Ok, let me put this way,
I need every transaction coming from application sync with both production
and archive db,
but the transactions I do to clean old data(before 7 days) on production db
in daily maintenance window should not sync with archive db,
Archive db need read-only, used for maintain
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Amit Kapila writes:
> > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Robert Haas writes:
> >>> Could you answer my question about whether adjust_appendrel_attrs()
> >>> might translate Vars into non-Vars?
>
> >> Yes, absolutely.
>
>
Hi all,
When recovery_target_time is set, but recovery finishes before it reaches
that time, it outputs "before 2000-01-01 00:00:00+00" to the .history
file. This is because it uses recoveryStopTime, which is initialised to 0,
but is never set, and is then passed to timestamptz_to_str, which give
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 06:52:15AM +, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> !distinct column values, a generic plan assumes a column equality
> >> !comparison will match 33% of processed rows. Column statistics
> >>
> >> ... assumes *that* a column equality comparison will ma
On 2016-06-09 17:19:34 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2016-06-09 14:37:31 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I'm writing a patch right now, planning to post it later today, commit
> > it tomorrow.
>
> Attached.
And pushed. Thanks to Michael for noticing the missing addition of
header file hunk.
A
Robert Haas wrote:
> 3. vacuumlazy.c includes this code:
>
> if (heap_prepare_freeze_tuple(tuple.t_data, FreezeLimit,
> MultiXactCutoff, &frozen[nfrozen]))
> frozen[nfrozen++].offset = offnum;
> else if
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 8:27 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:41 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> [Action required within 72 hours. This is a generic notification.]
>>
>> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. Robert,
>> since you committed the patch believe
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> Regarding the patch that ended up being committed, I wonder if it is
> intentional that PL/pgSQL overwrites the context from the parallel worker.
> Shouldn't the context effectively look like
>
> ERROR: message
> CONTEXT: parallel worker
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Master, but with an existing standby. So it could be related to
>> hot_standby_feedback or such.
>
> I just managed to trigger it again.
>
>
> #1 0x7fa1a73778da in __GI_abort () at abort.c:89
> #2 0x7f9f1395e59c in record_corrupt_i
2016-06-10 20:56 GMT+02:00 Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com>:
> I noticed that this new feature in PL/Python gratuitously uses slightly
> different keyword names than the C and PL/pgSQL APIs, e.g. "schema" instead
> of "schema_name" etc. I propose to fix that with the attached
I noticed that this new feature in PL/Python gratuitously uses slightly
different keyword names than the C and PL/pgSQL APIs, e.g. "schema"
instead of "schema_name" etc. I propose to fix that with the attached
patch.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Deve
On 6/6/16 9:45 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Attached is a patch to illustrates how this could be fixed. There might
be similar issues elsewhere. The notification propagation in particular
could be affected.
Tracing the code, NotificationResponse messages are converted to the
client encoding d
On 2016-06-09 23:39:24 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2016-06-10 11:58:26 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > I have tried in multiple ways by running pgbench with read-write tests, but
> > could not see any such behaviour.
>
> It took over an hour of pgbench on a fast laptop till I saw it.
>
>
> >
On 6/7/16 11:43 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
I changed this to keep the main message while overwriting the CONTEXT; a bug
in this area could very well produce some other error rather than no error.
Regarding the patch that ended up being committed, I wonder if it is
intentional that PL/pgSQL overwrit
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 8:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Robert Haas writes:
>>> There's one other related thing I'm concerned about, which is that the
>>> code in namespace.c that manages pg_temp doesn't know anything about
>>> parallelism. So it will interpret pg_temp to mean the pg_temp_N
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Kapila writes:
>> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Robert Haas writes:
Could you answer my question about whether adjust_appendrel_attrs()
might translate Vars into non-Vars?
>
>>> Yes, absolutely.
>
>> Isn't
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:11 AM, Sridhar N Bamandlapally <
sridhar@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Is there any feature in PostgreSQL where online DW (Dataware housing) is
> possible ?
>
> am looking for scenario like
>
> 1. Production DB will have CURRENT + LAST 7 DAYS data only
>
> 2. Archive/DW
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> Since vacuum calls the pruning function, and not the other way
>> around, the name you suggest would be technically more correct.
