Should setting TupleTableSlotOps get_heap_tuple=NULL break INSERT..ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE..RETURNING?

2022-09-29 Thread Mark Dilger
ackendStartup(port=0x7f9edc804080) at postmaster.c:4252:3 frame #25: 0x00010c690d0e postgres`ServerLoop at postmaster.c:1745:7 frame #26: 0x00010c68e23a postgres`PostmasterMain(argc=8, argv=0x7f9edac06440) at postmaster.c:1417:11 frame #27: 0x00010c565249 postgres`main(

Re: Should setting TupleTableSlotOps get_heap_tuple=NULL break INSERT..ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE..RETURNING?

2022-09-29 Thread Mark Dilger
ve documentation) and later return a copy of the slot's tuple sans any "system columns" (also per the above documentation) and that's when the core code breaks. It's not the TAM that is broken here, not according to the interface's documentation as I read it. Am I reading it wrong? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Transparent column encryption

2022-10-13 Thread Mark Woodward
If memory serves me correctly, if you statically link openssl this will work. If you are using ssl in a DLL, I believe that the DLL has its own "c-library" and its own heap. On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 9:43 AM Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On 06.10.22 17:19, Andres Fr

Re: Incorrect comment regarding command completion tags

2022-10-13 Thread Mark Dilger
comment to remove mention of the > Asserts. I also tried to form the comment in a way that's more > understandable about why we always write a "0" in "INSERT 0 ". Your wording is better. +1 — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Privileges on PUBLICATION

2022-11-04 Thread Mark Dilger
e privileges, it sounds like you mean privileges on the publishing database. But then you talk about CREATE SUBSCRIPTION granting privileges, which would necessarily be on the subscriber database. Can you clarify what you have in mind? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: improve installation short version

2021-06-02 Thread Mark Dilger
I thought "run as" was the Windows option for this. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: security_definer_search_path GUC

2021-06-03 Thread Mark Dilger
d your original proposal as only restricting the value of search_path within security definer functions. This idea would allow you to restrict it everywhere, and not tailored to just that context. [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/608c9a81.3020...@anastigmatix.net — Ma

Re: security_definer_search_path GUC

2021-06-03 Thread Mark Dilger
ber of cases to be worth implementing. What are your thought on that? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: security_definer_search_path GUC

2021-06-03 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jun 3, 2021, at 12:06 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > > čt 3. 6. 2021 v 20:25 odesílatel Mark Dilger > napsal: > > > > On Jun 3, 2021, at 9:38 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > > This design looks good for extensions, but I am not sure if i

A modest proposal vis hierarchical queries: MINUS in the column list

2021-06-07 Thread Mark Zellers
One of the friction points I have found in migrating from Oracle to PostgreSQL is in the conversion of hierarchical queries from the Oracle START WITH/CONNECT BY/ORDER SIBLINGS by pattern to using the ANSI recursive subquery form. Once you wrap your head around it, the ANSI form is not so bad wi

logical replication of truncate command with trigger causes Assert

2021-06-08 Thread Mark Dilger
is triggered. You can see the stack trace by opening tmp_check/log/021_truncate_subscriber.log v1-0001-Adding-test-to-trigger-logical-replication-assert.patch Description: Binary data — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: logical replication of truncate command with trigger causes Assert

2021-06-08 Thread Mark Dilger
suitable Portal. I speculated about > that in the commit message for 84f5c2908da, but I don't feel like > taking point on such work. I'll dig into this a bit more. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: logical replication of truncate command with trigger causes Assert

2021-06-09 Thread Mark Dilger
t the sending server didn't send an invalid subtransaction id. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Estimating HugePages Requirements?

2021-06-09 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jun 9, 2021, at 1:52 PM, Bossart, Nathan wrote: > > I'd be happy to clean it up and submit it for > discussion in pgsql-hackers@ if there is interest. Yes, I'd like to see it. Thanks for offering. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The

Re: [External Sender] Re: A modest proposal vis hierarchical queries: MINUS in the column list

2021-06-10 Thread Mark Zellers
ere are other constraints (static validation, provably avoiding SQL Injection attacks, ease of maintenance) that may take precedence. There is value in not needing to make a knight’s tour through the code base every time someone adds a field to a table to update the column lists in all the queries that refer to that table. Regards, Mark Z.

Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles

2021-06-14 Thread Mark Dilger
Since I failed to apply the patches and didn't test them, > I may have overlooked something but I didn't find the > corresponding codes. Do you believe that functionality should be added? I have not thought much about that issue. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterpri

Re: Use extended statistics to estimate (Var op Var) clauses

2021-06-14 Thread Mark Dilger
aw no change, which is fine. I was looking for regressions where the estimates are now worse than before. Do you expect there to be any such cases? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Fix for segfault in logical replication on master

2021-06-16 Thread Mark Dilger
(relation->rd_replidindex); for (i = 0; i < indexDesc->rd_index->indnatts; i++) is unsafe without further checks, also attached. Would you mind taking a look? v1-0001-Fixing-bug-in-logical-replication.patch Description: Binary data — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.ente

Re: Fix for segfault in logical replication on master

2021-06-16 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jun 16, 2021, at 10:19 PM, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com wrote: > > I started to analyze your report and > will reply after my idea to your modification is settled. Thank you. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Fix for segfault in logical replication on master

2021-06-17 Thread Mark Dilger
would work in almost all cases. In any event, they seemed better than no checks, which is what we have now. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Fix for segfault in logical replication on master

2021-06-17 Thread Mark Dilger
mment was insufficient. I have added a more detailed code comment to explain the purpose of the check. I also changed the first check to use RelationIsValid(), as suggested upthread. v2-0001-Fixing-bug-in-logical-replication.patch Description: Binary data — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-17 Thread Mark Dilger
scriptions-on-error.patch Description: Binary data — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-18 Thread Mark Dilger
s will results in more and more data integrity problems (foreign key references, etc.) such that the failures will snowball with skipping becoming the norm rather than the exception. Users with those usage patterns would likely prefer the subscription to automatically be disabled until manual

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-18 Thread Mark Dilger
ra field, and am inclined to think it would be excessive, but maybe others feel differently? > == > > Test: Cause a PK violation in the Tablesync copy (DATASYNC) phase. > (when disable_on_error = true) > Observation: This patch changes nothing for this case. The Ta

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-19 Thread Mark Dilger
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAD21AoDeScrsHhLyEPYqN3sydg6PxAPVBboK%3D30xJfUVihNZDA%40mail.gmail.com [2] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/915B995D-1D79-4E0A-BD8D-3B267925FCE9%40enterprisedb.com#dbbce39c9e460183b67ee44b647b1209 — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-19 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jun 19, 2021, at 7:44 AM, Mark Dilger wrote: > > Wouldn't the user rather skip just the problematic rows? I understand that > on the subscriber side it is difficult to do so, but if you are going to > implement this sort of thing, it makes more sense to allow the u

Re: Teaching users how they can get the most out of HOT in Postgres 14

2021-06-20 Thread Mark Dilger
case and publish quantitative results about how bad it is. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-20 Thread Mark Dilger
transactions to purge is small, but I don't like designing the feature around that assumption. All the same, I'm looking forward to seeing your patch! — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-20 Thread Mark Dilger
kipped, it would seem that arbitrarily many such transactions could be committed on the publisher side. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-20 Thread Mark Dilger
is akin to a statement level trigger and not a row level trigger, so a number of things you might want to do would be hard to do from this. But perhaps the equivalent of row level triggers could also be written? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-20 Thread Mark Dilger
the first is cleared, but that still leaves the user having to clear one after the next until arbitrarily many of them coming from the publisher side are cleared. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-20 Thread Mark Dilger
aybe that needs to be stored somewhere else. Do you believe pg_subscription_rel is a suitable location? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-21 Thread Mark Dilger
ubmitted, the error message will remain, though I take Amit's point that there are deficiencies in handling parallel tablesync workers, etc. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-21 Thread Mark Dilger
if you are writing a TAP test, you should be the one controlling whether that is the case. I don't think it would be unpredictable from the point of view of the test author. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

2021-06-21 Thread Mark Dilger
us short network outages, but then gets autodisabled after a longer network outage. I'm not sure why anybody would want that. You might argue for exponential backoff, where it never gets autodisabled on transient errors, but retries less frequently. But I don't want to expand the scope of this patch to include that, at least not without a lot more evidence that it is needed. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: pglz compression performance, take two

