On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
After some more thoughts, ISTM that this is not exactly a CFD because of the
truncations, so I just named it "f" to be on the safe side.
Was there supposed to be a patch attached here?
No, the actual patch is in the "add function to pgb
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> As soon as a single checkpoint ever happened the early-return logic in
>> CreateCheckPoint() will fail to take the LogStandbySnapshot() in
>> CreateCheckPoint() into account. The test i
> -Original Message-
> From: Kaigai Kouhei(海外 浩平)
> Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 11:23 AM
> To: 'Robert Haas'
> Cc: Amit Kapila; Andres Freund; pgsql-hackers
> Subject: RE: [HACKERS] CustomScan support on readfuncs.c
>
> > On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Kouhei Kaigai wrote:
> > > Sor
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 6:01 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> We are going to try to get Beta2 wrapped on Monday for a release next
> week. So if you're currently working on a 9.5 Open Item, getting it
> checked in tommorrow or this weekend would be great.
There is this vacuumdb issue with password handl
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Christian Marie wrote:
> This patch addresses this by adding and documenting an optional argument to
> dmetaphone and dmetaphone_alt that specifies the maximum output length. This
> makes it possible to use dmetaphone on much longer inputs.
It would be good if you
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
"Refactoring" seems rather a narrow definition of what might show up
in such a category, btw. Maybe "Code Beautificati
On 5 November 2015 at 23:10, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> David Steele wrote:
>
>> The important thing about this implementation was that nothing was
>> terminated unless it had exceed a timeout AND was blocking another
>> process.
>
> This seems a nice idea, but you need to take the effect on vacuum o
On 6 November 2015 at 13:34, Robert Haas wrote:
>> But some options control how
>> next host should be choosen (i.e. use random order for load-balancing
>> or sequential order for high availability), so they should be specified
>> only once per connect string.
>
> But this seems like a point wort
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 11/04/2015 01:55 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> * Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote:
>>> On 11/04/2015 01:24 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I agree with Pavel. Having a transaction timeout just does not make any
sense. I can see absol
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> After some more thoughts, ISTM that this is not exactly a CFD because of the
> truncations, so I just named it "f" to be on the safe side.
Was there supposed to be a patch attached here?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Victor Wagner wrote:
> There are some drawbacks with this approach
>
> 1. You are suggesting usage of two nested loops, instead of one straight
> loop - outer loop over the URLs in the connect string, inner loop over
> the IP addresses each URL resolves into. (This
On Thursday, November 5, 2015, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 6 November 2015 at 12:45, Robert Haas > wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 9:57 AM, YUriy Zhuravlev
> > > wrote:
> >> Hello hackers.
> >> There are comments to my patch? Maybe I should create a separate thread?
> >> Thanks.
> >
> > You shoul
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 11:46 PM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
>> Yes, the above description is good.
>
> +1
Committed that way, then.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To mak
A developer I work with was trying to use dmetaphone to group people names into
equivalence classes. He found that many long names would be grouped together
when they shouldn't be, this turned out to be because dmetaphone has an
undocumented upper bound on its output length, of four. This is obviou
Hello,
At Fri, 6 Nov 2015 09:49:30 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote
in
> Apart from other problems discussed, I think it could also lead to
> a performance penality for the cases when the qual condition is
> costly as evaluating such a qual against lot of dead rows would be a
> time consuming operation
On 6 November 2015 at 12:45, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 9:57 AM, YUriy Zhuravlev
> wrote:
>> Hello hackers.
>> There are comments to my patch? Maybe I should create a separate thread?
>> Thanks.
>
> You should add this on commitfest.postgresql.org.
>
> I think the first question
Hi All,
PFA patch to get data sorted from the foreign server (postgres_fdw)
according to the pathkeys useful for merge join.
For a given base relation (extendable to join when that becomes available
in postgres_fdw), the patch tries to find merge joinable clauses. It then
adds paths with pathkeys
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>>> "Refactoring" seems rather a narrow definition of what might show up
>>> in such a category, btw. Maybe "Code Beautification" would be a
>>> suitable title? I'm bikeshedding thou
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 4:57 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Haribabu Kommi
> > wrote:
> >> I marked this patch as ready for committer.
