On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Emanuel Calvo
>> wrote:
>> > I realized that the output of the CREATE RULE has not a detailed
>> > output for the "events" parameter.
>> >
>
Thom Brown writes:
> Is it necessary for a partial index that doesn't include the row to be
> involved in locking?
Yes. You can't determine whether the index needs to get a new entry
without examining its metadata, and that's what the lock is mainly about.
The only possible alternative would be
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Emanuel Calvo
> wrote:
> > I realized that the output of the CREATE RULE has not a detailed
> > output for the "events" parameter.
> >
> The list of events possible is already listed in the section
> "Pa
On 22 March 2014 00:59, Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 03/22/2014 01:43 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've created a table with 1000 partial indexes. Each one matches
>> exactly one row based on the predicate WHERE id = .
>>
>> However, when I perform an UPDATE of a single row in a transaction,
>>
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Emanuel Calvo
wrote:
> I realized that the output of the CREATE RULE has not a detailed
> output for the "events" parameter.
>
> But the question here is that I'm not sure which format follow:
>
> { INSERT | UPDATE | DELETE | SELECT}
>
> or
>
> INSERT
> UP
On Mar 21, 2014, at 2:16 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Surely if it were really a major annoyance, someone would have sent code to
> fix it during the last 4 years and more since the above.
>
> I suspect it's a minor annoyance :-)
>
> But by all means add it to the TODO list if it's not there al
On 03/22/2014 01:43 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've created a table with 1000 partial indexes. Each one matches
> exactly one row based on the predicate WHERE id = .
>
> However, when I perform an UPDATE of a single row in a transaction,
> I've noticed that all those partial indexes show up i
Hi,
I've created a table with 1000 partial indexes. Each one matches
exactly one row based on the predicate WHERE id = .
However, when I perform an UPDATE of a single row in a transaction,
I've noticed that all those partial indexes show up in pg_locks with
RowExclusiveLock.
Only 2 of those ind
> That's because the parameter is checked at the beginning of recovery
> (i.e. at standby start) before XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE is received and
> applied on the standby. Please see CheckRequiredParameterValues() in
> StartupXLOG().
>
> To persist the max_connections change:
>
> 1) stop primary
> 2
Simon Riggs writes:
> On 21 March 2014 20:58, Noah Misch wrote:
>> It's not the behavior I would choose for a new product, but I can't see
>> benefits sufficient to overturn previous decisions to keep it.
> Speechless
The key argument for not "fixing" this is that it would break existing
pg_dum
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> Given the minor symptoms in released versions, I lean against a back-patch.
> FWIW, I'd lean toward a back-patch. It's probably not a big deal
> either way, but I have a hard time seeing what risk we're avoiding by
> n
Hello,
As people may know, I've implemented a relation cache mechanism on top of
custom-plan interface, that holds contents of a particular columns only, thus
it does not need to take storage access as long as user's query refers the
columns on in-memory cache.
The key factor of how this mechanism
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 01:16:08PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 3:23 AM, MauMau wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> The PostgreSQL documentation describes cp (on UNIX/Linux) or copy (on
> Windows) as an example for archive_command. However, cp/copy does not
> sync
> the
On 3/21/14, 4:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2014-03-21 16:49:53 -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
Why do we require a restart to change autovacuum_freeze_max_age? Can’t
we respawn the autovac workers to pick up the setting? (Or just pass
the HUP down to them?)
It's more complex than notifying the
On 2014-03-21 22:52:33 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> The committed version doesn't compile with LWLOCK_STATS...
Just noticed that it seems to also break the dtrace stuff:
http://pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=rover_firefly&dt=2014-03-21%2018%3A04%3A00
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andre
Hi,
On 2014-03-21 16:49:53 -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
> Why do we require a restart to change autovacuum_freeze_max_age? Can’t
> we respawn the autovac workers to pick up the setting? (Or just pass
> the HUP down to them?)
It's more complex than notifying the workers. There's limits in shared
memory
Merlin Moncure writes:
> There is no way for psql to handle that case though unless you'd strip
> *all* BOMs encountered. Compounding this problem is that there's no
> practical way AFAIK to send multiple file to psql via single command
> line invocation. If you pass multiple -f arguments all bu
Hi,
I see you've committed this, cool. Sorry for not getting back to the
topic earlier..
On 2014-03-13 22:44:03 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 03/12/2014 09:29 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >On 2014-03-07 17:54:32 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >>So there are some unexplained differences
Why do we require a restart to change autovacuum_freeze_max_age? Can’t we
respawn the autovac workers to pick up the setting? (Or just pass the HUP down
to them?)
--
Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect j...@nasby.net
512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'd be okay with swallowing a leading BOM if and only if client encoding
> is UTF8. This should apply to any file psql reads, whether script or
> data.
Yeah. The one case that doesn't solve is:
cat f1.sql f2.sql | psql ...
Which is common usa
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> Surely if it were really a major annoyance, someone would have sent code
> to fix it during the last 4 years and more since the above.
