On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 6:59 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Pushed, after going through the patch once more, addressed the remaining
> FIXMEs, corrected a couple places in the docs and comments, etc. Minor
> tweaks, nothing important.
>
The commit updates tab-completion for ALTER PUBLICATION
On Friday, March 25, 2022 8:31 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> On Thursday, March 24, 2022 11:19 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 22, 2022 7:50 PM Amit Kapila
>
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 7:25 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon
Hi,
Currently postgres runs end-of-recovery(EOR) checkpoint in wait mode
meaning the server can take longer before it opens up for connections.
The EOR checkpoint, at times, can take a while if there was a lot of
work the server has done during crash recovery, say it replayed many
WAL records or c
At Fri, 25 Mar 2022 14:22:56 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> At Thu, 24 Mar 2022 13:21:33 -0400, Melanie Plageman
> wrote in
> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 3:36 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > >
> > > The biggest todos are:
> > > - Address all the remaining AFIXMEs and XXXs
> >
> > Attac
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:49 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 2:23 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
>
> Since commit 75b1521 added decoding of sequence to logical
> replication, the patch needs to have pgoutput_sequence() call
> update_progress().
>
Yeah, I also think thi
Hi Tom!
On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 16:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > After a bit of further fooling, I found that we could make that
> > work with LEFT JOIN LATERAL. This formulation has a different
> > problem, which is that if you do want most or all of the output,
> > computing each sub-ag
On 22.03.22 03:22, Andres Freund wrote:
Attached is v8. It's just a rebase to resolve conflicts with recent changes.
I have committed the DLSUFFIX refactoring, and also a stripped-down
version of the patch that makes update-unicode work with vpath. This
takes care of patches 0007 and 0009.
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 07:50:11AM +, Jian Guo wrote:
> For a simple demo, with this explain statement：
>
> -- Test sort stats summary
> set force_parallel_mode=on;
> select explain_filter('explain (analyze, summary off, timing off, costs off,
> format json) select * from tenk1 order by u
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 05:04:53PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> I think the idea is interesting, however there are a few problems in the
> patch.
>
> First, I think that it should only be done in the VERBOSE OFF mode. If you
> ask
> for a VERBOSE output you don't need both the details and the
Le dim. 2 janv. 2022 à 01:07, Noah Misch a écrit :
> On Sat, Jan 01, 2022 at 11:35:02AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Noah Misch writes:
> > > I get the same results. The leak arises because AIX freelocale()
> doesn't free
> > > all memory allocated in newlocale(). The following program uses
> tr
On 2022-Mar-24, Japin Li wrote:
> Thanks for your detail explaination. I find bottomup_sort_and_shrink_cmp()
> has smilar code
... except that bottomup_sort_and_shrink_cmp never handles the case of
the two structs being exactly identical, so I don't think this is a
great counter-example.
> IIUC
Pgbench is a simple benchmark tool by design, and I wonder if adding
a multiconnect feature will cause pgbench to be used incorrectly.
Maybe, but I do not see how it would be worse that what pgbench already
allows.
I agree that pgbench is simple; perhaps really too simple when it comes to
All these functions are too low level to be helpful to know. Knowing
the caller might actually give a hint as to where the unknown node
originated from. We may get that from the stack trace if that's
available. But if we could annotate the error with error_context that
will be super helpful. For ex
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 2:19 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 2:23 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thur, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:32 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > >
> > Thanks for your kindly update.
> >
> > > It seems by mistake you have removed the changes from
> pgoutp
On 3/25/22 05:01, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:29 AM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>>
>> Pushed.
>>
>
> Some of the comments given by me [1] don't seem to be addressed or
> responded to. Let me try to say again for the ease of discussion:
>
D'oh! I got distracted by Petr's response
On 3/25/22 08:00, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 6:59 AM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Pushed, after going through the patch once more, addressed the remaining
>> FIXMEs, corrected a couple places in the docs and comments, etc. Minor
>> tweaks, nothing important.
