Hi,
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 10:47:53AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 01:30:11PM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > - change the arguments to false in the pgstat_drop_entry_internal() call in
> > pgstat_drop_all_entries()
> > - start the engine
> > - kill -9 postgres
> >
On 10/31/24 11:18, Vitaly Davydov wrote:
> Dear Hackers,
>
>
>
> I'd like to discuss a problem with replication slots's restart LSN.
> Physical slots are saved to disk at the beginning of checkpoint. At the
> end of checkpoint, old WAL segments are recycled or removed from disk,
> if they are n
On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 02:24:33PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 17 Oct 2024, at 04:45, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > I looked at this and decided the GUC section was illogical, so I just
> > moved the variables up into the be-secure.c section. Patch attached.
>
> No objections.
Patch ap
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 10:00 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> OK, do you think these three patches tell the _configthreadlocale()
> story properly? (Then after that we can get back to getting rid of
> it...)
Just by the way, here's another interesting thing I have learned about
the msvcrt->ucrt evoluti
On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 at 08:30, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> OK, I'm fine with this. v4 patch attached with one plan showing read,
> written, and dirtied buffers.
I think this might be a good time for anyone out there who is against
turning on BUFFERS when ANALYZE is on to speak up.
Votes for chang
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 8:44 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 5:31 PM Sutou Kouhei wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > In
> > "Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations"
> > on Mon, 18 Nov 2024 17:02:41 -0800,
> > Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > > I
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 7:54 PM Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 20 Nov 2024, at 00:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 9:45 AM Andrey M. Borodin
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 19 Nov 2024, at 14:31, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Done.
> >>
> >> Here's v3
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 02:10:23PM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Yeah, also this could useful for custom statistics. So I created a dedicated
> thread and a patch proposal (see [1]).
>
> [1]:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Zz3skBqzBncSFIuY%40ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal
T
Oh, and yeah, we should include the branch name in the cache key.
Something like the attached. For some reason CI is not allowing me to
see the output from macOS right now (?!) so I couldn't see what
"Populate macports cache" printed out[1], but I think this should be
right... will try again tomor
Alexander Lakhin writes:
> 17.11.2024 05:33, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah. This has been happening off-and-on in the buildfarm ever
>> since we added that test. I'm not sure if it's just "the test
>> is unstable" or if it's telling us there's a problem with the
>> cancel logic. Scraping the last 3 m
On Tue, Nov 5, 2024 at 05:24:07PM +0800, jian he wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 11:51 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 10:00:54AM +0800, jian he wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 2:05 AM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > Yes, updated patch attached.
> > > >
> > > looks goo
Mikhail Gribkov writes:
> What do you think?
I think this will break cases we don't want to break.
Accessing the metadata of other temp tables is fine, and indeed
necessary for operations like dropping them. It's access to
the table contents that needs to be blocked. I'm surprised
that we don'
On 10/3/24 05:11, David Steele wrote:
On 10/3/24 07:45, Michael Paquier wrote:
1) is something that has more value than 2), IMO, because there is no
need for a manual step when a backup is taken by the replication
protocol. Well, custom backup solutions that rely on the replication
protocol to
> On Nov 20, 2024, at 6:39 AM, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 20 Nov 2024, at 15:58, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>>
>> PFA the patch doing so.
>
> Ugh. The patch is simply dysfunctional, sorry. xmax_status is being checked
> uninitiated.
> But, well, it highlights the idea: make verif
On 11/20/24 18:24, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> ...
>
> What confuses me a bit is that we update the restart_lsn (and call
> ReplicationSlotsComputeRequiredLSN() to recalculate the global value)
> all the time. Walsender does that in PhysicalConfirmReceivedLocation for
> example. So we actually see the
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 02:20:18PM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Right. I did not had in mind to go that far here (for the per backend stats
> needs). My idea was "just" to move the new pgstat_create_backend_stat() (which
> is related to per backend stats only) call at the right place in Startup
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 11:33 AM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> After thinking about this some more, I'm actually finding myself leaning
> towards leaving the hint and potentially adding more detail to the
> documentation as a follow-up patch.
Sounds good to me. I think my hesitation was more that the
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 09:01:26AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 04:28:55PM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > So, for the startup process only, what about?
> >
> > - don't call pgstat_create_backend_stat() in pgstat_beinit()...
