Thank you for your review again.
> ...but I think Timestamp[Tz]s are stored as microseconds, so we're off
> by a factor of a million. This still works because later we cast to
> double and pass it back through float8_timestamptz, which converts it:
In my test, if I made ASN1_TIME_to_timestamp
Rebased version attached (v2), with another sentence in the sgml to explain
the optional use of -d
Cheers,
Greg
pgbench.dash.d.or.not.dash.d.v2.patch
Description: Binary data
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 18:50, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> If the problem you speculate is different from this one, I am not able to see
> it. It might help give an example query or explain more.
I looked at this again and I might have been wrong about there being a
problem. I set a breakpoint in cr
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 6:12 PM Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 04:20:35PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 3:11 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 10:56:25AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 8:19 PM
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 12:39 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> > If you think that this is OK, and as far as I can see this looks OK on
> > the thread, then this open item should be moved under "resolved before
> > 17beta1", mentioning the commit involved in the fix. Please see [1]
> > for e
On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 12:49 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
>
> Following are some open points:
>
> 1. Where to do inactive_timeout invalidation exactly if not the checkpointer.
>
I have suggested to do it at the time of CheckpointReplicationSlots()
and Bertrand suggested to do it whenever we res
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 6:46 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>
> I intend to commit 0001+0002 after a bit more polishing.
>
V43 is far more intuitive! thanks!
if (isnull ||
(exprType(expr) == JSONBOID &&
btype == default_behavior))
coerce = true;
else
coerced_expr =
coerce_to_target_type(pstate, expr, ex
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 11:56, Amonson, Paul D wrote:
> Changed in this patch set.
Thanks for rebasing.
I don't think there's any need to mention Intel in each of the
following comments:
+# Check for Intel AVX512 intrinsics to do POPCNT calculations.
+# Newer Intel processors can use AVX-512 PO
Hi, Alexander!
For 0007:
Code inside
+heapam_reloptions(char relkind, Datum reloptions, bool validate)
+{
+ if (relkind == RELKIND_RELATION ||
+ relkind == RELKIND_TOASTVALUE ||
+ relkind == RELKIND_MATVIEW)
+ return heap_reloptions(relkind, reloptions, validate);
+
+ retur
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 at 17:18, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> Dear Sawada-san,
>
> Thanks for giving comments!
>
> > This behavior makes sense to me. But do we want to handle the case of
> > using environment variables too?
>
> Yeah, v5 does not consider which libpq parameters are specified by
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> Committed, with some final cosmetic cleanups. Thanks everyone!
A couple of buildfarm animals don't like these tests:
Assert(child_type >= 0 && child_type < lengthof(child_process_kinds));
for example
ayu | 2024-03-19 13:08:05 | launch_backend.c:2
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 3:42 PM Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Looking at 0001:
Thanks for reviewing.
> 1 ===
>
> + True if this logical slot conflicted with recovery (and so is now
> + invalidated). When this column is true, check
>
> Worth to add back the physical slot mention
> Hi,
>
> > I'm attaching a new version (v30) that adds:
> >
> > * 3 new options (--publication, --subscription, --replication-slot) to
> > assign
> > names to the objects. The --database option used to ignore duplicate
> > names,
> > however, since these new options rely on the number of dat
On 19.03.24 10:38, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
Considering the number of environments PostgreSQL can run in (OS +
hardware + virtualization technologies) and the fact that
hardware/software changes I doubt that it's realistic to expect any
particular guarantees from gettimeofday() in the general c
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 12:06 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 1:29 PM John Naylor wrote:
> > Locally (not CI), we should try big inputs to make sure we can
> > actually go up to many GB -- it's easier and faster this way than
> > having vacuum give us a large data set.
>
> I
minor issues I found while looking through it.
other than these issues, looks good!
/*
* Convert the a given JsonbValue to its C string representation
*
* Returns the string as a Datum setting *resnull if the JsonbValue is a
* a jbvNull.
*/
static char *
ExecGetJsonValueItemString(JsonbValue
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 11:30 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> > Sounds similar in principle, but it looks really complicated. I don't
> > think the additional loops and branches are a good way to go, either
> > for readability or for branch prediction. My sketch has one branch for
> > which loop to do,
101 - 117 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