The code would probably be pretty trivial, *if* we had consensus on
what the behavior ought to be. I'm not sure if we do. People who
o
From: "Jeff Janes"
Do people really just copy the files from one directory of local storage
to
another directory of local storage? I don't see the point of that.
It makes sense to archive WAL to a directory of local storage for media
recovery. Here, the local storage is a different disk dr
On 21 March 2014 20:58, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 06:53:27PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 21 March 2014 17:49, Noah Misch wrote:
>>
>> >> > alter table information_schema.triggers set (security_barrier = true);
>> >>
>> >> I find it hard to justify why we accept such a stat
On 03/21/2014 05:06 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
See http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4afeab39.3000...@dunslane.net
This is still broken as of fairly recent HEAD; any objections to adding it to
TODO?
Agreed: this is a major annoyance.
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> See http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4afeab39.3000...@dunslane.net
>
> This is still broken as of fairly recent HEAD; any objections to adding it to
> TODO?
Agreed: this is a major annoyance.
merlin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing lis
See http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4afeab39.3000...@dunslane.net
This is still broken as of fairly recent HEAD; any objections to adding it to
TODO?
--
Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect j...@nasby.net
512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
--
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 06:53:27PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 21 March 2014 17:49, Noah Misch wrote:
>
> >> > alter table information_schema.triggers set (security_barrier = true);
> >>
> >> I find it hard to justify why we accept such a statement. Surely its a
> >> bug when the named table
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 3:23 AM, MauMau wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The PostgreSQL documentation describes cp (on UNIX/Linux) or copy (on
> Windows) as an example for archive_command. However, cp/copy does not sync
> the copied data to disk. As a result, the completed WAL segments would be
> lost in th
On 21 March 2014 03:45, Noah Misch wrote:
>> + * Note that Hot Standby only knows about AccessExclusiveLocks on the master
>> + * so any changes that might affect SELECTs running on standbys need to use
>> + * AccessExclusiveLocks even if you think a lesser lock would do, unless you
>> + * have a
On 21 March 2014 18:26, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Given the minor symptoms in released versions, I lean against a back-patch.
>
> FWIW, I'd lean toward a back-patch. It's probably not a big deal
> either way, but I have a hard time seeing what risk we're avoiding by
> not back-patching, and it seems
On 21 March 2014 17:49, Noah Misch wrote:
>> >> + * Be careful to ensure this function is called for Tables and Indexes
>> >> only.
>> >> + * It is not currently safe to be called for Views because
>> >> security_barrier
>> >> + * is listed as an option and so would be allowed to be set at a le
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> We added these ConstrCheck fields for 9.2, but equalTupleDescs() did not get
> the memo. I looked for resulting behavior problems, and I found one in
> RelationClearRelation() only. Test case:
>
> set constraint_exclusion = on;
> drop table i
Hi,
I've been annoyed at the amount of memory used by the backend local
PrivateRefCount array for a couple of reasons:
a) The performance impact of AtEOXact_Buffers() on Assert() enabled
builds is really, really annoying.
b) On larger nodes, the L1/2/3 cache impact of randomly accessing
sev
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 04:11:12PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 21 March 2014 03:45, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 08, 2014 at 11:14:30AM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Thanks for the review. I'll respond to each point on a later email but
> looks nothing much major, apart from the point raise
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 02:02:50PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> The attached patch is slightly updated. I will apply it to head and all
> the back branches, including the stylistic change to pg_resetxlog (for
> consistency) and remove the MinGW block in head.
Patch applied back through 8.4. I h
From: "Alvaro Herrera"
MauMau escribió:
The "raw" link only gave the mail in text format. I hoped to import
the mail into Windows Mail on Windows Vista, but I couldn't.
You might need to run a conversion process by which you transform the
raw file (in mbox format) into EML format or whateve
Andrew Dunstan escribió:
> What would be useful for many purposes, and is a long-standing
> project of mine that I still haven't found time to make progress on,
> is that the server should contain functions to produce the creation
> SQL for all its own objects, free of the locks that pg_dump requi
On 21 March 2014 03:45, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 08, 2014 at 11:14:30AM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 7 March 2014 09:04, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> > The right thing to do here is to not push to the extremes. If we mess
>> > too much with the ruleutil stuff it will just be buggy. A more
>> >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi guys,
I realized that the output of the CREATE RULE has not a detailed
output for the "events" parameter.
But the question here is that I'm not sure which format follow:
{ INSERT | UPDATE | DELETE | SELECT}
or
INSERT
UPDATE
DELE
From: "Michael Paquier"
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:54 PM, MauMau wrote:
* Create pg_copy in C so that it can be used on Windows as well as on
UNIX/Linux. It just copies one file. Its source code is located in
src/bin/pg_copy/. Please recommend a better name if you have one in
mind.
I'd rat
From: "Michael Paquier"
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:54 PM, MauMau wrote:
* Create pg_copy in C so that it can be used on Windows as well as on
UNIX/Linux. It just copies one file. Its source code is located in
src/bin/pg_copy/. Please recommend a better name if you have one in
mind.