> > - but call it in StartupXLOG() ins
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 08:14:01PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hi
>
> I wrote POC of VARIABLE(varname) syntax support
Thanks, the results look good. I'm still opposed the idea of having a
warning, and think it has to be an error -- but it's my subjective
opinion. Lets see if there are more vot
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 06:43:58AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> > Thanks for rebasing. To help with review, could you also describe
> > current status of the patch? I have to admit, currently the commit
> > message doesn't tell much, and looks more like notes for the future you.
>
> The patch
On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 10:22:54AM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 at 08:30, Guillaume Lelarge
> wrote:
> > OK, I'm fine with this. v4 patch attached with one plan showing read,
> > written, and dirtied buffers.
>
> I think this might be a good time for anyone out there who is
On 19/11/2024 01:20, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I realized that building test_radixtree.c with TEST_SHARED_RT fails
> because it eventually sets RT_SHMEM when #include'ing radixtree.h but
> it's missing some header files to include. I've attached a patch to
> include necessary header files in radixtr
Hi hackers,
I was experimenting with temporary tables and noticed many odd things with
them.
Short story: Having appropriate privileges, user can access other session's
temp
tables and it is a complete mess. Let's fix it.
Longer story.
Let's open two sessions for one postgres user. In the first
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, failed
Implements feature: tested, failed
Spec compliant: tested, failed
Documentation:not tested
Hi,
- Tested patch with check-world.
- Verified CheckAutovacuumWo
Thank you for taking the time to look this over.
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 3:19 AM jian he wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 4:40 AM David G. Johnston
> wrote:
> >
> > The attached are complete and ready for review. I did some file
> structure reformatting at the end and left that as the second p
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 5:07 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> One piece of it would be to see how much of such "bottlenecks" we
> would be able to get rid of by integrating pg_stat_statements into
> the central pgstats with the custom APIs, without pushing the module
> into core.
Any particular reas
On 11/20/24 14:40, Vitaly Davydov wrote:
> Dear Hackers,
>
>
>
> To ping the topic, I'd like to clarify what may be wrong with the idea
> described here, because I do not see any interest from the community.
> The topic is related to physical replication. The primary idea is to
> define the
Anymore feedback on this patch? Hoping this is a straightforward one.
Raghuveer
> -Original Message-
> From: Devulapalli, Raghuveer
> Sent: Friday, November 8, 2024 11:05 AM
> To: Devulapalli, Raghuveer ; Nathan Bossart
>
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Shankaran, Akash
>
>
Yugo NAGATA writes:
>> You could even argue that case 2 isn't good enough either,
>> and we should be delivering a specific error message saying
>> that an ENR can't be used in a view/matview. To do that,
>> we'd likely need to pass down the QueryEnvironment in more
>> places not fewer.
> We can
Le mer. 20 nov. 2024 à 16:51, Greg Sabino Mullane a
écrit :
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 1:26 AM Guillaume Lelarge
> wrote:
>
>> OK, but I'm not sure which example I should pick to add dirtied and
>> written shared buffers. It looks kinda artificial. Should I choose one
>> randomly?
>>
>
> It will
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 05:14:53PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Marcos Pegoraro writes:
> > But it would be good to have this patch applied to all supported versions,
> > as soon as nothing was changed on that pg_dump option, no ?
>
> Even more to the point, should we change pg_dump's help output?
>
On 20/11/2024 22:22, David Rowley wrote:
On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 at 08:30, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
OK, I'm fine with this. v4 patch attached with one plan showing read, written,
and dirtied buffers.
I think this might be a good time for anyone out there who is against
turning on BUFFERS when A
Hi Peter,
On 2024-11-20 04:06, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
Hi Masahiro,
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 3:30 AM Masahiro Ikeda
wrote:
Apologies for the delayed response. I've confirmed that the costing is
significantly
improved for multicolumn indexes in the case I provided. Thanks!
https://www.postgresq
rebased
--
nathan
>From e877271830e076338f999ee72b9d8148e469d5d2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nathan Bossart
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 15:05:44 -0500
Subject: [PATCH v10 1/1] allow changing autovacuum_max_workers without
restarting
---
doc/src/sgml/config.sgml | 28 ++-
Hi,
On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 at 18:13, jian he wrote:
>
> also played around with v5-0002, works fine.
