Re: Is pgAdmin the only front-end to PostgreSQL debugger ? And is "a working pl/pgsql debugger" something core should care to maintain ?

On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 8:10 PM Pavel Stehule wrote: > > Hi > > čt 13. 2. 2025 v 18:00 odesílatel Hannu Krosing napsal: >> >> Hallo PostgreSQL Hackers, >> >> >> We recently discovered an error where pgAdmin fails when stepping into >> nested function calls ( >> https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgad

Re: Assignment before assert

On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 12:15:40AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > On 13 Feb 2025, at 18:08, Dmitry Koval wrote: > > > > Hi! > > Function EvalPlanQualFetchRowMark contains an assignment > > > > ExecRowMark *erm = earm->rowmark; > > > > before assert > > > > Assert(earm != NULL); > > > > M

Re: Is pgAdmin the only front-end to PostgreSQL debugger ? And is "a working pl/pgsql debugger" something core should care to maintain ?

Hi pá 14. 2. 2025 v 0:37 odesílatel Hannu Krosing napsal: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 8:10 PM Pavel Stehule > wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > čt 13. 2. 2025 v 18:00 odesílatel Hannu Krosing > napsal: > >> > >> Hallo PostgreSQL Hackers, > >> > >> > >> We recently discovered an error where pgAdmin fails

Re: DOCS - Question about pg_sequences.last_value notes

On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 8:35 AM Nathan Bossart wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 03:59:45PM +1100, Peter Smith wrote: > > I noticed the pg_sequences system-view DOCS page [1] has a note about > > the 'last_value' field. But the note is not within the row for that > > field. Indeed, it is not even

Re: Confine vacuum skip logic to lazy_scan_skip

On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 4:55 PM Melanie Plageman wrote: > > Thanks for your review! I've made the changes in attached v18. > > I do want to know what you think we should do about what you brought > up about lazy_check_wraparound_failsafe() -- given my reply (below). > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 6:0

Re: Confine vacuum skip logic to lazy_scan_skip

Thanks for your review! I've made the changes in attached v18. I do want to know what you think we should do about what you brought up about lazy_check_wraparound_failsafe() -- given my reply (below). On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 6:08 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > Sorry for the late chiming in. I've

Re: Confine vacuum skip logic to lazy_scan_skip

On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 6:52 PM Thomas Munro wrote: > > I've been poking, reading, and trying out these patches. They look good to > me. Thanks for the review. > Tiny nit, maybe this comment could say something less obvious, cf the > similar comment near the other stream: > > + /* Set up

Out-of-cycle release on 2025-02-20

Hi, CVE-2025-1094[1] introduced a regression that was reported fairly shortly after the release[2]. Based on the nature of the report and the fact it's in libpq, the release team was unsure of what the overall prevalence of the issue given its client-facing, and decided to have an out-of-cycl

Re: Proposal: Filter irrelevant change before reassemble transactions during logical decoding

On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 10:41 AM Ajin Cherian wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 9:31 AM Peter Smith wrote: > > Hi Ajin, > > Some review comments for patch v12-0001. > > == > Commit message > > 1. > Track transactions which have snapshot changes with a new flag > R

Re: Proposal - Allow extensions to set a Plan Identifier

On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:10:27AM -0600, Sami Imseih wrote: > I don't think direct setting of values is a good idea. We will need an API > similar to pgstat_report_query_id which ensures we are only reporting top > level planIds -and- in the case of multiple extensions with the capability > to set

<    1   2