code I'm not
> sure why there's a .control file, since this isn't a loadable extension,
> not why there's a test_oat_hooks.h file.
The .control file exists because the test defines
> On Mar 21, 2022, at 8:41 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> My first inclination is to say it's probably ok. The immediately obvious
> alternative would be to create yet another set of functions that don't
> have classId parameters. That doesn't seem attractive.
>
> Modulo that issue I think pat
This patch seems to be getting ignored. Like David I'm a bit puzzled
because it doesn't seem like an especially obscure or difficult patch
to review. Yet it's been multiple years without even a superficial
"does it meet the coding requirements" review let alone a design
review.
Can we get a volunt
Hm. Actually... These changes were split off from the JSON_TABLE
patches? Are they still separate or have they been merged into those
other patches since? I see the JSON_TABLE thread is getting more
comments do those reviews include these patches?
On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 at 16:09, Greg Stark wrote:
>
On 3/20/22 12:38, Stephen Frost wrote:
Greetings,
On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 18:31 Joshua Brindle
mailto:joshua.brin...@crunchydata.com>>
wrote:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 12:27 PM Joe Conway mailto:m...@joeconway.com>> wrote:
>
> On 3/3/22 11:26, Joshua Brindle wrote:
> > On Th
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 11:27:15AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 3:16 AM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> /* buffer stats */
>> appendStringInfo(&logmsg, "wrote %d buffers (%.1f%%); ",
>>
>> Checkpoin
Op 21-03-2022 om 21:13 schreef Greg Stark:
Hm. Actually... These changes were split off from the JSON_TABLE
patches? Are they still separate or have they been merged into those
other patches since? I see the JSON_TABLE thread is getting more
comments do those reviews include these patches?
T
On 3/21/22 15:57, Mark Dilger wrote:
>> On Mar 18, 2022, at 3:04 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>> I haven't looked at it in detail, but regarding the test code I'm not
>> sure why there's a .control file, since this isn't a loadable extension,
>> not why there's a test_oat_hooks.h file.
> The .co
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 12:58 AM Michail Nikolaev
wrote:
> Hm, not sure here
> AFAIK current implementation does not produce repeated FPIs. Page is
> marked as dirty on the first bit. So, others LP_DEAD (if not set by
> single scan) do not generate FPI until checkpoint is ready.
There is one FPI
Hi Japin,
> You should use a different user that has different length from your current
> one.
> For example:
>
> px@localhost$ make check-world
This is fixed in the latest commit:
https://github.com/zli236/postgres/commits/ddl_replication
Thanks,
Zheng
Hi everyone.
I develop postgresql's extension such as fdw in my work.
I'm interested in using postgresql for OLAP.
I think that this patch is realy useful when using OLAP queries.
Furthermore, I think it would be more useful if this patch works on a foreign
table.
Actually, I changed this patc
>
> Hi,
> I was looking at calls to bms_free() in PG code.
>
> e.g. src/backend/commands/publicationcmds.c line 362
>
> bms_free(bms);
>
> The above is just an example, there're other calls to bms_free().
> Since the bms is allocated from some execution context, I wonder why this
> call is
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 6:14 AM David Christensen
wrote:
> Updated to include the V3 fixes as well as the unsigned int/enum fix.
Hi David,
I ran this though pg_indent and adjusted some remaining
non-project-style whitespace, and took it for a spin. Very minor
comments:
pg_waldump: error: could
On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 4:56 PM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
>
> Addressed all of these points in
> v2-0001-add-replica-cleanup-tests.patch
>
> also added a new test file in
> v2-0002-Add-TAP-test-for-discarding-stats-after-crash.patch
> testing correct behavior after a crash and when stats file is inv
On 3/21/22 14:05, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 20.03.22 23:55, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Attached is a rebased patch, addressing most of the remaining issues.
>
> This looks okay to me, if the two FIXMEs are addressed. Remember to
> also update protocol.sgml if you change LOGICAL_REP_MSG_SEQUENCE.
Zhihong Yu writes:
>> I was looking at calls to bms_free() in PG code.
>> e.g. src/backend/commands/publicationcmds.c line 362
>> bms_free(bms);
>> The above is just an example, there're other calls to bms_free().
>> Since the bms is allocated from some execution context, I wonder why this
>>
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 3:05 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Zhihong Yu writes:
> >> I was looking at calls to bms_free() in PG code.
> >> e.g. src/backend/commands/publicationcmds.c line 362
> >> bms_free(bms);
> >> The above is just an example, there're other calls to bms_free().
