On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 5:29 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> In psql, the tab completion always converts key words to upper case. In
> practice, I and I think most users type in lower case. So then you end
> up with commands looking like this:
>
> => alter TABLE foo add CONSTRAINT bar check (a > 0
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> WALRestore process asynchronously executes restore_command while
> recovery continues working.
>
> Overlaps downloading of next WAL file to reduce time delays in file
> based archive recovery.
>
> Handles cases of file-only and streaming/file c
> > I will really try to see if we have other issues. Really cannot have
> Robert
> > reporting all the bugs and getting annoyed, but there are lotsa
> variations
> > possible with inheritance..
>
> BTW thank you for doing the work on this. Probably the reason no one
> bothers too much with inheri
> > I have also tried to change the error message as per Alvaro's
> suggestions.
> > I will really try to see if we have other issues. Really cannot have
> Robert
> > reporting all the bugs and getting annoyed, but there are lotsa
> variations
> > possible with inheritance..
>
> So did you find any
On 16.01.2012 21:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of lun ene 16 16:17:42 -0300 2012:
On 15.01.2012 06:49, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
- pg_upgrade bits are missing.
I guess we'll need to rewrite pg_multixact contents in pg_upgrade. Is
the page format backwards-
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Brendan Jurd wrote:
> On 12 December 2011 15:59, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> 2011/12/12 Brendan Jurd :
>>> I just bumped into a situation where I wanted to do a little macaddr
>>> arithmetic in postgres. I note that the inet type has support for
>>> bitwise AND, OR a
Daniel Farina writes:
> Copying CRC32 implementations everywhere is not the worst thing, but I
> find it inadequately explained why it's necessary for now, at least.
Agreed, but I don't care for your proposed solution (put it in
libpgport) because that assumes a fact not in evidence, namely that
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> On 01/16/2012 08:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> the last two release cycles I've put huge amounts of energy
>> into trying to get the release stable enough to release before July
>> and August roll around and everybody disappears. It didn't work
On 01/16/2012 08:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
the last two release cycles I've put huge amounts of energy
into trying to get the release stable enough to release before July
and August roll around and everybody disappears. It didn't work,
either time. If that's not going to happen anyway, then the
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think you make a compelling case.
That's enough for me to just do it. Expect a patch soon.
--
fdr
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailp
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Daniel Farina wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Daniel Farina wrote:
>> I have been working with xlogdump and noticed that unfortunately it
>> cannot be installed without access to a postgres build directory,
>> which makes the exported functionality in sr
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> The attached patch adds OAT_DROP object-access-hook around permission
> checks of object deletion.
> Due to the previous drop statement reworks, the number of places to
> put this hook is limited to these six points: RemoveObjects,
> RemoveRel
On 1/16/12 5:59 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>
> What I think is needed instead is a write-heavy benchmark with a think
> time in it, so that we can dial the workload up to, say, 90% of I/O
> capacity, but that spikes to 100% when checkpoint sync happens. Then
> rearrangements in syncing that reduces ca
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun ene 16 12:27:03 -0300 2012:
>
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of dom ene 15 10:00:03 -0300 2012:
> >> On ons, 2011-12-28 at 14:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> The trouble with using ReadNewTransactionId is that it make
On 01/16/2012 11:00 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
Also, I am still struggling with what the right benchmarking
methodology even is to judge whether
any patch in this area "works". Can you provide more details about
your test setup?
The "test" setup is a production server with a few hundred users at
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> I think this is getting more predictable simply based on having some
> history. The trail blazing you led here for some time didn't know what was
> and wasn't possible yet. I feel that the basic shape of things, while still
> fuzzy in spots, i
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Daniel Farina wrote:
> I have been working with xlogdump and noticed that unfortunately it
> cannot be installed without access to a postgres build directory,
> which makes the exported functionality in src/include/utils/pg_crc.h
> useless unless one has access to
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, short of seeing an acceptable patch for the larger thing, I don't
> want to accept a patch to add that field to Const, because I think it's
> a kluge. I'm still feeling that there must be a better way ...
Hm. Maybe it is tractable to to fi
On 16 January 2012 23:53, Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, short of seeing an acceptable patch for the larger thing, I don't
> want to accept a patch to add that field to Const, because I think it's
> a kluge. I'm still feeling that there must be a better way ...
What does an acceptable patch look like?