2021-06-28 Thread Mark Dilger
equently contains strings shorter than 16 bytes. Is it worth sharting a static inline function that uses your optimization in other places? How confident are you that your optimization really helps? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: pglz compression performance, take two

2021-06-28 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jun 28, 2021, at 9:05 AM, Mark Dilger wrote: > > Is it worth sharting a static inline function that uses your optimization in > other places? s/sharting/sharing/ > How confident are you that your optimization really helps? By which I mean, is the optimization worth t

Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles (Was: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers)

2021-07-06 Thread Mark Dilger
le ways to cut up the set of all GUCs. database/host/network is not an entirely clean distinction, and perhaps database/host/network/replication is better, but I'm uncertain. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: visibility map corruption

2021-07-06 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jul 6, 2021, at 2:27 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > It looks like amcheck's verify_heapam.c functionality almost catches > bugs like this one. Something for Mark (CC'd) to consider. Does it > matter that we usually "ctx.oldest_xid = ctx.relfr

Re: Unstable tests for recovery conflict handling

2022-04-28 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Apr 27, 2022, at 6:26 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > I'm a bit confused - what's the relation of that failure to this thread / the > tests / this commit? None, upon further reflection. It turned out to be unrelated. Sorry for the noise. — Mark Dil

Re: DBT-5 Stored Procedure Development (2022)

2022-05-02 Thread Mark Wong
On Mon, May 02, 2022 at 07:14:28AM -0700, Mark Wong wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 10:45 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 10:36 AM Mark Wong wrote: > > > I'm afraid not. I'm guessing that pulling in egen 1.14 would address > > >

Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes

2022-05-10 Thread Mark Dilger
bject to the table's row-level security policies (Mark Dilger) ... should mention, independent of any RLS considerations, subscriptions are now applied under the privilege of the subscription owner. I don't think we can fit it in the release note, but the basic idea is that:

Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes

2022-05-10 Thread Mark Dilger
> On May 10, 2022, at 6:46 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Allow logical replication to run as the owner of the publication Make that "owner of the subscription". This change operates on the subscriber-side. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The En

Re: How about a psql backslash command to show GUCs?

2022-06-06 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jun 6, 2022, at 9:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Thoughts? I think it depends on your mental model of what \dconfig is showing you. Is it showing you the list of configs that you can SET, or just the list of all configs?

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-08 Thread Mark Dilger
he problem to manifest itself. As a simple example, text[] constructed using array_agg over sorted data can be corrupted by a collation change, and reindex won't fix it. If we extend the table-AM interface to allow query quals to be pushed down to the table-AM, we might develop

Re: Tightening behaviour for non-immutable behaviour in immutable functions

2022-06-08 Thread Mark Dilger
tile marking is wrong, and a warning when you cannot prove the marking is correct? That would tend to give warnings for polymorphic functions that use functions or operators over the polymorphic types, or which use dynamic sql, but maybe that's ok. Those functions probably deserve closer sc

Re: Checking for missing heap/index files

2022-06-09 Thread Mark Dilger
did not (and likely will not) back port it. I have had several occasions to want this functionality recently, but the customers were on pre-v14 servers, so these tools were not available anyway. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: real/float example for testlibpq3

2022-06-14 Thread Mark Wong
amples for REAL, TIMESTAMP WITHOUT TIME ZONE, and BOOLEAN to try to illustrate how testlibpq3.sql and testlibpq3.c will grow if this is a good way to go. Regards, Mark diff --git a/src/test/examples/testlibpq3.c b/src/test/examples/testlibpq3.c index 4f7b791388..68972f17f3 100644 --- a/src/test/exampl

Modest proposal to extend TableAM API for controlling cluster commands

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
ay not be clustered" interface overly simplistic? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Extending USING [heap | mytam | yourtam] grammar and behavior

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
tomers, etc., and for a given piece of DDL that you want to release you only want to say which TAMs not to use, not to nail down which TAM must be used. Thoughts? I'll hold off posting a patch until the general idea is debated. [*] It takes some extra work to get the TAP tests to play al

Re: Modest proposal to extend TableAM API for controlling cluster commands

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 6:01 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2022-06-15 17:21:56 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote: >> While developing various Table Access Methods, I have wanted a callback for >> determining if CLUSTER (and VACUUM FULL) should be run against a tab