> >> Since the bms
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 03:44:39PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> A simple approach could be to just set log_min_messages to PANIC before
> exiting. I've attached a patch for this. With this patch, we'll still see
> a FATAL if we try to use 'postgres -C' for a runtime-computed GUC on a
> running
Tom Lane wrote:
> Hence, I propose the attached. 0001 is pure refactoring: it hopefully
> clears up the confusion about which "relkind" is which, and it also
> saves a couple of redundant syscache fetches in RemoveRelations.
> Then 0002 adds the actual bug fix as well as a test case that does
> d
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 4:39 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
[snip]
I guess you did this because init fork references aren't really
> expected in the WAL, but I think it's more consistent to allow up to
> MAX_FORKNUM, not least because your documentation mentions 3 as a
> valid value. So I adjust this t
> On Mar 21, 2022, at 1:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> To the best of my knowledge .control files are only used by extensions,
> not by other modules. They are only referenced in
> src/backend/commands/extension.c in the backend code. For example,
> auto_explain which is a loadable module but
Hi,
On 2022-01-21 01:06:37 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Yeah, I haven't updated some of the test output because some of those
> changes are a bit wrong (and I think that's fine for a PoC patch). I
> should have mentioned that in the message, though. Sorry about that.
Given that the patch hasn't b
On 2022-01-14 11:25:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Julien Rouhaud writes:
> > Like many I previously had to investigate a slowdown due to sub-transaction
> > overflow, and even with the information available in a monitoring view (I
> > had
> > to rely on a quick hackish extension as I couldn't patch
Hi,
On 2022-02-22 15:10:11 +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 22 Feb 2022, at 00:08, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > I'll fix that.
>
> The attached v3 fixes that thinko, and cleans up a lot of the output which
> isn't diagnostic per the TAP spec to make it less noisy. It also fixes tag
> s
Hi,
On 2022-03-07 13:10:32 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Meanwhile here is an updated based on your other comments above, as
> well as those from Julien.
This fails on cfbot, due to compiler warnings:
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5127667648299008?logs=mingw_cross_warning#L390
Greetings,
Andres
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 11:12:06AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Right, the previous behaviors were clearly faulty. I have updated the
> commit message to call out the behavior change more clearly.
>
> This patch is now complete from my perspective.
I took a look at this patch and found nothi
On 2021-06-07 16:16:58 +0500, Andrey Lepikhov wrote:
> Second version of the patch fixes problems detected by the FDW regression
> tests and shows differences of error reports in tuple-by-tuple and batched
> COPY approaches.
Patch doesn't apply and likely hasn't for a while...
On 2022-02-13 19:34:05 +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> Thanks for the comments, the attached v14 patch has the changes for the same.
The patch needs a rebase, it currently fails to apply:
http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_2957.log
Hi,
On 2022-03-04 09:43:59 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> On second thought the two seems repeating the same things. Thus I
> merged the two comments together. In this verion 16 it looks like
> this.
Patch currently fails to apply, needs a rebase:
http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_2490.log
Hi,
On 2022-03-10 17:42:14 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Shall I set this as Ready For Committer?
Currently this CF entry fails on cfbot:
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4531771134967808?logs=test_world#L1158
[16:27:35.772] # Failed test 'no parameters missing from
postgresql.conf.sample'
[16:27:35
Hi,
On 2022-01-25 19:21:01 +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> I rebased the pathset in attached v9. Please double check that I didn't miss
> anything in the rebase.
Fails to apply at the moment: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_2947.log
Marked as waiting for author.
- Andres
On 2022-02-28 18:08:48 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> =?UTF-8?B?U29maWEgS29waWtvdmE=?= writes:
> > ACL lists in tables may potentially be large in size. I suggest adding
> > TOAST support for system tables, namely pg_class, pg_attribute and
> > pg_largeobject_metadata, for they include ACL columns.
>
Hi Ishii-san,
On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 09:52:06 +0900 (JST)
Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Hi Yugo,
>
> I have looked into the patch and I noticed that linkend=... endterm=...> is used in pgbench.sgml. e.g.
>
>
>
> AFAIK this is the only place where "endterm" is used. In other places
> "link" tag is used
On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 16:11:43 +0900 (JST)
Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > Hi Yugo,
> >
> > I tested with serialization error scenario by setting:
> > default_transaction_isolation = 'repeatable read'
> > The result was:
> >
> > $ pgbench -t 10 -c 10 --max-tries=10 test
> > transaction type:
> > scaling
Hi,
On 2022-02-04 10:58:24 +0100, Sergey Dudoladov wrote:
> Thank you for the contribution. I included both of your diffs with
> minor changes.