> >
> > The patch says:
> >
> > If a background worker registers to receive
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 9:57 AM, YUriy Zhuravlev
wrote:
> Hello hackers.
> There are comments to my patch? Maybe I should create a separate thread?
> Thanks.
You should add this on commitfest.postgresql.org.
I think the first question that needs to be answered is "do we want
this?". I'm sure I k
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I was thinking about this idea:
>>
>> 1. Add a parallel_aware flag to each plan.
>
> Okay, so shall we add it in generic Plan node or to specific plan nodes
> like SeqScan, IndexScan, etc.
Hello,
The attached small patch is what I have in mind now.
fdwroutine->ExecForeignScan may be unset if the FDW does nothing
special. And all the FDW routine needs is the node.
> Subject: [PATCH] Allow substitute ExecScan body for ExecForignScan
>
> ForeignScan node may return joined tuple. Thi
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11/04/2015 11:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Jeff Janes writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:14 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
You're missing my point: that is possible in an indexscan, but
*not* in a bitmap indexscan, because
Hello,
At Thu, 5 Nov 2015 01:58:00 +, Kouhei Kaigai wrote
in <9a28c8860f777e439aa12e8aea7694f801162...@bpxm15gp.gisp.nec.co.jp>
> > So, as the third way, I propose to resurrect the abandoned
> > ForeinJoinState seems to be for the unearthed requirements. FDW
> > returns ForeignJoinPath, not
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> I was thinking about this idea:
>
> 1. Add a parallel_aware flag to each plan.
>
Okay, so shall we add it in generic Plan node or to specific plan nodes
like SeqScan, IndexScan, etc. To me, it appears that parallelism is
a node specific pro
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 12:51:52PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> As for the second part, I had to look up Fisher-Yates ;-) but after
> having read Wikipedia's entry about it I think this is a good change.
> The code's shorter and more efficient, and it should mathematically
> provide an equally-unbiase
Hi. Thank you for the comments.
The revised version is attaced.
- A typo is fixed in the comment for PQmblen().
- Do the same fix to PQdsplen().
At Thu, 5 Nov 2015 18:32:59 +0900, Amit Langote
wrote in <563b224b.3020...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
> On 2015/11/05 18:10, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> > Hel
Hello, thank you for the comments.
The revised version of this patch is attached.
- Prevent complete with ON to the sequence "[CREATE] [UNIQUE] INDEX ON".
- Added TABLESPACE to the preposition list for SECURITY LABEL.
I think that the current completion mechanism is simple, fast and
maybe enou
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Kouhei Kaigai wrote:
> > Sorry for my late.
> >
> > I confirmed that CustomScan support of readfuncs.c works fine using the
> > attached patch for the PG-Strom tree. It worked as expected - duplication,
> > serialization and deserialization by:
> > plan_dup = s
Hi,
On 11/06/2015 01:05 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
...
I can do that - I see there are three patches in the two threads:
1) gin_pending_lwlock.patch (Jeff Janes)
2) gin_pending_pagelock.patch (Jeff Janes)
3) gin_alone_cleanup-2.patch (
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> This is more or less lifted from numeric_abbrev_convert_var(). Perhaps
> you should change it there too. The extra set of parenthesis are
> removed in the attached patch. The patch also mechanically updates
> things to be consistent with the
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
>
> On 11/05/2015 11:44 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>>
>>
>> This looks like it is probably the same bug discussed here:
>>
>>
>> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAMkU=1xalflhuuohfp5v33rzedlvb5aknnujceum9knbkrb...@mail.gmail.com
>>
>> And here:
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Haribabu Kommi
> wrote:
> > I went through the patch, following are my observations,
> >
> > Patch applied with hunks and compiled with out warnings.
> > Basic tests are passed.