> overall, v5-0001 and v5-0002 works as i expected.
Thanks for checking it!
--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsoft
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 7:12 AM Andrey M. Borodin
wrote:
> +1 for the idea. I heard a lot of complaints about that pgss is costly.
> Most of them were using it wrong though.
I'm curious what "using it wrong" means exactly?
Oh, and a +1 in general to the patch, OP, although it would also be nic
> On 20 Nov 2024, at 13:36, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 11/19/24 17:44, Sanjay Khatri wrote:
>> And we dont have any data backup too.
This will be your first priority once the system is up and running again, maybe
even to the point of planning for what immediate action to take before the
system boo
> On 28 Oct 2020, at 21:21, Mark Dilger wrote:
>
> The other possibillity is that this tuple is erroneously marked as
> HEAP_UPDATED. heap_update() sets that, which makes sense.
> rewrite_heap_tuple() copies the old tuple's bits to the new tuple and then
> does some work to resolve update
On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 12:43, Nisha Moond wrote:
>
> Attached is the v49 patch set:
> - Fixed the bug reported in [1].
> - Addressed comments in [2] and [3].
>
> I've split the patch into two, implementing the suggested idea in
> comment #5 of [2] separately in 001:
>
> Patch-001: Adds additional
Dear,
Last week I installed Postgres 15.8 on my Windows server 2016, I
installed the pgadmin thats comes packed with postgresql installer.
I already have postgres 12.1 with pgAdmin installed on my server.
After installing Postgres 15.8, the respective pgAdmin was not working, it
showed error 'Po
On 18.11.24 20:19, David E. Wheeler wrote:
- The biggest problem is that many extensions set in their control file
module_pathname = '$libdir/foo'
This disables the use of dynamic_library_path, so this whole idea of installing
an extension elsewhere won't work that way. The obvious solutio
> On 20 Nov 2024, at 12:48, Vladimir Sitnikov
> wrote:
>
> "select * from pg_prepared_xacts" might produce transactions created by a
> different user, so the caller won't be able to issue "commit prepared".
>
> I think there should be a view that returns only the transactions that the
> ca
> You should be more careful with the amount of tests you are doing
> here. This fails while waiting for some changes to be streamed when
> creating a subscription:
> cd src/test/subscription/ && PROVE_TESTS=t/017_stream_ddl.pl make check
I apologize for the obvious error in the previous patch. I
This seems like a combination of (at least) two independent issues - the
pgadmin issue and the crash.
On 11/19/24 17:44, Sanjay Khatri wrote:
> Dear,
> Last week I installed Postgres 15.8 on my Windows server 2016, I
> installed the pgadmin thats comes packed with postgresql installer.
> I alre
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 03:45:19PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 03:43:24PM GMT, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > @cfbot: rebased
>
> Thanks for rebasing. To help with review, could you also describe
> current status of the patch? I have to admit, currently the commit
> message d
> On 15 Nov 2024, at 21:33, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> Attached patch teaches btree_xlog_vacuum, nbtree VACUUM's REDO
> routine, to reset the target page's opaque->btpo_cycleid to 0. This
> makes the REDO routine match original execution, which seems like a
> good idea on consistency grounds.
On Tuesday, November 19, 2024 9:42 PM Shlok Kyal
wrote:
> I agree that we can remove the test. I debugged and found the test modified in
> above patch does not hit the condition added in commit adedf54.
> Also, according to me we cannot trigger the bug after the fix in this thread.
> So, I
> thi
On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 8:24 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> Attach the V9 patch set which addressed above comments.
>
Reviewed v9 patch-set and here are my comments for below changes:
@@ -1175,10 +1189,29 @@ ApplyLauncherMain(Datum main_arg)
long elapsed;
if (!sub->enabled)
+ {
+ can_ad
On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 1:53 AM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 14.11.24 08:48, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > The three MinGW environments we test today are using ucrt, and
> > configure detects the symbol on all. Namely: fairwren
> > (msys2/mingw64), the CI mingw64 task and the mingw cross-build that
> >
Hi,
To achieve both completeness and avoid writing to a file, I can consider
> displaying the numbers for the remaining contexts as a cumulative total
> at the end of the output.