This currently doesn't apply: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_3405.log
Could you rebase? Marking as waiting on author for now.
- Andres
Hi,
On 2022-02-19 11:06:18 -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> v21 rebased with compile errors fixed is attached.
This currently doesn't apply (mea culpa likely):
http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_3272.log
Could you rebase? Marked as waiting-on-author for now.
- Andres
Hi,
On 2022-02-25 19:44:27 +0300, Melih Mutlu wrote:
> I've been working on adding Windows+MinGW environment into cirrus-ci tasks
> (discussion about ci is here [1]).
This doesn't apply anymore: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_3575.log
Could you rebase?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
On 3/22/22 00:35, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-01-21 01:06:37 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Yeah, I haven't updated some of the test output because some of those
>> changes are a bit wrong (and I think that's fine for a PoC patch). I
>> should have mentioned that in the message, thoug
Hi,
On 2022-01-14 01:39:30 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Are you interested / willing to do some of this work?
This patch hasn't moved in the last two months. I think it may be time to
mark it as returned with feedback for now?
It's also failing tests, and has done so for months:
https://cirrus-
Hi,
On 2021-06-30 05:36:11 +0300, Yura Sokolov wrote:
> Anastasia Lubennikova писал 2021-06-30 00:49:
> > Hi, hackers!
> >
> > Many recently discussed features can make use of an extensible storage
> > manager API. Namely, storage level compression and encryption [1],
> > [2], [3], disk quota fea
Hi,
On 2021-08-24 12:03:59 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Tomas committed the bug-fix, so attaching a rebased version of the
> patch for $subject.
This patch is in the current CF, but doesn't apply:
http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_2992.log
marked the entry as waiting-on-author.
Greetings,
Andr
Joseph Koshakow writes:
> [ v8-0001-Check-for-overflow-when-decoding-an-interval.patch ]
This isn't applying per the cfbot; looks like it got sideswiped
by 9e9858389. Here's a quick rebase. I've not reviewed it, but
I did notice (because git was in my face about this) that it's
got whitespace i
Hi,
On 2021-11-05 15:10:29 +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> > 4 нояб. 2021 г., в 17:55, Daniel Gustafsson написал(а):
> >
> > The patch no longer applies, can you submit a rebased version please?
>
> Thanks, Daniel! PFA rebase.
Doesn't apply once more: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_3213.log
On 3/22/22 01:18, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-01-14 01:39:30 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Are you interested / willing to do some of this work?
>
> This patch hasn't moved in the last two months. I think it may be time to
> mark it as returned with feedback for now?
>
> It's also fai
Hi,
On 2022-02-01 21:57:00 -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> This patch adds a new option (-J num, --jobs-per-disk=num) in
> pg_upgrade to speed up copy mode. This generates upto ${num}
> processes per tablespace to copy segments of the same relfilenode
> in parallel.
>
> This can help when you h
Hi,
On 2022-01-12 12:57:02 -0600, David Christensen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > According to the cfbot, the patch doesn't apply anymore and needs a
> > rebase: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_36_3290.log
>
> V4 rebased attached.
Doesn't apply anymore, again: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_3290.lo
Hi,
On 2022-01-22 22:56:44 +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 05:28:05AM -0800, Kenaniah Cerny wrote:
> > Thank you so much for the backtrace!
> >
> > This latest patch should address by moving the dumpRoleMembership call to
> > before the pointer is closed.
>
> Thanks! The
Hi,
On 2022-01-17 01:05:14 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Great, I attached a rebased version.
Currently this doesn't apply: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_3394.log
- Andres
Hi,
On 2022-01-20 14:55:13 +0900, Takashi Menjo wrote:
> Here is patchset v8. It will have "make check-world" and Cirrus to
> pass.
This unfortunately does not apply anymore:
http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_3181.log
Could you rebase?
- Andres
Hi,
On 2022-02-14 00:43:36 +0300, Nikolay Shaplov wrote:
> I'd like to introduce a patch that reworks options processing.
This doesn't apply anymore: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_3536.log
Given that this patch has been submitted just to the last CF and that there's
been no action on it, I
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 16:11:43 +0900 (JST)
> Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
>> > Hi Yugo,
>> >
>> > I tested with serialization error scenario by setting:
>> > default_transaction_isolation = 'repeatable read'
>> > The result was:
>> >
>> > $ pgbench -t 10 -c 10 --max-tries=10 test
>> > transaction type
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