>>
>
>
пн, 21 мар. 2022 г. в 16:11, Pavel Borisov :
> 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 in
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 17:42, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2022-Mar-24, Japin Li wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your detail explaination. I find bottomup_sort_and_shrink_cmp()
>> has smilar code
>
> ... except that bottomup_sort_and_shrink_cmp never handles the case of
> the two structs being exactly ide
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 04:08:38PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 04:50:31PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> And so, this first part has been applied as of d4781d8. I'll try to
>> look at 0002 shortly.
>
> Thanks!
Now looking at 0002. The changes in hba.c are straight-f
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:56 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
>
> On 3/25/22 05:01, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:29 AM Tomas Vondra
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Pushed.
> >>
> >
> > Some of the comments given by me [1] don't seem to be addressed or
> > responded to. Let me try to say again fo
On 3/25/22 12:21, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:56 PM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 3/25/22 05:01, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:29 AM Tomas Vondra
>>> wrote:
Pushed.
>>>
>>> Some of the comments given by me [1] don't seem to be addressed o
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> - The DefGetCopyHeader() function seems very bulky and might not be
> necessary. I think you can just check for the string "match" first and
> then use defGetBoolean() as before if it didn't match.
The problem is that defGetBoolean() ends like this in the non-
On 2022-Mar-21, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> 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:
Pushed this, backpatching to 14 and 13. It would have been good to
backpatch further, but there's an (textually
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> On 18 Feb 2022, at 22:02, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
>> .. let's drop the 0001 from this thread and just go ahead with 0002.
>
> I applied the 0002 patch today, cleaning up the unused module imports.
A quick git grep¹ revealed a few more extraneous `use Config;`
sta
Hi, hackers
When I try to get total size of partition tables though partitioned table
name using pg_relation_size(), it always returns zero. I can use the
following SQL to get total size of partition tables, however, it is a bit
complex.
SELECT
pg_size_pretty(sum(pg_relation_size(i
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> On 24 Mar 2022, at 19:34, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>
>> I just spotted an unnecessarily gendered example involving a 'salesmen'
>> table in the UPDATE docs. Here's a patch that changes that to
>> 'salespeople'.
>
> No objections to changing that, it's AFAICT t
On 24.03.22 22:57, David Rowley wrote:
* Unknown attributes are ignored. Some additional attributes are used for
* special "hack" cases.
I think these really should all be documented. If someone needs to
use one of these hacks then they're going to need to trawl through
Perl code to see if
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 01:05:49AM -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> This patch is marked "waiting on author" in the CF. However the most
> recent emails have patches and it's not clear to me what's left from
> previous reviews that might not be addressed yet. Should this patch be
> marked "Needs Review"?
On 2022-Mar-25, Japin Li wrote:
> Could we provide a function to get the total size of the partition table
> though the partitioned table name? Maybe we can extend
> the pg_relation_size() to get the total size of partition tables through
> the partitioned table name.
Does \dP+ do what you need?
Hi,
The changes look good to me.
Thanks,
Dipesh
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 24.03.22 22:57, David Rowley wrote:
>> Also, I'm quite keen to see this work make it into v15. Do you think
>> you'll get time to do that? Thanks for working on it.
> My thinking right now is to wait for the PG16 branch to open and then
> consider putting it in ear
Guillaume Lelarge writes:
> Did this get anywhere? Is there something we could do to make this move
> forward?
No. Write a patch?
regards, tom lane
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 20:59, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2022-Mar-25, Japin Li wrote:
>
>> Could we provide a function to get the total size of the partition table
>> though the partitioned table name? Maybe we can extend
>> the pg_relation_size() to get the total size of partition tables throu
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2022-03-25 01:38:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> AFAICS, this strategy of whacking a predetermined chunk of the page with
>> a predetermined value is going to fail 1-out-of-64K times.