>
> Something like follows:
> ```
> postgres=# select * from pg_get_process_memory_contexts('237244', false);
>
> On 18 Nov 2024, at 08:03, Raghu Dev Ramaiah wrote:
> Is there an alternate way I can build PSQL 17.1 source code on AIX platform?
> Please let me know..thanks.
As Tom has already answered in your other mail on this, PostgreSQL 17 does not
support building on AIX. If PostgreSQL 18 is going to
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 6:41 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2024-Nov-14, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > Sorry, here's the full example. Note I'd changed both
> > AddRelationNotNullConstraints() and AdjustNotNullInheritance() to not
> > throw an error *if* the table is a leaf partition when the NO INHER
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 11:34 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> master patched
> few-xacts: 0.0041 0.0041 s / iteration
> many-xacts:0.0042 0.0042 s / iteration
> many-xacts-wide-apart: 0.0043 0.0045 s / iteration
Hi
Dear Hackers,
To ping the topic, I'd like to clarify what may be wrong with the idea
described here, because I do not see any interest from the community. The topic
is related to physical replication. The primary idea is to define the horizon
of WAL segments (files) removal based on saved on
> On 20 Nov 2024, at 14:34, Sanjay Khatri wrote:
>
> These are the errors from the logs of iDrac M630.
> I uninstalled the Postgres 15.8 , once I got the connection. But sadly the
> server disconnected again and crashed, even after uninstalling.
> No I am not able to boot it.
I'm going to go ou
Hi
st 20. 11. 2024 v 14:29 odesílatel Marcos Pegoraro
napsal:
> Em ter., 19 de nov. de 2024 às 16:15, Pavel Stehule <
> pavel.steh...@gmail.com> escreveu:
>
>> I wrote POC of VARIABLE(varname) syntax support
>>
>
> Not related with POC of VARIABLE but seeing your patches ...
>
> Wouldn't it be b
Em qua., 20 de nov. de 2024 às 10:52, Pavel Stehule
escreveu:
> COMMIT can be a little bit messy. TRANSACTION END is more intuitive, I
> think.
>
>>
Exactly to be not messy I would just ON COMMIT for all, and DOCs can
explain that this option is ignored for temp objects and do the same at the
end
st 20. 11. 2024 v 15:15 odesílatel Marcos Pegoraro
napsal:
> Em qua., 20 de nov. de 2024 às 10:52, Pavel Stehule <
> pavel.steh...@gmail.com> escreveu:
>
>> COMMIT can be a little bit messy. TRANSACTION END is more intuitive, I
>> think.
>>
>>>
> Exactly to be not messy I would just ON COMMIT for
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 2:39 PM Rahila Syed wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> To achieve both completeness and avoid writing to a file, I can consider
>> displaying the numbers for the remaining contexts as a cumulative total
>> at the end of the output.
>>
>> Something like follows:
>> ```
>> postgres=# select
Em ter., 19 de nov. de 2024 às 16:15, Pavel Stehule
escreveu:
> I wrote POC of VARIABLE(varname) syntax support
>
Not related with POC of VARIABLE but seeing your patches ...
Wouldn't it be better to use just one syntax and message for what to do ON
COMMIT ?
When creating a new variable you us
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 10:56:11AM -0500, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 8:55 PM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>
>> * Expand the documentation. Perhaps we could add a step-by-step guide
>> for migrating to SCRAM-SHA-256 since more users will need to do so when
>> MD5 password sup
> On 20 Nov 2024, at 15:58, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>
> PFA the patch doing so.
Ugh. The patch is simply dysfunctional, sorry. xmax_status is being checked
uninitiated.
But, well, it highlights the idea: make verify_heapam() aware of such
corruptions.
What do you think?
Best regards, And
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 05:45:55PM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> I think this is a good idea. +1 for the $SUBJECT.
Thanks for looking at it!
> There are duplicated codes in the injection_stats_fixed.c file. Do you
> think that 'modifying existing functions to take an argument to
> differ
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 03:31:51PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> + /*
> + * Do serialize or not this kind of stats.
> + */
> + boolto_serialize:1;
>
> Not sure that "serialize" is the best term that applies here. For
> pgstats entries, serialization refers to
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 06:52:40AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback!