I'd rat
On 03/21/2014 09:38 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Craig Ringer writes:
Here's how I think it needs to look:
[ move all the functionality to the backend ]
Of course, after you've done all that work, you've got something that is
of exactly zero use t
Andrzej Mazurkiewicz writes:
> My patch need one change that might be of significance.
> A type of the depencencies (pg_depend) among the FK constraint
> (pg_constraint)
> and the corresponding "RI_ConstraintTrigger" triggers has to be changed from
> DEPENDENCY_INTERNAL to DEPENDENCY_AUTO.
So
I had implemented similar code on top of FDW API.
https://github.com/kaigai/pg_strom/blob/old_cuda/utilcmds.c#L244
Probably, heap_create_with_catalog() is what you are finding out.
2014-03-21 22:57 GMT+09:00 Rajashree Mandaogane :
> We are working on a project in which we need to create tables
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Behn, Edward (EBEHN) wrote:
>
> I've endeavored to enable the return of arrays of composite types from code
> written in PL/Python. It seems that this can be accomplished though a very
> minor change to the code:
>
> On line 401 in the file src/pl/plpython/plpy_
We are working on a project in which we need to create tables for each
column. So which function should we call in recursion to create the tables?
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Craig Ringer writes:
>> Here's how I think it needs to look:
>> [ move all the functionality to the backend ]
>
> Of course, after you've done all that work, you've got something that is
> of exactly zero use to its supposed principal use-case,
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I must admit that I'm coming around to the view that jsonb_hash_ops
> would make a better default. Its performance is superb, and I think
> there's a strong case to be made for that more than making up for it
> not supporting all indexable
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:54 PM, MauMau wrote:
> * Create pg_copy in C so that it can be used on Windows as well as on
> UNIX/Linux. It just copies one file. Its source code is located in
> src/bin/pg_copy/. Please recommend a better name if you have one in mind.
I'd rather see that as a part o
From: "Tatsuo Ishii"
Last time I tested in following way, max_connections in pg_control of
standby did not reflect the change in primary.
1) stop primary
2) stop standby
3) change max_connections to 4 in primary
4) change max_connections to 4 in standby
5) start primary
6) start standby but it
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 4:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Craig Ringer writes:
> > Here's how I think it needs to look:
> > [ move all the functionality to the backend ]
>
> Of course, after you've done all that work, you've got something that is
> of exactly zero use to its supposed principal use-case
> The primary log the new value as an XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE WAL record
> at startup when the parameter value in postgresql.conf does not match
> the one in pg_control. Then, the WAL record is sent to the standby
> and applied, which changes the value in pg_control on the standby.
Last time I test
From: "Rajeev rastogi"
If you changed max_connection to 4 only in primary, then I am not able to
understand, how it got changed in standby also (if you have not taken back
again)?
Let me know If I have missed something.
The primary log the new value as an XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE WAL record at
From: "Mitsumasa KONDO"
2014-03-17 21:12 GMT+09:00 Fujii Masao :
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Robert Haas
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 6:23 AM, MauMau wrote:
>> * Improve the example in the documentation.
>> But what command can we use to reliably sync just one file?
>>
>> * Provide
On 21 March 2014 16:17, Tatsuo Wrote:
> In my case I had already changed primary's max_connections to 4 and
> restarted it. So at that point both postgresql.conf of primary and
> standby were 4.
If you changed max_connection to 4 only in primary, then I am not able to
understand, how it got cha
>> I changed primary servers max_connections from 100 to 4 for just a
>> testing purpose. Now standby server won't start and complains:
>>
>> hot standby is not possible because max_connections = 4 is a lower
>> setting than on the master server (its value was 100)
>>
>> My guess is this is becau
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo
Section "Inheritance"
"Allow inherited tables to inherit indexes, UNIQUE constraints, and
primary/FOREIGN KEYS"
Good Morning.
I started to program a patch for inheritance of the foreign key constraints.
I. e. after applying the patch FKs are maintained bet
On 21 March 2014 13:41, Tatsuo Wrote:
> I changed primary servers max_connections from 100 to 4 for just a
> testing purpose. Now standby server won't start and complains:
>
> hot standby is not possible because max_connections = 4 is a lower
> setting than on the master server (its value was 10
From: "Amit Kapila"
The comments in your first version needs to be improved, as there
you just mentioned a Windows specific comment:
+ /* On Windows, lstat()
I think you can change comments (make it somewhat similar to
destroy_tablespace_directories) and then submit it as a new version.
OK, d
I changed primary servers max_connections from 100 to 4 for just a
testing purpose. Now standby server won't start and complains:
hot standby is not possible because max_connections = 4 is a lower setting than
on the master server (its value was 100)
My guess is this is because standby's pg_cont
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:24 PM, MauMau wrote:
> From: "Amit Kapila"
>> If create_tablespace_directories() needs to handle with directory both on
>> Windows/Linux, then shouldn't it be a runtime check as in your first
>> version rather than compile time check?
>> Also isn't that the reason why d
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:21 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
>> It does sound like the main question here is which opclass should be
>> the default. From the discussion there's a jsonb_hash_ops which works
>> on all input values but supports fewer o
62 matches
Mail list logo