Re: Modest proposal to extend TableAM API for controlling cluster commands

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
he target is pre-clustered, and both will run against the table if the user has run an ALTER TABLE..CLUSTER ON. Now, we could try to catch that latter command with a utility hook, but since the VACUUM FULL is still problematic, it seems cleaner to just add the callback I am proposi

Re: Modest proposal to extend TableAM API for controlling cluster commands

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 7:14 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2022-06-15 19:07:50 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote: >>> On Jun 15, 2022, at 6:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >>> >>> I think nothing would happen in this case - only pre-clustered tables ge

Re: Modest proposal to extend TableAM API for controlling cluster commands

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 7:21 PM, Mark Dilger wrote: > >> If a user does that for a table that doesn't support clustering, well, I >> don't >> see what's gained by not erroring out. > > Perhaps they want to give the TAM information about which in

Re: Modest proposal to extend TableAM API for controlling cluster commands

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
ble with the new one. I'm left no choices but to copy my data over, loose my data, or abort the command. None of those are OK options for me. I'm open to different solutions. If a simple callback like relation_supports_cluster(Relation rel) is too simplistic, and more parameters with mo

Re: Extending USING [heap | mytam | yourtam] grammar and behavior

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
just trying to leverage the existing tests as much as I can without having to reinvent tests to cover "chicago", and then reinvent again to cover "detroit", and so forth. If you develop enough TAMs in parallel, and go with the "using heap" solution, you eventually

Re: Modest proposal to extend TableAM API for controlling cluster commands

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 8:18 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2022-06-15 20:10:30 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote: >>> On Jun 15, 2022, at 7:30 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >>>> But it's up to the TAM what it wants to do with that boolean, if in fact it &g

Re: Extending USING [heap | mytam | yourtam] grammar and behavior

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
lause or appending no clause. Since the user can do this anyway, what's the security implication in some syntactic sugar? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Modest proposal to extend TableAM API for controlling cluster commands

2022-06-15 Thread Mark Dilger
In what sense does this made-up TAM conflict with mvcc and wal? It doesn't have all the features of heap, but that's not the same thing as violating mvcc or breaking wal. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Modest proposal to extend TableAM API for controlling cluster commands

2022-06-16 Thread Mark Dilger
nt, but what about a TAM that wants to route different tuples to different pages? The "current_buf" isn't enough information, and there's no void *extra field, so you're just sunk. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Modest proposal to extend TableAM API for controlling cluster commands

2022-06-16 Thread Mark Dilger
ot asking the community to accept the TAM back as a patch. The freedom I'm talking about is the freedom to design and implement such a third-party TAM without seeking community approval of the TAM's merits. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: real/float example for testlibpq3

2022-06-16 Thread Mark Wong
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 03:41:50PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:40 PM Mark Wong wrote: > >> I've created a function for each data type with the idea that an example > >> for handling a specific data type can be more ea

Re: real/float example for testlibpq3

2022-07-01 Thread Mark Wong
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 03:41:50PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:40 PM Mark Wong wrote: > >> I've created a function for each data type with the idea that an example > >> for handling a specific data type can be more ea

Re: Memory leak fix in psql

2022-07-19 Thread Mark Dilger
t comments down-thread seem reasonable, so I suspect a new patch will be needed. Would you like to author it, or would you prefer that I, as the guilty party, do so? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Asking for feedback on Pgperffarm

2022-08-08 Thread Mark Wong
t-3, because I'm trying to maintain it and because it sounded like you were starting to do something similar to that, I think you can save a good amount of effort from reimplementing another kit from scratch. Regards, Mark -- Mark Wong EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Re: hash_xlog_split_allocate_page: failed to acquire cleanup lock

2022-08-09 Thread Mark Dilger
en it's not another backend, but our own, and we'd want to debug why we're pinning the same page twice (or more) while replaying wal. Otherwise, maybe it's a race condition with some other process that transiently pins a buffer and occasionally causes this code to panic? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Suggestion: optionally return default value instead of error on failed cast

2022-08-13 Thread Mark Simon
-specific, but the point is that it’s not hard. Best Regards, Mark On 12/12/2020 8:13 pm, Wolfgang Walther wrote: Hi, currently a failed cast throws an error. It would be useful to have a way to get a default value instead. T-SQL has try_cast [1] Oracle has CAST(... AS .. DEFAULT ... ON

Re: verify_heapam for sequences?