Done. The section mistake in REL_16_STABLE was.. Interesting.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 09:59:07AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 29.10.24 15:20, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > > There are a bunch of (void *) casts in the code that don't make sense to
> > > me. I think some of these were once necessary because char * was used
> > > in p
Hi hackers,
Working on [1] produced the need to give to the statistics the ability to
decide whether or not they want to be written to the file on disk.
Indeed, there is no need to write the per backend I/O stats to disk (no point to
see stats for backends that do not exist anymore after a re-sta
Hi,
Thank you for working on this!
On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 at 17:05, Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
>
> Hi hackers,
>
> Working on [1] produced the need to give to the statistics the ability to
> decide whether or not they want to be written to the file on disk.
>
> Indeed, there is no need to write the pe
On Wed, 4 Sept 2024 at 17:32, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> On 9/4/24 16:25, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Sept 2024 at 18:20, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >> FWIW the actual cost is somewhat higher, because we seem to need ~400B
> >> for every lock (not just the 150B for the LOCK struct).
> >
>
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 05:40:20PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 03:47:20PM -0500, Corey Huinker wrote:
> > * create a pg_stats_health_check script that lists tables missing stats,
> > with
> > --fix/--fix-in-stages options, effectively replacing vacuumdb for those
> > purp
On Tue, Nov 5, 2024 at 6:50 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> It would be nice to document all these behaviors with regression
> tests in pgbench as it is the only place where we can control that
> with error pattern checks.
It's not the first time I wanted to be able to do pipelining in psql
as relying
"=?gb18030?B?emVuZ21hbg==?=" writes:
> Thanks for your guidance, you are right, I looked at your patch
> and combined it with the example to generate a new patch,
> which is really better.
I pushed the code fix, but I can't really convince myself that the
test case is worth the cycles it'd eat fo
On 2024/11/19 21:40, torikoshia wrote:
These messages may be unexpected for some users because the documentation of
fild_fdw does not explicitly describe that file_fdw uses COPY internally.
(I can find several wordings like "as COPY", though.)
However, since the current file_fdw already has suc
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 1:26 AM Guillaume Lelarge
wrote:
> OK, but I'm not sure which example I should pick to add dirtied and
> written shared buffers. It looks kinda artificial. Should I choose one
> randomly?
>
It will be artificial, but I think that's ok: anyone running it on their
own will
Hi,
I was attempting to set up a high availability system using DNS and
target_session_attrs. I was using a DNS setup similar to below and was
trying to use the connection strings `psql postgresql://
u...@pg.database.com/db_name?target_session=read-write` to have clients
dynamically connect to the
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 8:55 PM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> * Expand the documentation. Perhaps we could add a step-by-step guide
> for migrating to SCRAM-SHA-256 since more users will need to do so when
> MD5 password support is removed.
> * Remove the hint. It's arguably doing little more than po
On Nov 20, 2024, at 04:05, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> The path is only consulted if the specified name does not contain a slash.
> So if you do LOAD 'foo', the path is consulted, but if you do LOAD
> '$libdir/foo', it is not. The problem I'm describing is that most extensions
> use the latter
> On 19 Nov 2024, at 18:30, Joe Conway wrote:
> Any other opinions out there?
Couldn't installations who would be satisfied with a GUC gate revoke privileges
from the relevant functions already today and achieve almost the same result?
--
Daniel Gustafsson
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 09:51:09PM -0500, Jonathan Katz wrote:
> On 11/20/24 9:50 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> > On 11/20/24 9:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 7:18 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > > so when we decided to remove the download
st 20. 11. 2024 v 21:14 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>
napsal:
> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 08:14:01PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I wrote POC of VARIABLE(varname) syntax support
>
> Thanks, the results look good. I'm still opposed the idea of having a
> warning, an
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 10:12:55PM -0500, Jonathan Katz wrote:
> On 11/20/24 10:08 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Yes, or for MacOS.
>
> Well, why did EDB remove them? We didn't issue any guidance to remove
> downloads. We only provided guidance to users on decision making about
> whether to wait or
On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 06:28:42PM -0500, Jonathan Katz wrote:
> We're scheduling an out-of-cycle release on November 21, 2024 to address two
> regressions that were released as part of the November 14, 2024 update
> release[1]. As part of this release, we will issue fixes for all supported
> versi
On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 11:21 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> Not sure yet what is different in this environment or why you're
> suddenly noticing on 13.17. The logic has been there since 13.13 (ie
> it was backpatched then).