>
> I'm interested in hearing opi
On 11/05/2015 11:44 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>
This looks like it is probably the same bug discussed here:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAMkU=1xalflhuuohfp5v33rzedlvb5aknnujceum9knbkrb...@mail.gmail.com
And here:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/56041b26.2040...@sigaev.ru
The bug t
I wrote:
> I think the easiest way to fix this is to forget about the special
> initialization at outer level and just always initialize a new stack level
> to have the same hash as its parent. That leads to the first patch below
> --- but once you look at that, you realize that we've got unnecess
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 4:57 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Haribabu Kommi
> wrote:
>> I marked this patch as ready for committer.
>
> The patch says:
>
> If a background worker registers to receive asynchronous notifications
> with the LISTEN through SPI,
> there is cur
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> while repeating some full-text benchmarks on master, I've discovered
> that there's a data corruption bug somewhere. What happens is that while
> loading data into a table with GIN indexes (using multiple parallel
> connections), I some
Hi,
while repeating some full-text benchmarks on master, I've discovered
that there's a data corruption bug somewhere. What happens is that while
loading data into a table with GIN indexes (using multiple parallel
connections), I sometimes get this:
TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(((PageHeader) (page))
David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I'm interested in hearing opinions from multiple people about the
> > following two questions:
> >
> > 1. Is the new behavior better than the old behavior?
> > 2. Will breaking backward compatibility make too many p
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> "Refactoring" seems rather a narrow definition of what might show up
>> in such a category, btw. Maybe "Code Beautification" would be a
>> suitable title? I'm bikeshedding though.
>
> I think that there is value in limiting the number of
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The attached one-liner fixes it, but of course this means that on-disk
>> jsonb_path_ops indexes are possibly broken and will need to be reindexed.
>> I see no way around that ... does anybody else?
> I think it's impo
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> For the '+' overload operator with conversions there are 4 cases (2
> arguments ** 2 types) to handle. For all 5 binary operators (+ - * / %).
> that makes 20 cases to handle. Then for every function, you have to deal
> with type conversion as
New patch attached and rebased on HEAD
(8c75ad436f75fc629b61f601ba884c8f9313c9af).
Am 03.11.2015 um 04:06 schrieb Robert Haas:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Julien Rouhaud
> wrote:
>> I just reviewed your patch, everything looks fine for me. Maybe some
>> minor cosmetic changes could be made
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Catalin Iacob wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I wrote some text. But needs some work of native speaker.
>>
>> It does. It would be nice if some kind reviewer could help volunteer
>> to clean that up.
>
> I'll give it a go sometime n
2015-11-05 21:29 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule :
>
>
> 2015-11-05 13:31 GMT+01:00 Craig Ringer :
>
>> On 5 November 2015 at 14:36, Pavel Stehule
>> wrote:
>>
>> > 1. The encapsulation and local scope - all objects in schema are
>> accessible
>> > from other objects in schema by default (can be rewritt
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> I went through the patch, following are my observations,
>
> Patch applied with hunks and compiled with out warnings.
> Basic tests are passed.
I'm interested in hearing opinions from multiple people about the
following two questions:
1. Is
Folks,
We are going to try to get Beta2 wrapped on Monday for a release next
week. So if you're currently working on a 9.5 Open Item, getting it
checked in tommorrow or this weekend would be great.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing
On 11/05/2015 12:56 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2015-11-05 17:17 GMT+01:00 Joe Conway wrote:
> Hey, I resemble that remark ;-)
>
> I am sorry, Joe - no any personal attack - I'll pay a beer for you if
> you visit Prague :)
No offense taken, but I might take you up on that beer someday ;-)
--
On 11/05/2015 09:01 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Tom noted earlier some caveats with the 'idle' timeout in terms of
> implementation. Maybe that needs to be zeroed in on.
AFAIK, those issues have already been solved by Andres some time ago.
--
Vik Fearing
2015-11-05 17:17 GMT+01:00 Joe Conway :
> On 11/04/2015 10:46 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > 2015-11-05 7:39 GMT+01:00 Craig Ringer wrote:
> > I see constant confusion between \copy and COPY. It's a really good
> > reason NOT to overload other psql commands IMO.