2021-08-26 Thread Mark Dilger
invalidate that assumption. v1-0001-WIP-patch-to-support-amcheck-of-sequences.patch.WIP Description: Binary data — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: amcheck/verify_heapam doesn't check for interrupts

2021-08-26 Thread Mark Dilger
er parallel reindexes and vacuums running in backends. It should be just as safe to ctrl-c out of pg_amcheck as out of those two. They all three use fe_utils/cancel.h's setup_cancel_handler(), so I would expect modifying verify_heapam would be enough. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: htt

Re: amcheck/verify_heapam doesn't check for interrupts

2021-08-26 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Aug 26, 2021, at 4:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > >> Not any good one that I can see. > > Seems that way. Want to post a patch? Sure. I just posted another unrelated patch for amcheck this morning, so it seems a good day for it :) — Mark Dilger

Re: amcheck/verify_heapam doesn't check for interrupts

2021-08-26 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Aug 26, 2021, at 4:41 PM, Mark Dilger wrote: > >> Seems that way. Want to post a patch? > > Sure. v1-0001-Add-CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS-to-verify_heapam.patch Description: Binary data — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles (Was: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers)

2021-08-27 Thread Mark Dilger
, but that seems confusing more than helpful. Thoughts? [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/17554.1120258001%40sss.pgh.pa.us — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Use extended statistics to estimate (Var op Var) clauses

2021-08-28 Thread Mark Dilger
appears not to be. Do you think you could save the results rather than recomputing them? It's a little messy, since these are the only two functions out of about ten which follow this pattern, so you'd have to pass NULLs into get_restriction_variable() from the other eight callers, but it still looks like that would be a win. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Use extended statistics to estimate (Var op Var) clauses

2021-08-28 Thread Mark Dilger
rate case of only one table end up with a table column compared against itself. You could argue that those people need to fix their queries/generators to not do this sort of thing, but the end user affected by such queries may have little ability to fix it. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http

Re: verify_heapam for sequences?

2021-08-30 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Aug 30, 2021, at 1:22 AM, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: > > On 26.08.21 21:02, Mark Dilger wrote: >> I understand that sequences are really just heap tables, and since we >> already test corrupted heap tables, we could assume that we already have >> sufficie

Re: Bug fix for cache lookup failure for statistic_ext type

2021-08-31 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Aug 31, 2021, at 10:50 AM, Tomas Vondra > wrote: > > I've pushed a fix for this. And then a fix for the fix :-( because I forgot > about the rule that role names in regression tests should start with regress_ > prefix, so animals enforcing this failed.

Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side

2021-09-02 Thread Mark Dilger
rsion? 0001-Adding-tests-of-subscription-errors.patch Description: Binary data — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side

2021-09-02 Thread Mark Dilger
(either a DELETE or an UPDATE) on the existing data in the table where the conflict arises. These other options are DDL and do not easily come to mind when I read that phrase. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2021-09-07 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Aug 31, 2021, at 5:15 AM, Amul Sul wrote: > > Attached is the rebased version for the latest master head. Hi Amul! Could you please rebase again? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Postgres perl module namespace

2021-09-08 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Sep 7, 2021, at 9:00 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > > I wondered about using PGXS:: as the namespace for all these modules That immediately suggests perl modules wrapping C code, which is misleading for these. See `man perlxstut` — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprised

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2021-09-09 Thread Mark Dilger
clear? This also would be a better interface if taking the system read-only had a timeout as I suggested above, as such a timeout parameter when allowing wal is less clearly useful. That's enough code review for now. Next I will review your regression tests — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2021-09-09 Thread Mark Dilger
out. If not, a mia culpa saying, "hey, were not terribly safe about this" should be explicit in the comment. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2021-09-10 Thread Mark Dilger
to jump to the definition, particularly if you are logged into a production server where non-essential software is intentionally missing. Then you have to wonder, what exactly is the boolean argument toggling here? I don't feel strongly about this, though, and you don't need to change it. > Apart from this, recently while testing this patch with > pgbench where I have exhausted the connection limit and want to change > the system's prohibited state in between but I was unable to do that, > I wish I could do that using the pg_clt option. How about having a > pg_clt option to alter wal prohibited state? I'd have to review the implementation, but sure, that sounds like a useful ability. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2021-09-10 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Sep 10, 2021, at 8:42 AM, Mark Dilger wrote: > > Take for example a code stanza from heapam.c: > >if (needwal) >CheckWALPermitted(); > >/* NO EREPORT(ERROR) from here till changes are logged */ >START_CRIT_SECTION(); > > Now