Hi Christoph,
Also why only this branch, when they all have it? Reproducibl
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Oh wow, thanks for noticing that. I had already rewritten the commit
> message to some extent, but "master" had remained. Now I pushed the
> patch to branches 14+, having replaced it as you suggested.
When doing some unrelated work I noticed that in the new test
010_kee
On 11/20/24 9:50 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
On 11/20/24 9:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
"David G. Johnston" writes:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 7:18 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
so when we decided to remove the downloads
Can you elaborate on who "we" is here?
More to the point, what downloads were rem
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 8:20 AM Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
> On 18/11/2024 06:19, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 3:27 PM Alexander Korotkov
> > wrote:
> > Here is the next revision of this patch. No material changes,
> > adjustments for comments and commit message.
> I have p
Hi~Just found 'relam' field is assigned twice during relcache initialization. Wehave a specific area for initialization AM related stuff several lines later: /* * initialize the table am handler */ relation->rd_rel->relam = HEAP_TABLE_AM_OID; relation->rd_tableam = GetHeapamTableAmRoutine();so pr
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 7:18 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> so when we decided to remove the downloads
Can you elaborate on who "we" is here?
I don't recall this event happening.
I suppose "encouraging people to wait" is arguably a bad position to take
compared to directing them to a page on our w
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 05:13:18PM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> I don't have a strong opinion for this particular case here (I think the code
> is harder to read but yeah there is some code reduction): so I'm fine with
> v2 too.
Well, I like the enthusiasm of having tests, but injection_points
Hi,
In
"Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations" on
Wed, 20 Nov 2024 14:14:27 -0800,
Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I've extracted the changes to refactor COPY TO/FROM to use the format
> callback routines from v23 patch set, which seems to be a better patch
> spl
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 7:18 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> so when we decided to remove the downloads
> Can you elaborate on who "we" is here?
More to the point, what downloads were removed? I still see the
source tarballs in the usual place [1]. If some packager(s)
On 11/20/24 9:18 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 06:28:42PM -0500, Jonathan Katz wrote:
We're scheduling an out-of-cycle release on November 21, 2024 to address two
regressions that were released as part of the November 14, 2024 update
release[1]. As part of this release, we wil
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 07:40:36PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 7:18 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> so when we decided to remove the downloads
>
>
> Can you elaborate on who "we" is here?
>
> I don't recall this event happening.
Uh, I only see 17.0 available for
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 09:49:27PM -0500, Jonathan Katz wrote:
> That said, while it's certainly advisable to upgrade based on having CVEs in
> a release, many upgrade patterns are determined by the CVE score[2]. For
> example, a HIGH score (7.0 - 8.9 - our highest for this release was 8.8; 3
> of
On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 12:51, Nisha Moond wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 9:14 AM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 at 15:00, Nisha Moond wrote:
> > >
> > > Please find the v48 patch attached.
> > >
> > 2) Currently it allows a minimum value of less than 1 second like in
> > millis
On 11/20/24 10:08 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 09:51:09PM -0500, Jonathan Katz wrote:
On 11/20/24 9:50 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
On 11/20/24 9:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
"David G. Johnston" writes:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 7:18 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
so when we decided to
On 11/20/24 9:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
"David G. Johnston" writes:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 7:18 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
so when we decided to remove the downloads
Can you elaborate on who "we" is here?
More to the point, what downloads were removed? I still see the
source tarballs in the
On Wed, 2024-11-20 at 22:54 +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 20/11/2024 22:22, David Rowley wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 at 08:30, Guillaume Lelarge
> > wrote:
> > > OK, I'm fine with this. v4 patch attached with one plan showing read,
> > > written, and dirtied buffers.
> > I think this might b
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 at 13:07, RECHTÉ Marc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> For some unknown reason (probably a very big transaction at the source), we
> experienced a logical decoding breakdown,
> due to a timeout from the subscriber side (either wal_receiver_timeout or
> connexion drop by network equipment
Hello!
Accidentally I found that shared libraries autoinc.so and refint.so
rewrites in the "tmp_install" folder during the regression tests.
This happens because these libraries builds again for regression tests
purposes and rewrites by the "install_test_files" test [0].
I tried to change thi
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
