On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 7:56 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> I still think these moderation rules are deeply unhelpful...
Yes, it is rather annoying.
> I don't know - I think there's a explicit comment somewhere, but I couldn't
> find it immediately. There's a bunch of indirect references to in in
> he
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 7:41 PM David Rowley wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 at 16:15, Vladimir Churyukin
> wrote:
> > As an end user that spends a lot of time optimizing pretty complicated
> queries, I'd say that something like this could be useful.
>
> I think we really need to at least see that it
On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 at 22:01, Jacob Champion wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 4:14 AM vignesh C wrote:
> > The patch does not apply on top of HEAD as in [1], please post a rebased
> > patch:
>
> Hi Vignesh -- this is a patch for the CF app, not the Postgres repo,
> so cfbot won't be able to appl
On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 at 17:39, Vladimir Churyukin wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 7:41 PM David Rowley wrote:
>> From what I can see here, the motivation to make this a useful feature
>> is backwards from what is normal. I think if you're keen to see a
>> feature that allows you better visibility
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 11:40 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2023 at 11:03:32AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 4:47 AM Nathan Bossart
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 02:02:58PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> > Maybe we could have workers that are exiting
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 2:40 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 18:54 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 3:55 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I've checked it and it looks good to me.
> > > Rebased the other patches and ran the pgident for t
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 8:29 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I find this astonishing. Why isn't there a prominent comment that
> advertises that TransactionIdDidAbort() just doesn't work reliably?
I pushed a fix for this now.
We should add a comment about this issue to TransactionIdDidAbort()
header
David Rowley writes:
> The thing I had in mind was some mode that would record additional
> details during planning that could be tagged onto the final plan in
> createplan.c so that EXPLAIN could display them. I just think that
> EXPLAIN is the place where people go to learn about _what_ the plan
I have added the thread to the commitfest: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/42/
Did you get a chance to review the patch? Please let me know if you
need anything from my end.
Thanks & Regards,
Sravan Velagandula
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Wed,
Hi,
On 2023-01-03 20:29:53 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 7:56 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > I don't know - I think there's a explicit comment somewhere, but I couldn't
> > find it immediately. There's a bunch of indirect references to in in
> > heapam_visibility.c, with com
On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 2:31 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 2:40 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 18:54 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 3:55 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I've checked it and it lo
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 10:33 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> I'd say a comment above TransactionIdDidAbort() referencing an overview
> comment at the top of the file? I think it might be worth moving the comment
> from heapam_visibility.c to transam.c?
What comments in heapam_visibility.c should we be
Hi,
I realized that pg_locks view shows the transaction id of a
speculative token lock in the database field:
postgres(1:509389)=# select * from pg_locks where locktype = 'spectoken';
locktype | database | relation | page | tuple | virtualxid |
transactionid | classid | objid | objsubid | virtu
Hi,
On 2023-01-03 22:41:35 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 10:33 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > I'd say a comment above TransactionIdDidAbort() referencing an overview
> > comment at the top of the file? I think it might be worth moving the comment
> > from heapam_visibility.c
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 10:47 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> IMO the comment at the top mentioning why the TransactionIdIsInProgress()
> calls are crucial / need to be done first would be considerably more likely to
> be found in transam.c than heapam_visibility.c.
Yeah, but they're duplicated anyway.
Hi hackers,
I saw a problem related to column list.
There's a restriction that different column lists for same table can't be used
in the publications of single subscription. But we will get unexpected errors in
some cases because the dropped columns are not ignored.
For example:
-- publisher
cr
On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 at 13:47, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
>
> On 08.12.22 03:30, Peter Smith wrote:
> > PSA patches for v9*
> >
> > v9-0001 - Now the table rows are ordered per PeterE's suggestions [1]
>
> committed
>
> > v9-0002 - All the review comments from DavidJ [2] are addressed
>
> I'm not sure
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 5:36 AM vignesh C wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 11:04, Corey Huinker
> wrote:
> >
> > I've rebased and updated the patch to include documentation.
> >
> > Regression tests have been moved to a separate patchfile because error
> messages will vary by OS and configuration,
When trying Valgrind I came across some compiling warnings with
USE_VALGRIND defined and --enable-cassert not configured. This is
mainly because in this case we have MEMORY_CONTEXT_CHECKING defined
while USE_ASSERT_CHECKING not defined.
aset.c: In function ‘AllocSetFree’:
aset.c:1027:10: warning:
101 - 119 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