> >
> > but crosstab is one o
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> The attached one-liner fixes it, but of course this means that on-disk
> jsonb_path_ops indexes are possibly broken and will need to be reindexed.
> I see no way around that ... does anybody else?
I think it's impossible to avoid having to recomm
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I wrote some text. But needs some work of native speaker.
>
> It does. It would be nice if some kind reviewer could help volunteer
> to clean that up.
I'll give it a go sometime next week.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hack
I looked into bug #13756,
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20151105171933.14035.25...@wrigleys.postgresql.org
The cause of the problem is that gin_extract_jsonb_path() computes
a different hash for the "2" in
{"a":[ ["b",{"x":1}], ["b",{"x":2}]]}
than it does for the "2" in
{"a
Hello Robert,
2. ddebug and idebug seem like a lousy idea to me.
It was really useful to me for debugging and testing.
That doesn't mean it belongs in the final patch.
I think it is useful when debugging a script, not just for debugging the
evaluation code itself.
3. I'm perplexed by
2015-11-05 13:31 GMT+01:00 Craig Ringer :
> On 5 November 2015 at 14:36, Pavel Stehule
> wrote:
>
> > 1. The encapsulation and local scope - all objects in schema are
> accessible
> > from other objects in schema by default (can be rewritten by explicit
> > granting). Local objects are visible o
On 11/5/15 10:10 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Steele wrote:
The important thing about this implementation was that nothing was
terminated unless it had exceed a timeout AND was blocking another
process.
This seems a nice idea, but you need to take the effect on vacuum of
idle-in-xact sessi
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Pavel Stehule
wrote:
> Hi
>
> I had talk about possibility to implement PL/SQL packages in Postgres.
>
> The package concept is coming from ADA language and it is partially
> foreign/redundant element in SQL world. Oracle needs it for modularization,
> because sche
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 11/05/2015 10:09 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> On 5.11.2015 19:02 Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>> Thus, I think we have consensus that transaction_timeout is good -- it
>>> would deprecate statement_timeout essentially. Likewise,
>>> pg_cancel_trans
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 4:06 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>> 1. I think there should really be two patches here, the first adding
>> functions, and the second adding doubles. Those seem like separate
>> changes. And offhand, the double stuff looks a lot less useful that
>> the function call syntax.
>
2015-11-05 19:56 GMT+01:00 Joe Conway :
> On 11/05/2015 10:48 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > S
> > tC
> > a<>E
> > rA B A B A n
> > t d
> > |====--
On 11/05/2015 10:48 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> S
> tC
> a<>E
> rA B A B A n
> t d
> |====---|
>
> Currently we can set timeout and cancel for
2015-11-05 19:31 GMT+01:00 Joe Conway :
> On 11/05/2015 10:09 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > On 5.11.2015 19:02 Merlin Moncure wrote:
> >> Thus, I think we have consensus that transaction_timeout is good -- it
> >> would deprecate statement_timeout essentially. Likewise,
> >> pg_cancel_transaction
2015-11-05 17:27 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas :
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Pavel Stehule
> wrote:
> >> The documentation included in this patch doesn't really make it clear
> >> why -g is different from or better than -c.
> >
> > I wrote some text. But needs some work of native speaker.
>
> It d
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>> Well, one thing is that you might leak information about
>> already-deleted rows, which could be a security vulnerability, or more
>> mundanely cause a function to error out when there are no actually
>> visible rows that could trigger such an
On 11/05/2015 10:09 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> On 5.11.2015 19:02 Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> Thus, I think we have consensus that transaction_timeout is good -- it
>> would deprecate statement_timeout essentially. Likewise,
>> pg_cancel_transaction is good and would deprecate pg_cancel_backend;
>> i
Hi,
On 11/05/2015 06:51 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
I certainly understand there are cases that require care - like the
leakproof thing pointed out by Robert for example. I don't immediately see
why evaluation against dead rows would be a problem.
