On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 01:20:56AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bertrand Drouvot writes:
>> While working on wait events I faced some compilation issues due to circular
>> header file dependency (introduced in fa88928470b5) between wait_event.h and
>> wait_event_types.h.
>
> Ugh. I still carry the s
On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 5:01 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 12:01 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 4:42 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > Can you think of any better ideas?
> >
> > No idea. Hmm, there seems no reasonable way to fix this issue for ba
Hi Vignesh.
Some review comments for v20250426-0005.
==
doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml
1.
- State code:
+ State code for tables:
i = initialize,
d = data is being copied,
f = finished table copy,
s = synchronized,
r = ready (normal repl
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 04:42:56PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> This one is my fault,
I do feel guilty too...
> Splitting the values
> of the wait classes into their own header makes sense, but the header
> name wait_class_constants.h sounds a bit off. Why not a simpler
> "wait_classes.h
Hi Vignesh.
FYI, patch v20250424-0004 reported whitespace errors when applied.
[postgres@CentOS7-x64 oss_postgres_misc]$ git apply
../patches_misc/v20250424-0004-Enhance-sequence-synchronization-during-su.patch
../patches_misc/v20250424-0004-Enhance-sequence-synchronization-during-su.patch:366:
t
On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 12:01 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 4:42 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 10:46 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > What I'm concerned about is the back branches. With this approach all
> > > back branches will have such
I found several issues with v4. It does not deal correctly with pipelining,
and we should only really be concerned with dropping an unnamed
portal only.
So, v5 now moves the DropPortal call after the unnamed portal was
executed to completion ( as v4 was doing ), but does so only in the
case in whi
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 01:20:56AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bertrand Drouvot writes:
> > While working on wait events I faced some compilation issues due to circular
> > header file dependency (introduced in fa88928470b5) between wait_event.h and
> > wait_event_types.h.
>
> I don't have an o
Bertrand Drouvot writes:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 01:20:56AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Whatever it contains, we need to kill it with fire before the problem
>> metastasizes like it did the last time. (yeah, yeah, badly mixed
>> metaphors) I can take a look at this one over the weekend if nobody
On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 11:04 PM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 6, 2025 at 12:02 AM Alena Rybakina
> wrote:
> > Should we add more regression tests covering these cases?
> >
> > I experimented with some examples like this and noticed that it does affect
> > cardinality estimation, thoug
Hi, Alena!
On Sun, Apr 6, 2025 at 12:02 AM Alena Rybakina
wrote:
> Should we add more regression tests covering these cases?
>
> I experimented with some examples like this and noticed that it does affect
> cardinality estimation, though I'm not sure the impact is significant.
> I used the table
On 4/14/25 04:09, David Rowley wrote:
> I noticed a while ago that the new fast-path locking code uses integer
> division to figure out the fast-path locking group slot. To me, this
> seems a bit unnecessary as FastPathLockGroupsPerBackend is always a
> power-of-two value, so we can use bitwise-A
On 4/23/25 20:14, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> My primary concern about the patch is that
>> ProcessGetMemoryContextInterrupt() can be called from any
>> CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() and calls lots of DSA functions, including
>> dsa_create() and, via PublishMemoryContext(), dsa_allocate0().
Hi all,
Thank you for the detailed discussion and clarifications.
I sincerely appreciate everyone's time and valuable insights shared in this
discussion.
On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 9:57 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 3:43 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 6:02 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I realized that users who create a logical slot using
> > > pg_create_logical_replication_slot() would not
On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 03:35:06PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-04-20 14:53:39 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > The checkpoints and WAL creation took 30s, but archiving was only 20% done
> > (based on file name 0001006D) at the 360s PGCTLTIMEOUT.
>
> Huh. That seems surprisin
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 at 08:44, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Thanks. Those changes seem fine to me to.
Thanks for checking.
> Do you intend to push these, or do you want me to do it?
I made a few tweaks to the comments and pushed.
David
17 matches
Mail list logo