On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> To review (copying Heikki's message):
>
> 1. Pick a patch from the list at:
>
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/6/
>
> 2. Review it. Test it. Try to break it. Do we want the feature? Any
> weird interactions in corner-cases? Does it have th
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> BTW I think this is ready for committer, except for the need to check docs
> by native speaker.
If so, could you update the entry of this patch accordingly?
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/6/353/
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mail
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> As discussed in
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150611230316.gm133...@postgresql.org
> we've been working on implementing columnar storage for Postgres.
> Here's some initial code to show our general idea, and to gather
> comments r
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:53 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>> Thanks. For comparison, I wrote a patch to implement what I had in mind.
>>
>> When a WAL-skipping COPY begins, we add an entry for that relation in a
>> "pending-fsyncs" hash table. Whenever we perform any ac
Here is a new version merging the recent CREATE EXTENSION ... VERSION
patch from master.
(Apologies for sending so many versions. tab-complete.c keeps moving
and I want to keep a version that applies on top of master out there,
for anyone interested in looking at this. As long as no one objects
Petr Jelinek writes:
> On 2015-10-12 14:32, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>> Also, it was planned that documentation changes would be reviewed by
>> native english speaker.
> BTW I think this is ready for committer, except for the need to check
> docs by native speaker.
I'm working at Salesforce th
On 2015-10-12 14:32, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
Also, it was planned that documentation changes would be reviewed by
native english speaker.
BTW I think this is ready for committer, except for the need to check
docs by native speaker.
--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.c
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Andres Freund wrote:
>> for another every decent compiler can optimize those away. Note that
>> those duplicate strlen() calls are there in a lot of places in
>> walsender.c
> It can? Tom has repeatedly argue the opposite, in the past.
I'm prepared to believe that *some
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 2:04 AM, Nathan Wagner wrote:
> https://granicus.if.org/pgbugs/ for anyone who hasn't and wants to take a
> look.
FYI There seems to be an encoding problem somewhere. "Đặng Minh Dũng"
is showing up as "Äặng Minh DÅ©ng" on this page:
https://granicus.if.org/pgbugs/1369
On 2015-10-21 19:36:16 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> diff --git a/src/backend/replication/walsender.c
> b/src/backend/replication/walsender.c
> index c6043cd..5487cc0 100644
> --- a/src/backend/replication/walsender.c
> +++ b/src/backend/replication/walsender.c
> @@ -762,10 +762,10 @@ logical_rea
Andres Freund wrote:
> That seems fairly insignificant. For one this is a rather infrequent and
> expensive operation, for another every decent compiler can optimize
> those away. Note that those duplicate strlen() calls are there in a lot
> of places in walsender.c
diff --git a/src/backend/repli
Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-10-21 17:21:25 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I think the first assignment is also pointless -- I mean can't we just
> > use MyReplicationSlot->data.name in both places where slot_name is used?
>
> Makes the lines a bit long. strlen(NameStr(MyReplicationSlot->data
On 2015-10-21 11:52:31 -0300, Euler Taveira wrote:
> While testing wal2json, I faced some problems with pg_recvlogical. Attached
> is a serie of patches that can improve pg_recvlogical. Patches #2 and #3 are
> bugfixes (and should be applied to 9.5 too). Patch #1 is not mandatory to
> 9.5.
> #1: a
On 2015-10-21 17:21:25 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > It seems that the 2nd assignment was an oversight. Spotted by Bernd
> > Helmle.
Yea, that's obviously redudant. Will remove.
> I think the first assignment is also pointless -- I mean can't we just
> use MyReplicationSlot->data.name in both
Euler Taveira wrote:
> It seems that the 2nd assignment was an oversight. Spotted by Bernd
> Helmle.
I think the first assignment is also pointless -- I mean can't we just
use MyReplicationSlot->data.name in both places where slot_name is used?
In the same routine, it seems wasteful to be doing
Jim Nasby wrote:
> While warning a client that just did a Slony-based version upgrade to make
> sure to freeze the new database, it occurred to me that it should be safe to
> freeze without the cleanup lock. This is interesting because it would allow
> a scan_all vacuum to do it's job without block
On 10/21/2015 12:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Attached patch rips out CREATEUSER and NOCREATEUSER options lock, stock,
> and barrel.
Looks good to me.
> Another possibility is to change them to actually mean CREATEROLE and
> NOCREATEROLE. I think probably a clean break is better though.
I think th
On 20-10-2015 08:28, Bernd Helmle wrote:
The 2nd assignment to slot_name looks unnecessary?
Yes, it is. Seems to be an oversight. Patch attached.
--
Euler Taveira Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/
PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento
Jim Nasby writes:
> While warning a client that just did a Slony-based version upgrade to
> make sure to freeze the new database, it occurred to me that it should
> be safe to freeze without the cleanup lock.
What's your argument for that being safe?
regards, tom lane
On October 21, 2015 9:47:45 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane wrote:
>Jim Nasby writes:
>> While warning a client that just did a Slony-based version upgrade to
>
>> make sure to freeze the new database, it occurred to me that it
>should
>> be safe to freeze without the cleanup lock.