>> Committed using "Pruning" instead of "Vacuum" in
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
>> contain_volatile_functions_walker is duplicated, near entirely, in
>> contain_volatile_functions_not_nextval_walker.
>> Wouldn't it have been better not to duplicate, and keep a flag about
>> ignoring nextval in the cont
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> So I like the idea of centralizing checks in
>> RelationAllowsEarlyVacuum, but shouldn't it really be called
>> RelationAllowsEarlyPruning?
>
> Since vacuum calls the pruning function
Andres Freund writes:
> contain_volatile_functions_walker is duplicated, near entirely, in
> contain_volatile_functions_not_nextval_walker.
> Wouldn't it have been better not to duplicate, and keep a flag about
> ignoring nextval in the context variable?
> While at it, couldn't we also fold contai
Amit Kapila writes:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas writes:
>>> Could you answer my question about whether adjust_appendrel_attrs()
>>> might translate Vars into non-Vars?
>> Yes, absolutely.
> Isn't this true only for UNION ALL cases and not for inheritance c
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> So I like the idea of centralizing checks in
> RelationAllowsEarlyVacuum, but shouldn't it really be called
> RelationAllowsEarlyPruning?
Since vacuum calls the pruning function, and not the other way
around, the name you suggest would be tech
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2016-06-10 11:58:26 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
>
> > While looking at code in this area, I observed that during replay of
> > records (heap_xlog_delete), we first clear the vm, then update the page.
> > So we don't have Buffer lock whi
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Robert Haas writes:
>
> > Could you answer my question about whether adjust_appendrel_attrs()
> > might translate Vars into non-Vars?
>
> Yes, absolutely.
Isn't this true only for UNION ALL cases and not for inheritance child
relations (at lea
On 06/10/2016 01:44 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
I have attached a patch which adds the shcema, plus an updated patch for
tseach2.
Forgot adding schema to the tables. Here are new versions.
Andreas
parallel-contrib-v4-tsearch2.patch.gz
Description: application/gzip
diff --git a/contrib/citext
On 06/09/2016 10:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas writes:
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Yes, let's fix it. This will also take care of the questions about
whether the GIN/GIST opclass tweaks I made a few months ago require
module version bumps.
Tom, there's a patch f
One thing looks possible ( feature not available), just an idea
example/syntax:
BEGIN NOARCHIVE;
--- transaction-1
--- transaction-2
.
.
--- transaction-N
END;
This/These will be performed in Production to clean-up archive which will
not be sync with Archive/DW DB only
one heads-up
On 2016/06/10 2:07, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
>> I adjusted some comments per off-list suggestion from Ashutosh. Please
>> find attached the new version.
>
> Are PlaceHolderVars the only problem we need to worry about here?
It seems so, as far as po
On 10 June 2016 at 16:11, Sridhar N Bamandlapally
wrote:
> Hi
>
> Is there any feature in PostgreSQL where online DW (Dataware housing) is
> possible ?
>
> am looking for scenario like
>
> 1. Production DB will have CURRENT + LAST 7 DAYS data only
>
> 2. Archive/DW DB will have CURRENT + COMPLETE
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:11 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 5:48 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Attached patch implements the above 2 functions. I have addressed the
>> comments by Sawada San and you in latest patch and updated the documentation
>> as well.
>
> I made a number of cha
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
> Hello, I found that pg_basebackup from a replication standby
> fails after the following steps, on 9.3 and the master.
>
> - start a replication master
> - start a replication standby
> - stop the master in the mode other than immediate.
>
Hi
Is there any feature in PostgreSQL where online DW (Dataware housing) is
possible ?
am looking for scenario like
1. Production DB will have CURRENT + LAST 7 DAYS data only
2. Archive/DW DB will have CURRENT + COMPLETE HISTORY
expecting something like streaming, but not ETL
Thanks
Sridhar
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 06:05:10PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jean-Pierre Pelletier writes:
> > I wanted to test if phraseto_tsquery(), new with 9.6 could be used for
> > matching consecutive words but it won't work for us if it cannot handle
> > consecutive *duplicate* words.
>
> > For example, th
34 matches
Mail list logo
