On 2017/04/18 15:31, Kang Yuzhe wrote:
> My question is why is that there is a lot of hands-on about PG application
> development(eg. connecting to PG using JAVA/JDBC) but almost nothing about
> PG hacking hands-on lessons. For example, I wanna add the keyword
> "Encrypted" in CREATE TABLE t1(a int
On 7 April 2017 at 20:35, Andres Freund wrote:
>> But for costs such as (4, 4, 4, 20 times), the logic would give
>> us 20 workers because we want to finish the Append in 4 time units;
>> and this what we want to avoid when we go with
>> don't-allocate-too-many-workers approach.
>
> I guess,
Thanks Kevin for taking your time and justifying the real difficult of
finding ones space/way in PG development.And thanks for your genuine advice
which I have taken it AS IS.
My question is why is that there is a lot of hands-on about PG application
development(eg. connecting to PG using JAVA/JDBC
On 17 April 2017 at 15:02, Nikhil Sontakke wrote:
>
>
>> >> commit 728bd991c3c4389fb39c45dcb0fe57e4a1dccd71
>> >> Author: Simon Riggs
>> >> Date: Tue Apr 4 15:56:56 2017 -0400
>> >>
>> >>Speedup 2PC recovery by skipping two phase state files in normal
>> path
>> >
>> > Thanks Jeff for your
Tom Lane wrote:
I'm unimpressed by this part --- we couldn't back-patch such a change, and
I think it's unnecessary anyway in 9.6+ because the scan provider could
generate a nondefault pathtarget if it wants this to happen.
You're right, of course. Thank you very much!
--
Dmitry Ivanov
Postgr
Thanks Alvaro for taking your time and pointing me to "Developer_FAQ". I
knew this web page and there is good stuff int it.
The most important about "Developer_FAQ" which I believe is that it lists
vital books for PG developers.
Comparing the real challenge I am facing in finding my way in the rab
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 05:56:44AM +, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 10:26:16PM -0700, Vitaly Burovoy wrote:
> > On 4/6/17, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > On 4/4/17 22:53, Vitaly Burovoy wrote:
> > >> The next nitpickings to the last patch. I try to get places with
> > >> lacking o
2017-04-18 2:27 GMT+02:00 Fabien COELHO :
>
> Hello Jan,
>
> Corrected problem with \pset linestyle when format is set to markdown, or
>> rst.
>>
>> Corrected tuples only for markdown and rst (normal and expanded)
>>
>
> It seems that the patch does not apply anymore on head due to changes in
> ps
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Masahiko Sawada
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2017/04/14 21:44, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 14/04/17 06:14, Amit Langote wrote:
>> On 2017/04/14 10:57, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>>> For me the current behavior with inherited tables is correct.
>>
>> By the way, what do you think about the pg_dump example/issue I mentioned?
>> Is that a pg_dump prob
On 2017/04/18 14:50, Amit Langote wrote:
> Attached patch fixes the oversight that COMMENT ON COLUMN is not allowed
> on partitioned tables columns.
Forgot to mention that I added this to the open items list.
Thanks,
Amit
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
T
Attached patch fixes the oversight that COMMENT ON COLUMN is not allowed
on partitioned tables columns.
Thanks,
Amit
>From cfc0717478f2a73087c85d67d73e557aaccb4f78 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: amit
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:48:37 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] Allow COMMENT ON partitioned table columns
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:07:12PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 04/10/2017 08:42 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >As there have been some conflicts because of the commit of SASLprep,
> >here is a rebased set of patches. A couple of things worth noting:
> >- SASLprep does an allocation of the
On 2017-04-17 19:26:11 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I'm a bit inclined to agree with the idea of explicitly requiring SRFs
> > in FROM to appear only at the top level of the expression.
>
> If we are going to go down this road, I think it would be a good idea
> to try to provide a cursor
Hi Stephen,
On 2017/04/18 1:43, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Amit,
>
> * Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
>> OK, I agree. I tweaked the existing bullet point about differences from
>> traditional inheritance when using ONLY with partitioned tables.
>
> Please take a look at the att
On 2017-04-16 22:04:04 -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58:12AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:21:51AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2017-04-12 11:03:57 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > > On 4/12/17 02:31, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > >>> But I
At Tue, 18 Apr 2017 09:12:07 +0530, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote in
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> wrote:
> > At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 17:50:58 +0530, Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote in
> >
> >> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> >> wrote:
> >> > At Thu, 13 Apr 2017
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
> At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 17:50:58 +0530, Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote in
>
>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
>> wrote:
>> > At Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:04:12 -0400, Robert Haas
>> > wrote in
>> >
>> >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at
On 4/17/17 08:47, Euler Taveira wrote:
> Patch works fine. However, I don't see any documentation about
> supporting different schemas for logical replication. Is it an oversight?
I have added more documentation about that.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL
On 4/14/17 21:36, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> I tried something bit different which seems cleaner to me - use the
> pstate->r_table instead of ad-hock locally made up range table and fill
> that using standard addRangeTableEntryForRelation. Both in tablesync and
> in DoCopy instead of the old coding.
co
Hi,
Thank you for the revised version.
At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 23:29:28 +0900, Masahiko Sawada
wrote in
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> > wrote:
> >> At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 18:02:57 +0900, Masahiko Sawada
> >> w
Ah, thanks for the suggestions. I'll revise this patch soon :)
Fabien COELHO writes:
>> Done.
>
> Ok. The file should be named "v2".