>
>What's your argumen
Joe Conway writes:
> On 10/21/2015 11:26 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2015-10-21 11:17:44 -0700, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I wonder if it's time yet to remove those keywords. We've had the
>>> SUPERUSER spelling since 8.1, and this report should remind us that
>>> people get confused by the old spell
While warning a client that just did a Slony-based version upgrade to
make sure to freeze the new database, it occurred to me that it should
be safe to freeze without the cleanup lock. This is interesting because
it would allow a scan_all vacuum to do it's job without blocking on the
cleanup lo
Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 10/21/15 8:11 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >Meh. Adding complexity definitely needs to be weighed against the
> >benefits. As pointed out e.g. by all the multixact issues you mentioned
> >upthread. In this case your argument for changing the name doesn't seem
> >to hold much wat
On 10/21/15 8:11 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Meh. Adding complexity definitely needs to be weighed against the
benefits. As pointed out e.g. by all the multixact issues you mentioned
upthread. In this case your argument for changing the name doesn't seem
to hold much water.
ISTM VISIBILITY_MAP_FRO
Currently, xid_age() returns INT_MAX for a permanent xid. The comment in
the function that 'Permanent XIDs are always infinitely old' may be
technically correct, but returning INT_MAX is a useless behavior because
it actually makes it look like that XID is in immediate wraparound
danger. I thin
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> > I'm planning on adding a todo item to have COPY FREEZE set
> PD_ALL_VISIBLE.
> > Or is there some reason this can't be done?
> >
> > Since the whole point of COPY FREEZE is to avoid needi
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Robbie Harwood wrote:
>> Stephen Frost writes:
>>> psql: lost synchronization with server: got message type "S", length 22
>>
>> which unfortunately could be a great many things. I've said this a
>> couple times now, but I really do nee
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Thanks. For comparison, I wrote a patch to implement what I had in mind.
>
> When a WAL-skipping COPY begins, we add an entry for that relation in a
> "pending-fsyncs" hash table. Whenever we perform any action on a heap that
> would normally be WAL-logged, we check if
I am trying to patch postgres to accept this query. A recursive query
referencing the recursive table twice. By removing some checks it accepts
the query and generates a plan.
### Query
create table base(k1,k2,k3) as (values
(1,null,null),(2,null,null),(3,1,2));
with recursive x(k1,k2,k3) as (
Michael Paquier writes:
> Robbie,
>
> +#ifdef ENABLE_GSS
> + if (pggss_encrypt(conn) < 0)
> + return EOF;
> +#endif
>
> @@ -1528,10 +1541,20 @@ socket_putmessage(char msgtype, const char *s,
> size_t len)
> if (internal_putbytes(s, len))
> goto fail;
>
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Beena Emerson wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Attached patch is a rough patch which supports multi sync replication
>> by another approach I sent before.
>>
>> The new GUC parameters are:
>> * synchronous_sta
Hi,
While testing wal2json, I faced some problems with pg_recvlogical.
Attached is a serie of patches that can improve pg_recvlogical. Patches
#2 and #3 are bugfixes (and should be applied to 9.5 too). Patch #1 is
not mandatory to 9.5.
Short description:
#1: add a bunch of checks to complai
On 2015-10-21 07:49:23 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Hello Andres,
>
> >>>In my performance testing it showed that calling PerformFileFlush() only
> >>>at segment boundaries and in CheckpointWriteDelay() can lead to rather
> >>>spikey IO - not that surprisingly. The sync in CheckpointWriteDelay()
Here's patch with the regression fixed.
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <
ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 11:33 PM, Robert Haas
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:28 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
>> wrote:
>> > Attached is the patch which takes ca
On 2015-10-20 20:35:31 -0400, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 9 October 2015 at 15:20, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > I don't see the problem? I mean catversion will reliably tell you which
> > format the vm is in?
> >
> > Totally agreed.
> >
>
> Thi
On Wednesday, 21 October 2015, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 8:16 PM, Robert Haas > wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Robert Haas > wrote:
> > > It's good to have your perspective on how this can be improved, and
> > > I'm definitely willing to write more documentat
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:39:55AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> So where are we at on this?
Well, I can't speak to where we are, but my system is up, running, and
seems to work well, It even attracts a few visitors.
I have been meaning to write a triage interface, but I have been stuck
doing
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 8:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Robert Haas
wrote:
> > It's good to have your perspective on how this can be improved, and
> > I'm definitely willing to write more documentation. Any lack in that
> > area is probably due to being too close
Hello, KaiGai-san and Horiguchi-san.
I created v2 patch. Please find attached.
I believe this patch will fix the most of issues mentioned by
Horiguchi-san except naming.
In this v2 patch, scan node which is originally inner relation of
Join node must be SeqScan (or SampleScan). This limitation is
21.10.2015 01:37, Jim Nasby пишет:
On 10/20/15 9:00 AM, Artur Zakirov wrote:
Internal representation of the dictionary in the PostgreSQL doesn't
impose too strict limits on the number of affix rules. There are a
flagval array, which size must be increased from 256 to 65000.
Is that per diction
On 2015/10/21 13:34, Kouhei Kaigai wrote:
On 2015/10/20 13:11, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2015/10/20 5:34, Robert Haas wrote:
No. You just need to populate fdw_recheck_quals correctly, same as
for the scan case.
As I said yesterday, that opinion of me is completely wrong. Sorry for
the incorr
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 11:33 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:28 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> > Attached is the patch which takes care of above comments.
>
> I spent some time on this patch today. But it's still not right.
>
> I've attached a new version which fixes a seriou
On 2015.10.14 at 13:41:51 +0300, Victor Wagner wrote:
>
> Attached patch which implements client library failover and
> loadbalancing as was described in the proposal
> <20150818041850.ga5...@wagner.pp.ru>.
>
I'm sending imporoved verison of patch. As Olexander Shulgin noted,
previous version o
Robbie,
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Robbie Harwood wrote:
>> Stephen Frost writes:
>>> psql: lost synchronization with server: got message type "S", length 22
>>
>> which unfortunately could be a great many things. I've said this a
44 matches
Mail list logo