> Yea. I suspect that the way the modifications and checksumming are done are
> actually
Ashutosh Bapat writes:
> All these functions are too low level to be helpful to know. Knowing
> the caller might actually give a hint as to where the unknown node
> originated from. We may get that from the stack trace if that's
> available. But if we could annotate the error with error_context th
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 9:49 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> That'll just reduce the probability of failure, not eliminate it.
I mean, if the expected time to the first failure on even 1 machine
exceeds the time until the heat death of the universe by 10 orders of
magnitude, it's probably good enough.
--
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 21:21, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 6:23 PM Japin Li wrote:
>>
>> Hi, hackers
>>
>> When I try to get total size of partition tables though partitioned table
>> name using pg_relation_size(), it always returns zero. I can use the
>> following SQL t
Andrei Zubkov writes:
> Thank you for your attention and for the problem resolution. However
> I'm worry a little about possible performance issues related to
> monitoring solutions performing regular sampling of statistic views to
> find out the most intensive objects in a database.
There's no a
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 9:49 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> That'll just reduce the probability of failure, not eliminate it.
> I mean, if the expected time to the first failure on even 1 machine
> exceeds the time until the heat death of the universe by 10 orders of
> magnitude, it
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 01:20:47AM -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> It seems development on this has stalled. If there's no further work
> happening I guess I'll mark the patch returned with feedback. Feel
> free to resubmit it to the next CF when there's progress.
Since it's a reasonably large patch (a
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 2:07 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> We really ought to find a way to get to wider checksums :/
Eh, let's just use longer names for the buildfarm animals and call it good. :-)
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:12 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> Thanks, I have gone through your changes in comments and docs and those LGTM.
It looks like this patch will need to be updated for Alvaro's commit
49d9cfc68bf4e0d32a948fe72d5a0ef7f464944e. The newly added test
029_replay_tsp_drops.pl fails wit
Hi
On Fri, 2022-03-25 at 00:37 -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> Fwiw I find the idea of having a separate "aux" table kind of
> awkward.
> It'll seem strange to users not familiar with the history and without
> any clear idea why the fields are split.
Greg, thank you for your attention and for your tho
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:02 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 9:49 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> That'll just reduce the probability of failure, not eliminate it.
>
> > I mean, if the expected time to the first failure on even 1 machine
> > exceeds the time until t
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 6:23 PM Japin Li wrote:
>
> Hi, hackers
>
> When I try to get total size of partition tables though partitioned table
> name using pg_relation_size(), it always returns zero. I can use the
> following SQL to get total size of partition tables, however, it is a bit
> comple
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:02 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Adding another 16 bits won't get you to that, sadly. Yeah, it *might*
>> extend the MTTF to more than the project's likely lifespan, but that
>> doesn't mean we couldn't get unlucky next week.
> I suspect that the number
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:29 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Pushed, after going through the patch once more, addressed the remaining
> FIXMEs, corrected a couple places in the docs and comments, etc. Minor
> tweaks, nothing important.
While rebasing patch [1] I found a couple of comments:
sta
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 7:41 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:12 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > Thanks, I have gone through your changes in comments and docs and those
> > LGTM.
>
> It looks like this patch will need to be updated for Alvaro's commit
> 49d9cfc68bf4e0d32a948fe72d5a
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 21:21, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 6:23 PM Japin Li wrote:
>>
>> Hi, hackers
>>
>> When I try to get total size of partition tables though partitioned table
>> name using pg_relation_size(), it always returns zero. I can use the
>> following SQL to
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:34 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> I dunno. Compatibility and speed concerns aside, that seems like an awful
> lot of bits to be expending on every page compared to the value.
I dunno either, but over on the TDE thread people seemed quite willing
to expend like 16-32 *bytes* for
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 6:57 AM Imseih (AWS), Sami wrote:
>
> >Can the leader pass a callback that checks PVIndStats to ambulkdelete
> >an amvacuumcleanup callbacks? I think that in the passed callback, the
> >leader checks if the number of processed indexes and updates its
> >prog
On 23.03.22 13:58, Fabien COELHO wrote:
If you want to wait for libpq to provide a solution for this corner
case, I'm afraid that "never" is the likely result, especially as no
test case exercices this path to show that there is a problem somewhere,
so nobody should care to fix it. I'm not sure
Hi Bharath,
First look at the patch, bear with me if any of the following comments are
repeated.
