On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 11:32 AM David G. Johnston
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 5:00 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>>
>> Hi Shubham.
>>
>> Some review comments for patch v16-0001.
>>
>> ==
>> doc/src/sgml/ref/pg_createsubscriber.sgml
>>
>> 1.
>> + -c
>> + --drop-all-publications
>>
>> I
Hi,
I want to simulate a case where server receive "SELECT 1;SELECT 2;" at
once, so when executing exec_simple_query, the query_string is
"SELECT 1;SELECT 2;" However I found it is not easy to simulate, does
anyone has a suggestion?
I tried 'psql -f', checking 'psql/settings.h', at last I see
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 05:21:43AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 04:39:57PM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, 11 Sept 2024 at 15:36, Bertrand Drouvot
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi hackers,
> > >
> > > While working on a new pg_logicalinsp
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 1:58 AM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I fleshed this out more fully and I think 0001 is good enough to commit.
>
> I then noticed that constraints on domains are giving bogus error
> messages as well, and the situation is easily improved -- see 0002. I'm
> not so su
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 12:29:42PM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> During a recent review of pg_creatersubscriber I saw that commit
> e117cfb introduced a common 'dbinfos' struct to contain the array of
> individual 'dbinfo[i]' infos. But, this now means that getting to each
> dbinfo[i] requires anothe
Hi
út 11. 3. 2025 v 8:23 odesílatel Andy Fan napsal:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I want to simulate a case where server receive "SELECT 1;SELECT 2;" at
> once, so when executing exec_simple_query, the query_string is
> "SELECT 1;SELECT 2;" However I found it is not easy to simulate, does
> anyone has a sugge
Pavel Stehule writes:
>
> If I remember well, you can use \; for this case
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/app-psql.html
>
> Regards
Thank you Pavel, it works! This is so handy!
--
Best Regards
Andy Fan
Hello Hackers!
On 11 March 2025, the CI job failed
(https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5453963400577024).
The issue occurred in the test ‘pg_amcheck/t/002_nonesuch.pl .
Log:
https://api.cirrus-ci.com/v1/artifact/task/5453963400577024/testrun/build/testrun/pg_amcheck/002_nonesuch/log/regress_log_002
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 1:09 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> It seems to me that you mean 1afe31f03cd2, no?
Yes, that was a bad copy/paste from me.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 2:13 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I dunno about this patch: it seems to me it's doing things exactly
> backwards, namely trying to re
On 2025-Mar-11, Amul Sul wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 11:29 PM Álvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>
> > I fleshed this out more fully and I think 0001 is good enough to commit.
>
> The approach looks good to me, but instead of adding a CAS_flags struct, could
> we use macros like SEEN_DEFERRABILITY(bi
On 2025-Feb-28, Amul Sul wrote:
> Yeah, that was intentional. I wanted to avoid recursion again by
> hitting ATExecAlterChildConstr() at the end of
> ATExecAlterConstraintInternal(). Also, I realized the value doesn’t
> matter since recurse = false is explicitly set inside the
> cmdcon->alterEnfor
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 14:37, Naga Appani wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 10:43 AM Naga Appani wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
Hi
> =
> Proposal
> =
> The internal ReadMultiXactCounts() function, implemented in multixact.c,
> directly calculates the number of MultiXa
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 5:20 PM Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2025-Mar-10, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>
> > I adjusted the set_attnotnull() API and removed the added
> > queue_validation parameter. Rather, the function start using wqueue
> > input parameter as a check.
> > If wqueue is NULL, skip the qu
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 11:57 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 9, 2025 at 11:12 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> >
> > > However, in the heap vacuum phase, the leader process needed
> > > to process all blocks, resulting in soft page faults while creating
> > > Page Table Entries (PTEs). With
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:26 AM Anthonin Bonnefoy
wrote:
> --- a/src/backend/utils/mmgr/mcxt.c
> +++ b/src/backend/utils/mmgr/mcxt.c
> @@ -527,6 +527,7 @@ MemoryContextDeleteOnly(MemoryContext context)
>
> context->methods->delete_context(context);
>
> + context->type = T_Invalid;
>
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 6:21 PM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>
> > seems didn't cover "initially immediate" case for domain.
> > for example:
> > create domain d_int as int4;
> > --- the following two cases should fail.