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:52 AM, Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
>> Now instead of displaying Partial Seq Scan, if we just display Seq Scan,
>> then it might confuse user, so it is better to add some thing indicating
>> parallel node if we want to go this route.
>
> IMO, the change from Partial Seq Scan to
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> Dne 5.11.2015 19:02 napsal uživatel "Merlin Moncure" :
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> > * Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote:
>> >> On 11/04/2015 01:55 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> >> >* Joe Conway
Dne 5.11.2015 19:02 napsal uživatel "Merlin Moncure" :
>
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote:
> >> On 11/04/2015 01:55 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> >* Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote:
> >> >>On 11/04/2015 01:24 PM, Alva
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote:
>> On 11/04/2015 01:55 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> >* Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote:
>> >>On 11/04/2015 01:24 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> >>>I agree with Pavel. Having a transaction t
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Haribabu Kommi
wrote:
> I marked this patch as ready for committer.
The patch says:
If a background worker registers to receive asynchronous notifications
with the LISTEN through SPI,
there is currently no way for incoming notifications to be received.
But would
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> I certainly understand there are cases that require care - like the
> leakproof thing pointed out by Robert for example. I don't immediately see
> why evaluation against dead rows would be a problem.
Well, one thing is that you might leak info
On 11/05/2015 01:31 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 5 November 2015 at 14:36, Pavel Stehule wrote:
[snip]
2. The schema variables - a server side session (can be emulated now) and
server side local schema session variables (doesn't exist) is pretty useful
for storing some temp data or high frequent
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 12:51:52PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nathan Wagner writes:
> > I have two patches to make the geqo initialization and mutation
> > slightly better.
>
> > The first adjusts the mutation swaps to avoid having to re-pick
> > ties. The second changes the initialization and shu
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Kouhei Kaigai wrote:
> Sorry for my late.
>
> I confirmed that CustomScan support of readfuncs.c works fine using the
> attached patch for the PG-Strom tree. It worked as expected - duplication,
> serialization and deserialization by:
> plan_dup = stringToNode(no
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 11:07 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Amit Kapila
>> > wrote:
>> >> If we are going to add a new parameter to BackgroundWorker structure,
Joe Conway wrote:
> On 11/04/2015 10:46 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > but crosstab is one old function from old extension with unfriendly
> > design.
>
> Hey, I resemble that remark ;-)
You may be old all you want, but certainly not unfriendly!
--
Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQua
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> In this case, you ran it as superuser which automatically has the
> 'BYPASSRLS' privilege, which means that RLS is bypassed always.
>
> The change to how BYPASSRLS works was discussed with and ultimately
> implemented by Noah, as I recall.
Hm
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Amit Langote
wrote:
> The DDL and catalogs part are not much different from what I had last
> described though I took a few steps to simplify things. I dropped the
> multi-level partitioning bit
Hmm, that doesn't sound good to me. I think multi-level partitioning
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> The documentation included in this patch doesn't really make it clear
>> why -g is different from or better than -c.
>
> I wrote some text. But needs some work of native speaker.
It does. It would be nice if some kind reviewer could help v
On 11/04/2015 10:46 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2015-11-05 7:39 GMT+01:00 Craig Ringer wrote:
> I see constant confusion between \copy and COPY. It's a really good
> reason NOT to overload other psql commands IMO.
>
> but crosstab is one old function from old extension with unfriendly
> des
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 5:04 AM, Robert Haas
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 1:32 AM, Amit Kapila
>> >
I've done some work on the documentation as part of adding functions to
pgbench expression. You may have a look at:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/alpine.DEB.2.10.1511051256500.29177@sto
[...]
CDF2(x) = PHI(2.0 * threshold * ...) / (2.0 * PHI(threshold) - 1.0)
and then the probabilit
On 11/5/15 4:11 PM, Zeus Kronion wrote:
On Nov 1, 2015 5:04 PM, "Marko Tiikkaja" wrote:
However, I don't quite like the way the password cache is kept up to date
in the old *or* the new code. It seems to me that it should instead look
like:
if (PQconnectionUsedPassword(AH->connection))
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
> Hello, I found that a typo(?) in tab-complete.c.