1. With pg_get_wal_record(lsn), say a WAL record start, end lsn range
contains the specified LSN, wouldn't it be more meaningful to show the
corresponding WAL record.
For example, upon providing '0/173
On 23.03.22 16:14, Tom Lane wrote:
My big fear is that it will reduce portability of pg_dump output:
views that would have loaded successfully into pre-v14 servers
no longer will, and your chances of porting them to other RDBMSes
probably go down too. Once v13 becomes EOL, that will be less of a
On 25.03.22 14:32, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut writes:
On 24.03.22 22:57, David Rowley wrote:
Also, I'm quite keen to see this work make it into v15. Do you think
you'll get time to do that? Thanks for working on it.
My thinking right now is to wait for the PG16 branch to open and the
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 08:52:40PM +0800, Japin Li wrote:
> When I try to get total size of partition tables though partitioned table
> name using pg_relation_size(), it always returns zero. I can use the
> following SQL to get total size of partition tables, however, it is a bit
> complex.
This
As Tom said earlier, wasn't this fixed by 618c16707? If not, is there any
other discussion on the specifics of this issue? I'm not aware of one.
Hmmm… I'll try to understand why the doubled message seems to be still
there.
--
Fabien.
Robert Haas writes:
> ... It's not
> like a 16-bit checksum was state-of-the-art even when we introduced
> it. We just did it because we had 2 bytes that we could repurpose
> relatively painlessly, and not any larger number. And that's still the
> case today, so at least in the short term we will
On 3/23/22 16:55, Andres Freund wrote:
It's particularly impressive that the cost of running with ASAN is *so* much
lower than valgrind. On my workstation a check-world with
-fsanitize=alignment,undefined,address takes 3min17s, vs 1min10s or so without
-fsanitize. Not something to always use, b
Le ven. 25 mars 2022, 14:25, Tom Lane a écrit :
> Guillaume Lelarge writes:
> > Did this get anywhere? Is there something we could do to make this move
> > forward?
>
> No. Write a patch?
>
I wouldn't have asked if I could write such a patch :-)
Hi,
On 2022-03-25 11:50:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > ... It's not
> > like a 16-bit checksum was state-of-the-art even when we introduced
> > it. We just did it because we had 2 bytes that we could repurpose
> > relatively painlessly, and not any larger number. And that's s
Andres Freund writes:
> The same code also exists in src/bin/pg_basebackup/t/010_pg_basebackup.pl,
> which presumably has the same collision risks.
Oooh, I missed that.
> Perhaps we should put a
> function into Cluster.pm and use it from both?
+1, I'll make it so.
regar
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 11:52 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 3:04 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Seems like this ought to have at least some basic test to make sure it
> > actually works / keeps working?
>
> Wouldn't hurt, although it may be a little bit tricky to getting it
> work
Hello Michael,
Le mar. 25 janv. 2022 à 06:49, Michael Paquier a
écrit :
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 03:23:07PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > Looking at this thread I think it makes sense to go ahead with this
> patch. The
> > filter functionality worked on in another thread is dealing with
Hello Tom,
Le ven. 25 mars 2022 à 00:18, Tom Lane a écrit :
> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
> >> On 24 Mar 2022, at 23:38, Greg Stark wrote:
> >> It looks like this discussion has reached a bit of an impasse with Tom
> >> being against this approach and Michael and Daniel being for it. It
> >> doe
Tom Lane writes:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> ... It's not
>> like a 16-bit checksum was state-of-the-art even when we introduced
>> it. We just did it because we had 2 bytes that we could repurpose
>> relatively painlessly, and not any larger number. And that's still the
>> case today, so at least
Hello Chapman,
Le ven. 25 mars 2022 à 00:42, Chapman Flack a
écrit :
> On 03/27/21 08:57, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > We can bikeshed the name of the flag at some stage. --procedures-only
> > might also make sense
>
> Any takers for --routines-only ?