I have been working with xlogdump and noticed that unfortunately it
cannot be installed without access to a postgres build directory,
which makes the exported functionality in src/include/utils/pg_crc.h
useless unless one has access to pg_crc.o -- which would only happen
if a build directory is lyi
On 01/16/2012 02:42 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
But, I've noticed that nothing good comes of me pressing my own view
too hard. Either we as a community value having the CommitFest wrap
up in a reasonable period of time, or we don't. If we do, then let's
make it happen together. If we don't, then le
On 16 January 2012 23:43, Greg Smith wrote:
> While Peter had a version of this that worked completely within the
> boundaries of an extension, no one was really happy with that. At a minimum
> the .length changes really need to land in 9.2 to enable this feature to
> work well. As Daniel noted,
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Excerpts from Daniel Farina's message of dom ene 15 08:41:55 -0300 2012:
>> Onto the mechanism: the patch is both a contrib and changes to
>> Postgres. The changes to postgres are mechanical in nature, but
>> voluminous. The key change is to not only remember the positio
On 01/16/2012 06:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I wonder if it would make sense to split out those changes from the
patch, including a one-member struct definition to the lexer source,
which could presumably be applied in advance of the rest of the patch.
That way, if other parts of the main patch
On 01/16/2012 05:25 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
The most reasonable answer to this is for people to publish a git repo
URL in addition to the "official" submission of changes to the list in
patch form. And momentum toward doing that just keeps going up, even
among longer term contributors who we
Excerpts from Daniel Farina's message of dom ene 15 08:41:55 -0300 2012:
> Onto the mechanism: the patch is both a contrib and changes to
> Postgres. The changes to postgres are mechanical in nature, but
> voluminous. The key change is to not only remember the position of
> Const nodes in the q
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
> On 01/12/2012 11:57 AM, Scott Mead wrote:
>
>> Pretty delayed, but please find the attached patch that addresses all the
>> issues discussed.
>>
>
> The docs on this v4 look like they suffered a patch order problem here.
> In the v3, you added
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun ene 16 12:44:57 -0300 2012:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > While reviewing Nikhil Sontakke's fix for the inherited constraints open
> > item we have, I noticed that MergeWithExistingConstraint and
> > MergeConstraintsIntoExisting are using rather different me
Excerpts from Nikhil Sontakke's message of vie dic 23 01:02:10 -0300 2011:
> I have also tried to change the error message as per Alvaro's suggestions.
> I will really try to see if we have other issues. Really cannot have Robert
> reporting all the bugs and getting annoyed, but there are lotsa v
Excerpts from Nikhil Sontakke's message of vie dic 23 01:02:10 -0300 2011:
> FWIW, here's a quick fix for the issue that Robert pointed out.
Thanks, applied.
> Again it's
> a variation of the first issue that he reported. We have two functions
> which try to merge existing constraints:
>
> Mer
On 01/16/2012 03:48 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
3. Dig the messageID out of your sent mail.
4. Add a comment to the patch, type "Review" with the messageID, and
ideally a short summary comment of the review.
This is the time consuming part that would benefit the most from some
automation. The mes
Excerpts from Jeff Janes's message of lun ene 16 18:37:59 -0300 2012:
> > I mean,
> > if getting a message-id from Gmail is all that complicated, please
> > complain to Google.
>
> But after digging the message-id out of gmail and entering it into the
> commitfest app, the resulting link is brok
On 1/16/12 11:42 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> But, I've noticed that nothing good comes of me pressing my own view
> too hard. Either we as a community value having the CommitFest wrap
> up in a reasonable period of time, or we don't.
Reality is, alas, not nearly so binary as this, and therin lie the
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Josh Berkus's message of lun ene 16 17:48:41 -0300 2012:
>
>> Putting submitters aside, I have to say based on teaching people how to
>> use the CF stuff on Thursday night that the process of submitting a
>> review of a patch
On 1/15/12 3:01 PM, Thomas Munro wrote:
> 5. Probably many other things that I'm not aware of right now and
> won't discover until I dig/ask further and/or run into a brick wall!
>
> Useful? Doable?
Useful, yes. Harder than it looks, probably. I tried to mock up a
version of this years ago fo
> I mean, is email arcane? Surely not. Are summary lines arcane? Give
> me a break. So the only real complain point here is message-id, which
> normally people don't care about and don't even know they exist. So
> they have to learn about it.
The complaint is that the reviewer is expected to
Excerpts from Josh Berkus's message of lun ene 16 17:48:41 -0300 2012:
> Putting submitters aside, I have to say based on teaching people how to
> use the CF stuff on Thursday night that the process of submitting a
> review of a patch is VERY unintuitive, or in the words of one reviewer
> "astoni
On 1/14/12 8:44 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> Second, e-mail provides some level of validation that patches being
> submitted are coming from the person they claim. We currently reject
> patches that are only shared with the community on the web, via places
> like github. The process around this mailin
Seem 1575fbcb caused this warning:
view.c: In function ‘DefineVirtualRelation’:
view.c:105:6: warning: variable ‘namespaceId’ set but not used
[-Wunused-but-set-variable]
Attached seems to be the easy fix - or am I missing something obvious?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Wo
Thomas Munro writes:
> A common usage for this is to increase parallelism in systems with
> multiple workers taking jobs from a queue. I've used it for this
> purpose myself on another RDBMS, having seen it recommended for some
> types of work queue implementation. It may have other uses.