> > alter domain d_int add constraint nn1 not null initially immediate;
> > alter d
As the resident perl style pedant, I'd just like to complain about the
below:
Tomas Vondra writes:
> diff --git a/src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/Cluster.pm
> b/src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/Cluster.pm
> index 666bd2a2d4c..1c66360c16c 100644
> --- a/src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/Cluster.pm
> +++
On 10.03.25 21:25, Matheus Alcantara wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 10:46 AM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
This looks very good to me. I have one issue to point out: The logic
in get_extension_control_directories() needs to be a little bit more
careful to align with the rules in find_in_path(). For
Here is what I have staged for commit. The only differences from v1 are
some very light edits.
--
nathan
>From aa0cc332c6fbadfa6f49ab072dd97c5c8d78fdf8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nathan Bossart
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 11:01:32 -0500
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/1] Add reverse() for bytea.
This comm
On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 at 19:05, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
>
> On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 at 03:21, vignesh C wrote:
> > Couple of suggestions: a) No need to show CI status as "Needs rebase,"
> > "Not processed," etc., for committed patches.
>
> Do you mean specifically for committed ones? Or just for any pat
On Sun, Mar 2, 2025 at 2:26 PM Mats Kindahl wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 8:44 PM Mats Kindahl wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 4:19 PM Aleksander Alekseev <
>> aleksan...@timescale.com> wrote:
>>
>>> IMO the best solution would be re-submitting all the patches to this
>>> thread. Also ple
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 20:12, Álvaro Herrera
wrote:
>
> On 2025-Mar-11, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 20:42, Álvaro Herrera
wrote:
>
> > > Okay, we should probably fix that, but I think the new map.dat file
your
> > > patch adds is going to make the problem worse, becau
On 31.01.25 10:32, Laurenz Albe wrote:
I'll set this patch to "ready for committer".
This is about the color of the bikeshed, and several people
have voiced their opinion. I don't think much more review
is needed. All that is needed is a committer who either
commits or rejects it.
I don't thi
On Fri, 2025-03-07 at 20:38 +0100, Jim Jones wrote:
> I've tested this patch and for the most part it works as intended.
Thanks for the thorough test!
> There are a few issues though ...
>
> 1) Invalid codes aren't rejected. Is there any way to validate them?
>
> postgres=# SET log_suppress_err
> On Mar 11, 2025, at 3:03 AM, Kirill Reshke wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 11:09, Jeremy Schneider
> wrote:
>
>> observability frameworks like OpenTelemetry support tracing through all
>> layers of a stack, and trace_ids can even be passed into sql with
>> extensions like sqlcommenter.
On 2025-Mar-11, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 20:42, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Okay, we should probably fix that, but I think the new map.dat file your
> > patch adds is going to make the problem worse, because it doesn't look
> > like you handled that case in any particul
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 12:20 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, we are spinning in circles a bit trying to come up with
> a good way to represent the option needed for this, while at the same
> time trying to be future-proof. I see 3 choices...
>
> ==
>
> Choice 1. Generic option
>
>
On Monday, March 10, 2025 9:12 PM Kuroda, Hayato
wrote:
>
> > Currently, only the leaf partition is invalidated when the published
> > table is partitioned. However, I think pgoutput could cache both the
> > partitioned table and the leaf partition table as relsync entries.
> >
> > For INSERT/UP
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 5:12 PM Manika Singhal <
manika.sing...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The postgresql windows installer packaged by EDB, creates the postgresql
> instance on the fly.
> It creates a temporary file to store the password and then deletes it once
> the initdb is run succes
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 at 09:33, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 6:54 PM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > On further thinking, I felt the use of publications_updated variable
> > is not required we can use publications_valid itself which will be set
> > if the publication system table is inval
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 4:31 PM Shubham Khanna
wrote:
>
> > 2) This part of code has another bug:
> > "dbinfos.dbinfo->made_publication = false;" incorrectly modifies
> > dbinfo[0], even if the failure occurs in other databases (dbinfo[1],
> > etc.). Since cleanup_objects_atexit() checks made_pub
Hi Fujii-san,
It seems that this was forgotten somehow.
The patch still applies.
Examining c4d5cb71d229095a39fda1121a75ee40e6069a2a, it seems that this patch
could have been part of that commit as well. But may be it wasn't so apparent
that time. I think it's a good improvement.
On Tue, Nov 19,
Ashutosh Bapat writes:
> After fixing the statistics difference in dumps of tables with
> indexes, I now see difference in statistics of materialized view dump
> in the test I am developing at [1] (see the latest patches there).