>
> "Routine" is the genuine, ISO SQL umbrella
Hi,
On March 25, 2022 9:22:09 AM PDT, Robert Haas wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 11:52 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 3:04 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>> > Seems like this ought to have at least some basic test to make sure it
>> > actually works / keeps working?
>>
>> Wouldn't
Hello David,
thank you for your interest in that patch.
Le ven. 25 mars 2022 à 01:17, David G. Johnston
a écrit :
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 4:42 PM Chapman Flack
> wrote:
>
>> On 03/27/21 08:57, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> > We can bikeshed the name of the flag at some stage. --procedures-only
>>
On 3/25/22 12:59, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> On 3/25/22 12:21, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:56 PM Tomas Vondra
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/25/22 05:01, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:29 AM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> Pushed.
>
Some of the
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:40 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> Since the server spins up checkpointer process [1] while the startup
> process performs recovery, isn't it a good idea to make
> end-of-recovery completely optional for the users or at least run it
> in non-wait mode so that the server wil
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 9:44 AM Laetitia Avrot
wrote:
>
> Actually, I thought of it after the --schema-only flag (which is kind of
> confusing, because it won't export only schema creation DDL).
>
--schema-only is talking about the different sections of the dump file, not
namespace schema object
Hi,
On March 25, 2022 9:56:38 AM PDT, Robert Haas wrote:
>On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:40 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
>> Since the server spins up checkpointer process [1] while the startup
>> process performs recovery, isn't it a good idea to make
>> end-of-recovery completely optional for the u
=?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= writes:
> LGTM, but it would be good to include $! in the die messages.
Roger, will do.
regards, tom lane
Laetitia Avrot writes:
> Thank you so much for your suggestion. I was really excited to find a
> generic term for Functions and Procedures, but "routine" also includes
> aggregation functions which I had excluded from my feature (see Postgres
> Glossary here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/g
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:36 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Create a CF entry for it, or enable CI on a github repo?
I created a CF entry for it. Then I had to try to Google around to
find the URL from the cfbot, because it's not even linked from
commitfest.postgresql.org for some reason. #blamemagnu
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> I don't find the --objectype-only option to be desirable. psql
> --tables-only --functions-only just seems odd, no longer are they "only".
> I would go with --function-all (and maybe --function-system and
> --function-user) if going down this path but the wildcard fe
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:57 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
>
> > Except succinctly
> > omitting system objects which should get its own general option.
>
pg_dump never dumps system objects, so I don't see a need for
> a switch to tell it not to.
>
>
I considered pg_class to b
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:49 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> That's not a whole lot of fun if you think of cases like postgres_fdw (or
> citus as in Jelte's case), which run inside the backend. Even with just a
> single postgres_fdw, we don't really want to end up in an uninterruptible
> PQcancel() that
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:57 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> pg_dump never dumps system objects, so I don't see a need for
>> a switch to tell it not to.
> I considered pg_class to be a system object, which was dumped under -t '*'
Oh! You're right, the --table switches wil
On Friday, March 25, 2022, Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:57 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> pg_dump never dumps system objects, so I don't see a need for
> >> a switch to tell it not to.
>
> > I considered pg_class to be a system object, which was dumped u
Robert Haas writes:
> That said, I don't think that this particular patch is going in the
> right direction. I think Jacob's comment upthread is right on point:
> "This seems like a big change compared to PQcancel(); one that's not
> really hinted at elsewhere. Having the async version of an API o
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:28 AM Greg Stark wrote:
> Development of this seems to have stalled with the only review of this
> patch expressing some skepticism about whether it's needed at all.