To at
Attached patch adds a counter for number of deadlocks in a database to
pg_stat_database.
While not enough to diagnose a problem on it's own, this is an easy
way to get an indicator when for when you need to go look in the logs
for details. Overhead should be very small - one counter per database
i
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> I deliberately chose not to do that, because the PL/Python API is
> intentionally totally different from the standard DB-API, and mixing in
> some semi-conforming look-alike would be quite confusing from both ends.
Fair enough.
> I think we should stick with the PL/Pyt
Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of lun ene 16 16:17:42 -0300 2012:
>
> On 15.01.2012 06:49, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > --- 164,178
> > #define HEAP_HASVARWIDTH0x0002/* has variable-width
> > attribute(s) */
> > #define HEAP_HASEXTERNAL0x0004/* has exter
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On mån, 2012-01-16 at 11:17 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I don't see how setting indisvalid to false helps with this, because
>> IIUC when a session sees indisvalid = false, it is supposed to avoid
>> using the index for queries but still
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> I would have sworn I left this next to the bike shed...from the crickets
> chirping I guess not. I did complete bumping forward the patches that
> slipped through the November CF the other day, and it's properly closed now.
>
> As for CF 2012-0
On 15.01.2012 06:49, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
--- 164,178
#define HEAP_HASVARWIDTH 0x0002 /* has variable-width
attribute(s) */
#define HEAP_HASEXTERNAL 0x0004 /* has external stored
attribute(s) */
#define HEAP_HASOID 0x0008 /* has
On mån, 2012-01-16 at 11:17 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I don't see how setting indisvalid to false helps with this, because
> IIUC when a session sees indisvalid = false, it is supposed to avoid
> using the index for queries but still make new index entries when a
> write operation happens - but t
On sön, 2012-01-08 at 22:22 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 21:53, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > I've recently had a possible need for telling pg_basebackup how to
> > handle symlinks in the remote data directory, instead of ignoring them,
> > which is what currently happens.
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 19:41, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On sön, 2012-01-15 at 12:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander writes:
>> > Right now we have a single table on
>> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/monitoring-stats.html#MONITORING-STATS-VIEWS
>> > that lists all our sta
On ons, 2012-01-11 at 22:52 +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > .colnames() returns a list of column names (strings)
> > .coltypes() returns a list of type OIDs (integers)
> >
> > I just made that up because there is no guidance in the other standard
> > PLs for this sort
On ons, 2012-01-11 at 17:16 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I propose to add two functions to the result object:
> >
> > .colnames() returns a list of column names (strings)
> > .coltypes() returns a list of type OIDs (integers)
>
> No typmods?
Didn't think about that, but could be added using
On sön, 2012-01-15 at 12:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > Right now we have a single table on
> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/monitoring-stats.html#MONITORING-STATS-VIEWS
> > that lists all our statistics views ...
> > I'd like to turn that into one table for
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 18:57, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 09:37, Greg Smith wrote:
>>> On 01/15/2012 03:17 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
And FWIW, I'd find it a lot more useful for the CF app to have the
ability
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 09:37, Greg Smith wrote:
>> On 01/15/2012 03:17 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> And FWIW, I'd find it a lot more useful for the CF app to have the
>>> ability to post *reviews* in it, that would end up being properly
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
>
> I will add it to the 2012-01 commitfest now, I hope that's OK. If not,
> feel free to remove it and I'll put it in 2012-Next.
>
i'm not the CF manager so he can disagree with me...
but IMHO your patch has been almost complete since last
Hi list,
Here's v6 of my expression caching patch. The only change in v6 is
added expression cost estimation in costsize.c. I'm setting per-tuple
cost of CacheExpr to 0 and moving sub-expression tuple costs into the
startup cost.
As always, this work is also available from my Github "cache" branc
Hi,
2012/1/16 Alvaro Herrera :
>
> Excerpts from Jaime Casanova's message of lun ene 16 03:23:30 -0300 2012:
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Julien Tachoires wrote:
>> >
>> > OK, considering that, I don't see any way to handle the case raised by
>> > Jaime :(
>>
>> Did you consider what Álv
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Done. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
Thanks.