Are you doing the restore in parallel by any chance? I had a todo
i
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 08:48:33PM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 19:50, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> This issue exists since the query jumbling exists in pgss, so it goes
>> really down the road. I've spent a bit more than a few minutes on
>> that.
>
> I didn't mean to cause o
David Rowley writes:
> The only minor points I noted down while reviewing were 1)
> name_active_windows()'s newname variable could be halved in size and,
> 2) explain.sql's new test could name the window "w1" instead of "w" to
> exercise the name selection code a bit better. Both are minor points,
On Tue, 2025-03-11 at 10:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ashutosh Bapat writes:
> > After fixing the statistics difference in dumps of tables with
> > indexes, I now see difference in statistics of materialized view
> > dump
> > in the test I am developing at [1] (see the latest patches there).
>
> A
On 2025/03/11 20:55, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
Hi Fujii-san,
It seems that this was forgotten somehow.
The patch still applies.
Examining c4d5cb71d229095a39fda1121a75ee40e6069a2a, it seems that this patch
could have been part of that commit as well. But may be it wasn't so apparent
that time. I
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 2:24 PM Mahendra Singh Thalor
wrote:
>
> Hi,
> (refer file src/bin/pg_dump/pg_backup_utils.c)
>
> While doing some code changes with pg_dumpall and pg_rsetore[1], we noticed
> that on_exit_nicely_list array has only fixed slots (MAX_ON_EXIT_NICELY=20)
> but in some cases,
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 19:50, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 12:45:35AM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> > It seems to me that if this fixes the issue, that the next similar one
> > is already lurking in the shadows waiting to jump out on us.
>
> For how many years will be have to
Hi,
I am posting the new v2 patch, which is now rebased on the `master` branch.
Waiting for your feedback :)
--
Best regards,
Daniil Davydov
From 2e43a1411ebcb37b2c0c1d6bac758e48799d2c4e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniil Davidov
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 17:11:16 +0700
Subject: [PATCH v2] Add ma
On 21.02.25 00:41, Robert Treat wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 5:57 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 08:23:44AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The purpose of this patch is to allow using pg_upgrade between clusters that
have different checksum settings. When upgrading between
On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 11:59 AM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 5:53 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 9, 2025 at 1:25 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 07:11:25AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > > Okay, than
Hi,
The postgresql windows installer packaged by EDB, creates the postgresql
instance on the fly.
It creates a temporary file to store the password and then deletes it once
the initdb is run successfully.
But a user reported the initdb fails. On debugging it was found that, it
occurs because the u
Nathan, Daniel,
> > We already have array_reverse() and text_reverse(), so I see no strong
> > reason against also having a bytea_reverse().
>
> +1
I also considered adding reverse(bit) however to my knowledge there is
no practical usage for it.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
Hi,
Currently when a query needs some parallel workers, postmaster spawns
some backend for this query and when the work is done, the backend
exit. there are some wastage here, e.g. syscache, relcache, smgr cache,
vfd cache and fork/exit syscall itself.
I am thinking if we should preallocate (
>
> Hi ,
> I’ve been exploring logical replication and noticed that if the column
> datatypes don’t match between the publisher and subscriber, PostgreSQL
> doesn’t give a warning. This can cause unexpected behavior, and I thought
> it might be helpful to alert users when this happens.
> ###
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 5:00 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 9, 2025 at 11:28 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> >
> > Does phase 3 also use parallelism? If so, can we try to divide the
> > ring buffers among workers or at least try vacuum with an increased
> > number of ring buffers. This wou
On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 6:41 PM jian he wrote:
>
> hi.
>
> rebased and polished patch attached, test case added.
hi.
I realized I need to change the doc/src/sgml/ref/copy.sgml
Notes section.
current doc note section:
COPY TO can be used only with plain tables, not views, and does not
copy rows fr
Instead, wouldn't it be simpler to update LockAcquireExtended() to
take a new argument, like logLockFailure, to control whether
a lock failure should be logged directly? I’ve adjusted the patch
accordingly and attached it. Please let me know what you think!
Regards,
Thank you!