>
>> /* ALTER TABLE,INDEX,MATERIALIZED VIEW xxx ALL IN TABLESPACE xxx OWNED BY */
>> else if (pg_strcasecmp(prev6_wd, "ALL") == 0 &&
>>pg_strcasecmp(prev5_wd, "IN") == 0 &&
>
On 2015.11.02 at 12:15:48 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> That's true, but doesn't allowing every parameter to be multiply
>> specified greatly increase the implementation complexity for a pretty
>> marginal benefit?
>Well, the way I would have approached is that after all the parsing you
>en
On Nov 1, 2015 5:04 PM, "Marko Tiikkaja" wrote:
>
> On 10/25/15 10:55 PM, Zeus Kronion wrote:
>>
>> Parallel workers were failing to connect to the database when running
>> pg_dump with a connection string. The first of the following two commands
>> runs without errors, while the second one fails:
David Steele wrote:
> The important thing about this implementation was that nothing was
> terminated unless it had exceed a timeout AND was blocking another
> process.
This seems a nice idea, but you need to take the effect on vacuum of
idle-in-xact sessions too. If the operator left for the da
Hello hackers.
There are comments to my patch? Maybe I should create a separate thread?
Thanks.
--
YUriy Zhuravlev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscri
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>>> Two different methods of restricting ALTER SYSTEM have already been
>>> discussed on this thread: one using file permissions, and the other
>>> using ProcessUtility_hook. I personally th
On 05.11.2015 13:49, Craig Ringer wrote:
I believe that we need to lower the barrier for testing.
While I agree, I'd also like to note that formulaic testing is often
of limited utility. Good testing still requires a significant
investment of time and effort to understand the changes made by a
On 5 November 2015 at 15:59, Torsten Zühlsdorff
wrote:
> Hello,
>
>>> +1. FWIW, I'm willing to review some patches for this CommitFest, but
>>> if the committers have to do first-round review as well as
>>> committer-review of every patch in the CommitFest, this is going to be
>>> long, ugly, and
On 11/4/15 4:55 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote:
>> On 11/04/2015 01:24 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> I agree with Pavel. Having a transaction timeout just does not make any
>>> sense. I can see absolutely no use for it. An idle-in-transaction
>>> timeout, on t
On 5 November 2015 at 14:36, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 1. The encapsulation and local scope - all objects in schema are accessible
> from other objects in schema by default (can be rewritten by explicit
> granting). Local objects are visible only from objects in schema. This needs
> enhancing of ou
Hello again,
The v14 also remove references to the "threshold" word about gaussian and
exponential random generation in the source code (comments and variable
names), as it has no clear meaning, to replace it with param/parameter
depending on the context, as discussed in another thread starte
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:17 AM, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
> Hi list
>
> The attached patch changes the behavior of multiple ALTER x SET SCHEMA
> commands, to skip, rather than fail, when the old and new schema is
> the same.
>
> The advantage is that it's now easier to write DDL scripts that are
>
On 2015/11/04 18:50, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2015/11/04 17:10, Kouhei Kaigai wrote:
On 2015/10/28 6:04, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
Sorry, my explanation was not correct. (Needed to take in
caffeine.) What
I'm concerned about is the following:
S
Hello Robert,
Here is a v13 and a small test script.
- change names to random(), random_exponential() and random_gaussian()
I find them too long, but if the committer want that I cannot help
it:-)
- more comments, especially about the expression evaluation &
type system.
- improve
Horiguchi-san,
On 2015/11/05 18:10, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> Hello. I don't know whether this is a bug fix or improvement,
Would it be 50-50? :-)
...
>
> During the investigation into this issue, I found a mistake in
> the comment for PQmblen. It give the byte length of the character
> at t
On 2015-11-05 12:51:48 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On 11/3/15 6:36 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> I wonder if we could fix this by using install_name_tool during the
> >> tempinstall to add an appropriate rpath.
> >>
> >> Alternativel
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