My opinion on this patch is that we typically handle objects that are
essentially table properties by sh
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 03:11:47PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:28 AM Greg Stark wrote:
> > Development of this seems to have stalled with the only review of this
> > patch expressing some skepticism about whether it's needed at all.
>
> Now, there is some precedent for
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 2:47 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> I think you misunderstand where the real pain point is. The reason
> that PQcancel's functionality is so limited has little to do with
> blocking vs non-blocking, and everything to do with the fact that
> it's designed to be safe to call from a SI
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:20 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> \dX is similar, and I remember wondering whether it was really useful/needed.
> The catalog tables are exposed and documented for a reason, and power-users
> will learn to use them.
I don't think that \dX is comparable, because I don't think
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 3:21 PM Jacob Champion wrote:
> v3 rebases over Andres' changes and actually adds the Perl driver that
> I missed the git-add for.
This seems totally reasonable. However, I think it should update the
documentation somehow.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Robert Haas writes:
> Well, that's a fair point, but it's somewhat orthogonal to the one I'm
> making, which is that a non-blocking version of function X might be
> expected to share code or at least functionality with X itself. Having
> something that is named in a way that implies asynchrony wit
> On Mar 22, 2022, at 11:04 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> This patch adds three new arguments to processSQLNamePattern() and
> documents one of them. It adds three new parameters to
> patternToSQLRegex() as well, and documents none of them.
This next patch adds the missing comments.
> I think th
On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 6:26 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
> FWIW, here's a patch just adding a comment on how the startup process
> can get a free procState array slot even when SInvalShmemSize hasn't
> accounted for it.
I don't think the positioning of this code comment is very good,
because it's
On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 8:47 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Since the approach taken wasn't to anyones liking, attached is a v4 (partly
> extracted from the previous patch) which only adds notes that SSL is used
> interchangeably with TLS in our documentation and configuration.
I have actually bee
On 3/25/22 15:34, vignesh C wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 3:29 AM Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Pushed, after going through the patch once more, addressed the remaining
>> FIXMEs, corrected a couple places in the docs and comments, etc. Minor
>> tweaks, nothing important.
>
> While reb
On 3/25/22 13:52, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:36 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>> Create a CF entry for it, or enable CI on a github repo?
> I created a CF entry for it. Then I had to try to Google around to
> find the URL from the cfbot, because it's not even linked from
> commitf
Hi,
I've fixed most of the reported issues (or at least I think so), with
the exception of those in apply_handle_sequence function, i.e.:
1) properly coordinating with the tablesync worker
2) considering skip_lsn, skipping changes
3) missing privilege check, similar to TargetPrivilegesCheck
4)
Fabien COELHO writes:
>> [...] One way to avoid these errors is to send Parse messages before
>> pipeline mode starts. I attached a patch to fix to prepare commands at
>> starting of a script instead of at the first execution of the command.
> ISTM that moving prepare out of command execution i
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 8:49 AM James Coleman wrote:
> Here's a version that looks like that. I'm not convinced it's an
> improvement over the previous version: again, I expect more advanced
> users to already understand this concept, and I think moving it to the
> ALTER TABLE page could very well
On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 6:52 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> I don't think that the Windows CI is running the TAP tests for
> contrib. At least, I can't find any indication of it in the output. So
> it doesn't really help to assess how portable this test is, unless I'm
> missing something.
Yeah :-( vcre
Robert Haas writes:
> I vote for rejecting both of these patches.
I see what James is on about here, but I agree that these specific changes
don't help much. What would actually be desirable IMO is a separate
section somewhere explaining the performance characteristics of ALTER
TABLE. (We've al
> On 25 Mar 2022, at 20:58, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 8:47 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Since the approach taken wasn't to anyones liking, attached is a v4 (partly
>> extracted from the previous patch) which only adds notes that SSL is used
>> interchangeably with TLS in o
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 1:40 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 8:49 AM James Coleman wrote:
> > Here's a version that looks like that. I'm not convinced it's an
> > improvement over the previous version: again, I expect more advanced
> > users to already understand this concept, an
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