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2021-09-10 Thread Mark Dilger
ite. uses "immediately" and "will kill the running transaction" which reenforced the impression that this mechanism is heavier handed than it is. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: Foreign Key Arrays

2021-09-14 Thread Mark Rofail
Dear Alvaro, We just need to rewrite the scope of the patch so I work on the next generation. I do not know what was "out of scope" in the current version /Mark On Tue, 14 Sep 2021, 8:55 pm Alvaro Herrera, wrote: > On 2021-Sep-14, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > > Giv

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2021-09-14 Thread Mark Dilger
isolationtester-handle-closed-sessions.patch Description: Binary data v34-0010-Test-ALTER-SYSTEM-READ-ONLY-against-cursors.patch Description: Binary data [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAP4vRV5gEHFLB7NwOE6_dyHAeVfkvqF8Z_g5GaCQZNgBAE0Frw%40mail.gmail.com#e10861372aec22119b66756ec

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2021-09-22 Thread Mark Dilger
I have added in the latest version, but that test does not > reinitiate the same connection again, I think that is not possible > there too. Perhaps you can point me to a TAP test that does this in a concise fashion. When I tried writing a TAP test for this, it was much longer than the equiv

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

2021-09-22 Thread Mark Dilger
e in such a way as, for example, to make the attempt to open the cursor be a FATAL error, you'd see a change in the test output. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests

2021-09-24 Thread Mark Dilger
ad that gave rise to the related commit. That test happens to be stable on my laptop until I change GUC settings to both reduce max_wal_size=32MB and to set wal_consistency_checking=all. Thoughts? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests

2021-09-25 Thread Mark Dilger
it feels like we're just papering over the problem. I'm inclined to guess that the problem in src/bin/pg_basebackup/t/020_pg_receivewal.pl is similar. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests

2021-09-25 Thread Mark Dilger
by doing so, though? Does using a replication slot to force the wal to not be removed early break what the test is designed to check? The other tests raise similar questions. Is the brittleness intentional? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests

2021-09-25 Thread Mark Dilger
rtful first post was really meant to say, "here is a problem that I perceive about tap tests vis-a-vis wal files, do people disagree with me that this is a problem, and would patches to address the problem be welcome?"I took Tom's response to be, "yeah, go ahead", an

Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles (Was: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers)

2021-09-27 Thread Mark Dilger
of that role before they can create subscriptions. That seems, however, like something to do as a follow-on patch, since tightening up the security on subscriptions as done in this patch doesn't depend on that. v8.tar.bz2 Description: BZip2 compressed data — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests

2021-09-27 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Sep 25, 2021, at 11:04 AM, Mark Dilger > wrote: > > I took Tom's response to be, "yeah, go ahead", and am mostly waiting for the > weekend to be over to see if anybody else has anything to say about it. Here is a patch set, one patch per test. The third

Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests

2021-09-27 Thread Mark Dilger
sense of how stable it is. Applying my patches too soon would just add more variables to a not-so-well understood situation. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests

2021-09-28 Thread Mark Dilger
, which is certainly order dependent. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: Fixing WAL instability in various TAP tests

2021-09-28 Thread Mark Dilger
> On Sep 28, 2021, at 11:07 AM, Mark Dilger > wrote: > > Looking closer at the TAP test, it's not ORDERing the result set from the > SELECTs on either node, but it is comparing the sets for stringwise equality, > which is certainly order dependent. Taking the ou

Re: non-superusers are allowed to drop the replication user, but are not allowed to alter or even create them, is that ok?

2021-09-30 Thread Mark Dilger
les work differently than for other object types. I have a patch pending [1] for the version 15 development cycle that fixes this and other problems. I'd appreciate feedback on the design and whether it addresses your concerns. [1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/34/3223/ — Mark

minor gripe about lax reloptions parsing for views

2021-09-30 Thread Mark Dilger
when parsing reloptions for views and instead create a VIEW_RELOPT_NAMESPACES array which does not include "toast". I've already fixed this, mixed into some other work. I'll pull it out as its own patch if there is any interest. — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

<    3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   >