I'll review this first, but can't start immediately. Please expect
something back in 2 days.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 8:26 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On ons, 2011-08-24 at 11:24 -0700, Daniel Farina wrote:
>>> I was poking around at tablecmds and index.c and wonder if a similar
>>> two-pass approach as used by CREATE INDEX CONCURR
Bruce had a patch to turn SGML descriptions of system view into comments
via some Perl program or something. He posted it many moons ago and I
haven't seen an updated version. Bruce, do you have something to say on
this topic?
--
Álvaro Herrera
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
P
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:57 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
> ...
> 2012-01-16 02:39:01.184 EST [25052]: DEBUG: checkpoint sync: number=34
> file=base/16385/11766 time=0.006 msec
> 2012-01-16 02:39:01.184 EST [25052]: DEBUG: checkpoint sync delay: seconds
> left=3
> 2012-01-16 02:39:01.284 EST [25052]: D
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> Since synchronous_standby_names cannot be changed without bouncing the
> server, we do not provide the tools for an external tool to make this
> change cleanly.
Yes, it can. It's PGC_SIGHUP.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprise
Excerpts from Jaime Casanova's message of lun ene 16 03:23:30 -0300 2012:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Julien Tachoires wrote:
> >
> > OK, considering that, I don't see any way to handle the case raised by
> > Jaime :(
>
> Did you consider what Álvaro suggested? anyway, seems is too late
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> While reviewing Nikhil Sontakke's fix for the inherited constraints open
> item we have, I noticed that MergeWithExistingConstraint and
> MergeConstraintsIntoExisting are using rather different mechanism to
> compare equality of the constraint expressions; the former does
On 01/13/2012 02:50 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 01/13/2012 12:31 AM, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
So my conclusion is it's better than nothing, but we could do
better job here.
From timeline perspective, it'd be ok to apply this patch and improve
more later in 9.3+.
I agree, let's look at
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of dom ene 15 10:00:03 -0300 2012:
>> On ons, 2011-12-28 at 14:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> The trouble with using ReadNewTransactionId is that it makes the results
>>> volatile, not stable as the function is declared to be.
>> Co
While reviewing Nikhil Sontakke's fix for the inherited constraints open
item we have, I noticed that MergeWithExistingConstraint and
MergeConstraintsIntoExisting are using rather different mechanism to
compare equality of the constraint expressions; the former does this:
{
Datum
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
>>> The patch looks ok, though I wonder if we could have a way to release
>>> the lock on namespace much before the end of trans
Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of dom ene 15 10:00:03 -0300 2012:
>
> On ons, 2011-12-28 at 14:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > > Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of mié dic 28 15:04:09 -0300
> > > 2011:
> > >> On a hot standby, this fails with:
> > >>
On 01/09/2012 10:00 PM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> Because of this I decided to sample data in run-time to get a real-life
> picture of the system.
> Any functions not being called in productions are not that important to
> include in the documentation anyway.
FWIW I have a similar problem - with a si
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>
Thought? Comments?
>>>
>>> This is almost exactly the same as my patc
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 02:40:46PM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 6:26 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> >
> > - pgstattuple() and relation_free_space() should emit the same number, even
> > if
> > ?that means improving pgstattuple() at the same time.
>
> yes, i just wanted to unde
Despite the best attempts of all my neighbors to distract me, as if
there was something more important going on Sunday afternoon in
Baltimore than preparing for the CommitFest, I've tried to get all the
loose patches onto the CommitFest app and get the early reviews
accounted for on there too.
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 5:33 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Thomas Munro writes:
>> I am wondering out loud whether I am brave enough to try to propose
>> SKIP LOCKED DATA support and would be grateful for any feedback and/or
>> {en|dis}couragement. I don't see it on the todo list, and didn't find
>> sig
On 11/23/2011 09:28 PM, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
The first thing I did was add hook points where immediate statement
logging happens "pre_exec" and those that present duration
"post_exec". These should, with optimization turned on, have only a
few instructions of impact when no hooks are registe
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 7:01 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Kevin Grittner
> wrote:
>> Jeff Janes wrote:\
>>
>>> I don't understand why this is controversial.
>>
>> I'm having a hard time seeing why this is considered a feature. It
>> seems to me what is being propose
On 16.01.2012 00:42, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I've also attached the results of a pgbench-tools driven benchmark,
which are quite striking (Just the most relevant image - e-mail me
privately if you'd like a copy of the full report, as I don't want to
send a large PDF file to the list as a courtesy
That is quite useful feature to implement smth. like message queues
based on database and so on.
Now there is possibility to jump over luck of such feature in Postgres
using current advisory lock implementation (pg_try_advisory_xact_lock
to determine if somebody already acquired log on particular r
78 matches
Mail list logo