It's very simple
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 09:06:27AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 11:52:26AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 04:46:53PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 07:53:04AM +, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > > >
Hi Ashutosh, Junwang,
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 4:22 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 8:04 PM Junwang Zhao wrote:
> > I added a trivial fix(v12-0014) that called table_open/table_close in
> > rewriteGraphTable, it now passed the regression test and cirrus ci test,
> > but I'm not
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 6:42 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> > Currently, only the leaf partition is invalidated when the published table
> > is
> > partitioned. However, I think pgoutput could cache both the partitioned
> > table
> > and the leaf partition table as relsync entries.
> >
>
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 4:47 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 03:48:31PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 2:11 AM Nathan Bossart
> > wrote:
> >> Overall, I wish we could avoid splitting things into separate files and
> >> adding more header file gymnastics
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 11:10 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 5:01 PM Nisha Moond wrote:
> >
> > Hi Hackers,
> > (CCing people involved in related discussions)
> >
> > I am starting this thread to propose a new conflict detection type
> > "multiple_unique_conflicts" that identif
On Sun, Mar 2, 2025 at 1:28 PM Junwang Zhao wrote:
>
>
> I've refactored the patch to adapt the newly introduced CopyToRoutine struct,
> see 2e4127b6d2.
>
> v15-0001 is the merged one of v14-0001 and v14-0002
>
> There are some other ongoing *copy to/from* refactors[1] which we can benefit
> to ma
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 10:43 AM Naga Appani wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose exposing an internal PostgreSQL function called
> ReadMultiXactCounts() to allow for efficient monitoring of MultiXact
> member usage. This function provides an accurate, real-time view of
> MultiXact activity b
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 5:23 AM Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2025-03-10 at 17:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I wrote:
> > > I think what is happening is that the patch shut off CREATE
> > > INDEX's update of not only the table's stats but also the
> > > index's stats. This seems unhelpful: the in
On 2025-Mar-11, jian he wrote:
> this look a little strange?
> if (cas_bits & (CAS_NOT_DEFERRABLE) && seen)
> seen->seen_deferrability = true;
>
> it should be
> if ((cas_bits & CAS_NOT_DEFERRABLE) && seen)
> seen->seen_deferrability = true;
True. And since you mentioned
Hi,
In the stats_ext regression test, there is a function
check_estimated_rows that returns actual rows as an integer. Currently,
none of the test cases produce a non-zero fractional part in actual rows.
The question is: should this function be modified to return a fractional
number instead
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 1:56 PM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2025-Mar-11, Amul Sul wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 11:29 PM Álvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I fleshed this out more fully and I think 0001 is good enough to commit.
> >
> > The approach looks good to me, but instead of addi
On 11.03.25 10:46, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> Thanks for the thorough test!
>
>> There are a few issues though ...
>>
>> 1) Invalid codes aren't rejected. Is there any way to validate them?
>>
>> postgres=# SET log_suppress_errcodes TO '0foo1'; SHOW log_suppress_errcodes;
>> SET
>> log_suppress_errco
Dear Amit, Hou,
Thanks for giving comments!
> For patch 0002, I think the implementation could be improved. The
> current patch introduces a new function, RenamePublication, to replace the
> existing generic approach in ExecRenameStmt->AlterObjectRename_internal.
> However, this creates inconsist
On 2025/03/11 16:50, Yuki Seino wrote:
Instead, wouldn't it be simpler to update LockAcquireExtended() to
take a new argument, like logLockFailure, to control whether
a lock failure should be logged directly? I’ve adjusted the patch
accordingly and attached it. Please let me know what you thin
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 2:11 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> Overall, I wish we could avoid splitting things into separate files and
> adding more header file gymnastics, but maybe there isn't much better we
> can do without overhauling the CPU feature detection code.
I wanted to make an attempt to m
On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 8:22 AM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Right. How about the attached? It checks as an alternative to a
> password whether the SCRAM keys were provided. That should get us back
> to the same level of checking?
Yes, I think so. Attached is a set of tests to illustrate, mirrorin
On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 10:52 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 08:51:21AM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> > That was my hunch too, but I wanted to be more sure, so I modified the
> > benchmark so it doesn't know the address of the next calculation until
> > it finishes the last calc
Hello!
>> Variant B is not acceptable IMO as it adds a whole bunch of
>> null-terminators unnecessarily. For example, in a simple "select 1",
>> (expr == NULL) is true 19 times, so that is an extra 19 bytes.
> Variant B is not acceptable here.
Could we improve Variant B?
