Re: On login trigger: take three

Hi Nikita, > Mikhail, I've checked the patch and previous discussion, > the condition mentioned earlier is still actual: Thanks for pointing this out! My bad, I forgot to fix the documentation example. Attached v34 has this issue fixed, as well as a couple other problems with the example code. -

Re: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply

On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 4:34 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 2:47 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com > wrote: > > > > > --- > > > + active_workers = list_copy(ParallelApplyWorkerPool); > > > + > > > + foreach(lc, active_workers) > > > + { > > > + int

Re: On login trigger: take three

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 3:46 AM Mikhail Gribkov wrote: > Hi Nikita, > > > Mikhail, I've checked the patch and previous discussion, > > the condition mentioned earlier is still actual: > > Thanks for pointing this out! My bad, I forgot to fix the documentation > example. > Attached v34 has this is

Re: allow granting CLUSTER, REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW, and REINDEX

On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 10:04 PM Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 10:10:43AM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote: > > The proposal to skip privilege checks for partitions would be > > consistent with INSERT, SELECT, REINDEX that flow through to the > > underlying partitions regardless of permi

Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables

On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:18:58PM +0400, Ilya Gladyshev wrote: > > > I actually think that the progress view would be better off without > > > the total number of partitions, > > > > Just curious - why ? > > We don't really know how many indexes we are going to create, unless we > have some kin

Re: [PATCH] random_normal function

Hello Paul, My 0.02€ about the patch: Patch did not apply with "git apply", I had to "patch -p1 <" and there was a bunch of warnings. Patches compile and make check is okay. The first patch adds empty lines at the end of "sql/random.sql", I think that it should not. # About random_normal

Re: Infinite Interval

Hi Ashutosh, I've added tests for all the operators and functions involving intervals and what I think the expected behaviors to be. The formatting might be slightly off and I've left the contents of the error messages as TODOs. Hopefully it's a good reference for the implementation. > Adding inf

Re: check_strxfrm_bug()

On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 3:22 PM Thomas Munro wrote: > ... If you're worried that the bugs might > come back, then the test is insufficient: modern versions of both OSes > have strxfrm_l(), which we aren't checking. With my garbage collector hat on, that made me wonder if there was some more poten

Re: Error-safe user functions

On 2022-12-15 Th 09:12, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 6:24 PM Tom Lane wrote: >> I've gone through these now and revised/pushed most of them. > Tom, I just want to extend huge thanks to you for working on this > infrastructure. jsonpath aside, I think this is going to pay dividend

Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump

001: still refers to "gzip", which is correct for -Fp and -Fd but not for -Fc, for which it's more correct to say "zlib". That affects the name of the function, structures, comments, etc. I'm not sure if it's an issue to re-use the basebackup compression routines here. Maybe we should accept "-Z

Re: Infinite Interval

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 2:34 PM Joseph Koshakow wrote: > > Hi Ashutosh, > > I've added tests for all the operators and functions involving > intervals and what I think the expected behaviors to be. The > formatting might be slightly off and I've left the contents of the > error messages as TODOs.

Re: Rework of collation code, extensibility

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 7:14 PM Jeff Davis wrote: > Attached is a new patch series. I think there are enough changes that > this has become more of a "rework" of the collation code rather than > just a refactoring. This is a continuation of some prior work[1][2] in > a new thread given its new sc

Re: Rework of collation code, extensibility

On Sun, Dec 18, 2022 at 10:28 AM Ted Yu wrote: > It seems the `else` is not needed (since when the if branch is taken, we return from the func). By that same logic, this review comment is not needed, since compiler vendors don't charge license fees by the number of keywords. ;-) Joking aside, we

Re: Rework of collation code, extensibility

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 8:54 PM John Naylor wrote: > > > nul-terminate -> null-terminate > > NUL is a common abbreviation for the zero byte (but not for zero > pointers). See the ascii manpage. > > -- > John Naylor > EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com > > Ah. `nul-terminated` does appear in the co