I was thinking about
hi.
in RememberAllDependentForRebuilding
while (HeapTupleIsValid(depTup = systable_getnext(scan)))
{
if(subtype == AT_SetExpression)
elog(INFO, "foundObject.classId:%d", foundObject.classId);
}
Then do the regress test on generated_stored.sql
I found out only constraints and in
=?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera writes:
> On 2025-Mar-09, Tom Lane wrote:
>> David Rowley writes:
>>> What are your thoughts on being a bit more brief with the naming and
>>> just prefix with "w" instead of "window"?
>> OK by me, any objections elsewhere?
> WFM.
Here's a hopefully-final v3 tha
Em seg., 10 de mar. de 2025 às 12:22, Heikki Linnakangas
escreveu:
> On 21/01/2025 12:05, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 12:03 PM Alexander Korotkov
> > wrote:
> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2024 at 3:59 PM Heikki Linnakangas
> wrote:
> >>> However, I think GetLatestSnapshot() is w
Robert Haas writes:
> If there is, maybe we should discard the integer IDs and just use
> strings directly. I could make GetExplainExtensionState() and
> SetExplainExtensionState() take const char *extension_name arguments
> instead of int extension_id, and just get rid of GetExplainExtensionId
>
Masahiko Sawada 于2025年3月8日周六 12:04写道：
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 12:05 PM Kirill Reshke
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 14 Aug 2024 at 11:35, Steven Niu wrote:
> > >
> > > Junwang, Kirill,
> > >
> > > The split work has been done. I created a new patch for removing
> redundant smgrclose() funct
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 02:44:53PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 08:51:20PM -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I don't think the issue is actually quite as unlikely to be hit as reasoned
> > in
> > the commit message. The crash has indeed to happen between the link() and
>
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 11:29 PM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I fleshed this out more fully and I think 0001 is good enough to commit.
>
The approach looks good to me, but instead of adding a CAS_flags struct, could
we use macros like SEEN_DEFERRABILITY(bits), SEEN_ENFORCEABILITY(bits),
e
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 5:02 PM Nisha Moond wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 4:31 PM Shubham Khanna
> wrote:
> >
> > > 2) This part of code has another bug:
> > > "dbinfos.dbinfo->made_publication = false;" incorrectly modifies
> > > dbinfo[0], even if the failure occurs in other databases (db
Hello,
On 2025-Mar-11, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
> In map.dat file, I tried to fix this issue by adding number of characters
> in dbname but as per code comments, as of now, we are not supporting \n\r
> in dbnames so i removed handling.
> I will do some more study to fix this issue.
Yeah, I t
Hi,
On 2025-03-10 13:27:07 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> From: Peter Eisentraut
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 16:01:06 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH v3 1/4] pg_noreturn to replace pg_attribute_noreturn()
>
> We want to support a "noreturn" decoration on more compilers besides
> just GCC-compatible ones,
On 26.02.25 06:15, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
> ON DELETE RESTRICT must be specified when PERIOD BUSINESS_TIME is
also specified.
Here are some patches removing support for RESTRICT
I have committed this.
I think this is about as much as we can hope to get done from this patch
series for PG18.
Jelte Fennema-Nio writes:
> Okay, the cause of this seems to be that the CFbot currently uses "git
> apply --3way", not "git am --3way". For some reason "git apply" fails
> to apply the patch while "git am" succeeds. I'll check this weekend if
> I can change the logic to use "git am" instead.
Ple
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 at 18:05, Kirill Reshke wrote:
>
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 07:33, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> >
> > On 3/4/25 10:24 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> > > Rebased the patch to add support for OLD.* and NEW.*.
> >
> > Apparently the CI did not like that version.
> >
> > Andreas
>
> Hi!
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 12:51 AM Cary Huang wrote:
> > Oh well - you're probably right.
> > I guess I was blinded by my convenience.
> > Adding a 'base64url' option there is more appropriate.
>
> I agree with it too. It is neater to add "base64url" as a new option for
> encode() and decode() SQL
On 10/03/2025 18:20, Ranier Vilela wrote:
Just for curiosity.
*RelationFindReplTupleSeq* on the same source, does not suffer
from the same issue?
PushActiveSnapshot(GetLatestSnapshot());
res = table_tuple_lock(rel, &(outslot->tts_tid), GetLatestSnapshot(),
:facepalm: yep, it sure does, and Fi
Hi,
> I definitely like that passlib have documented their thought process
> thoroughly.
>
Please find attached v4 of this patch. I added the following changes:
- Check for non-supported characters in the salt like passlib does.
- Check for reserved tokens when parsing the salt string (i find t
David Rowley writes:
> What are your thoughts on being a bit more brief with the naming and
> just prefix with "w" instead of "window"? Looking at window.out, I see
> that the EXPLAIN output does become quite a bit wider than before. I
> favour the idea of saving a bit of space. There is an examp
On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 8:25 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> [1] initdb [option...] [ --pgdata | -D ] directory
> [2] pg_archivecleanup [option...] archivelocation oldestkeptwalfile
> [3] pg_checksums [option...] [[ -D | --pgdata ]datadir]
> [4] pg_controldata [option] [[ -D | --pgdata ]datadir]
> [5] pg
Jeff Davis writes:
> On Tue, 2025-03-11 at 10:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Are you doing the restore in parallel by any chance? I had a todo
>> item to revisit the dependencies that pg_dump is creating for stats
>> items, because they looked wrong to me, ie inadequate to guarantee
>> correct rest
On 2025-Mar-11, jian he wrote:
> but it's better to align CREATE DOMAIN with ALTER DOMAIN.
> For example, the following two logic should behave the same.
>
> create domain d_int as int4 constraint nn1 not null initially immediate;
> alter domain d_int add constraint nn1 not null initially immedia
Thanks Alvaro and Jian for the review and feedback.
On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 20:42, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Disclaimer: I didn't review these patches fully.
>
> On 2025-Mar-05, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 01:02, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
> > > A database name containi
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 2:23 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> - 0016 to 0020 - cleanups for temp buffers code - I just wrote these to clean
> up the code before making larger changes, needs review
This is a review of 0016-0020
Commit messages for 0017-0020 are thin. I assume you will beef them up
a
The usecase that I think might be useful is to have a database client send
metadata along with a query.
This partially is possible today by setting application_name, but that is a
separate request, it would be great if that could be sent along with the query
in one go.
Another option to pass met
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 at 13:05, Richard Guo wrote:
>
> Attached are the patches.
>
This looks good to me. I did some more testing, and I wasn't able to break it.
Some minor nitpicks:
These 2 comment changes from 0002 could be made part of 0001:
1). In pull_up_simple_subquery(), removing the word
Hi,
Am Montag, dem 09.12.2024 um 18:10 +0100 schrieb Bernd Helmle:
> > I think we have two options:
> > 1. Just do not commit tests. We ran it manually, saw that paths are
> > taken, we are happy.
>
> So here's a version with the original, unchanged regression tests and
> injection point removed
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 11:20 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-02-27 11:19:55 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 10:55 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > I was working on expanding tests for AIO and as part of that wrote a test
> > > for
> > > temp tables -- our coverage is fairl
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 1:56 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2025-03-11 11:31:18 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > Commit messages for 0017-0020 are thin. I assume you will beef them up
> > a bit before committing.
>
> Yea. I wanted to get some feedback on whether these refactorings are a
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 1:46 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> Commit bbf668d66fbf6 (back-patched to v17) lowered the minimum
> maintenance_work_mem to 64kB, but it doesn't work for parallel vacuum
That was done in the first place to make a regression test for a bug
fix easier, but that test never go
> It seems to me that if this fixes the issue, that the next similar one
> is already lurking in the shadows waiting to jump out on us.
Yes, this is true that there may be other cases, but I am not sure if
it's worth carrying all the
extra bytes in the jumble to deal with a few cases like this. Th
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 10:08:49AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 12:35:22PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
>> I have no further comments.
>
> Thanks. I'll give this a little more time for review before committing.
I realized that we could limit the catalog query reuse to only
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 03:08:49PM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for working on this!
>
> I just started reading the code and have a couple of questions.
Thanks for looking at it!
> I think that every time we flush IO or WAL stats, we want(?) to flush
> backend stats
Hi,
I continued stress testing this, as I was rather unsure why the assert
failures reported in [1] disappeared. And I managed to reproduce that
again, and I think I actually understand why it happens.
I modified the test script (attached) to setup replication, not just a
single instance. And the
Em seg., 10 de mar. de 2025 às 13:52, Heikki Linnakangas
escreveu:
> On 10/03/2025 18:20, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > Just for curiosity.
> > *RelationFindReplTupleSeq* on the same source, does not suffer
> > from the same issue?
> >
> > PushActiveSnapshot(GetLatestSnapshot());
> >
> > res = table_t
1 - 100 of 189 matches
Mail list logo