>
>> Would you like to be the reviewer?
>
> Dunno. At least I wanted to have a look at it!
>
> My 0.02€:
>
> I think that the improvement provided is worthwhile.
At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 17:50:58 +0530, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote in
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> wrote:
> > At Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:04:12 -0400, Robert Haas
> > wrote in
> >
> >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Robert Haas
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 8:4
Done.
Ok. The file should be named "v2".
Would you like to be the reviewer?
Dunno. At least I wanted to have a look at it!
My 0.02€:
I think that the improvement provided is worthwhile.
Two questions: Why no documentation update? Why no non-regressions
tests?
As far as the output is
Done. Would you like to be the reviewer? Thanks! diff --git a/src/bin/psql/describe.c b/src/bin/psql/describe.c
index 0f9f497..a6dc599 100644
--- a/src/bin/psql/describe.c
+++ b/src/bin/psql/describe.c
@@ -3284,7 +3284,7 @@ listTables(const char *tabtypes, const char *pattern, bool verbose, bool s
I'm not sure where to add documentations about this patch or if needed one.
Please help
me if you think this patch is useful.
This patch does not apply anymore. Are you planning to update it?
--
Fabien.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes t
On 2017/04/17 23:08, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 4/16/17 23:00, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> To fix this, pg_dump should emit ADD TABLE ONLY foo.
>>
>> Yeah, that's one way. Attached is a tiny patch for that.
>>
>> By the way, I noticed that although grammar accepts ONLY and * against a
>> table name
Hello Jan,
Corrected problem with \pset linestyle when format is set to markdown, or
rst.
Corrected tuples only for markdown and rst (normal and expanded)
It seems that the patch does not apply anymore on head due to changes in
psql non regression tests. Could you rebase?
--
Fabien.
--
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Jeff, does this patch make the situation better? The fix is rather
>> simple as it just makes sure that the next XID never gets updated if
>> there are no 2PC files.
>
>
> Y
I wrote:
> I'm a bit inclined to agree with the idea of explicitly requiring SRFs
> in FROM to appear only at the top level of the expression.
If we are going to go down this road, I think it would be a good idea
to try to provide a cursor position for the "can't accept a set" error
message, becau
David Rowley wrote:
> On 18 April 2017 at 05:12, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Pushed, after tweaking so that a WARNING is still emitted, because it's
> > likely to be useful in pointing out a procedural mistake while extended
> > stats are being tested.
>
> Thanks for pushing.
>
> Seems you maintai
On 18 April 2017 at 05:12, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Pushed, after tweaking so that a WARNING is still emitted, because it's
> likely to be useful in pointing out a procedural mistake while extended
> stats are being tested.
Thanks for pushing.
Seems you maintained most of my original patch and ad
On 18 April 2017 at 09:01, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> David Rowley wrote:
>> While reviewing extended stats I noticed that it was possible to
>> create extended stats on many object types, including sequences. I
>> mentioned that this should be disallowed. Statistics were then changed
>> to be only a
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > > On 4/13/17 08:37, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > >> We have a bunch of > 3-character prefixes already: amop*, amproc*,
> > >> enum*, cast*. But I think I nevertheless like "ste" better.
> >
> > > "stx" perhaps?
> >
> > >
David Rowley wrote:
> While reviewing extended stats I noticed that it was possible to
> create extended stats on many object types, including sequences. I
> mentioned that this should be disallowed. Statistics were then changed
> to be only allowed on plain tables and materialized views.
>
> This
On 04/15/2017 03:58 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
The instructions on how to create a self-signed certificate in s 18.9.3
of the docs seem unduly cumbersome.
+1, I see no reason for us to spread unnecessarily complicated instructions.
Andreas
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 04:27:30PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > I would like to revisit these instructions, as well as document how to
> > create intermediate certificates. I have scripts that do that.
> >
>
>
> OK.. Do you want to run with this?
Please go forward and I will work on the int
On 04/17/2017 02:19 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 11:17:14AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>> On 04/15/2017 09:58 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> The instructions on how to create a self-signed certificate in s 18.9.3
>>> of the docs seem unduly cumbersome. AFAICT we could re
So after reading a recent thread on the steep learning curve for PG
internals [1], I figured I'd share where I've gotten stuck with this in a
new thread vs hijacking that one.
One of the goals I had with pg_partman was to see if I could get the
partitioning python scripts redone as C functions usi
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 03:43:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > I think the reason we have those cumbersome instructions is that there
> > is no way to create a non-expireable certificate using simpler
> > instructions.
>
> Um ... but the current instructions don't address t
Peter,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 4/13/17 12:11, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I wonder if we should have an --no-subscriptions option, now that they
> > are dumped by default, just like we have --no-blobs, --no-owner,
> > --no-password, --no-privileges, --no-acl, -
Rod,
* Rod Taylor (rod.tay...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Yep. It's equivalent to a DELETE or DEACTIVATE. RLS may not be the right
> facility but it was very close to working exactly the way I wanted in FOR
> ALL mode.
Turning an UPDATE into, effectively, a DELETE, does seem like it's
beyond the mandate
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I think the reason we have those cumbersome instructions is that there
> is no way to create a non-expireable certificate using simpler
> instructions.
Um ... but the current instructions don't address that either.
> I would like to revisit these instructions, as well as
Noah, all,
* Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:38:08AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > Sure, though I won't be able to today and I've got some doubts about the
> > > other patches. I'll have more time tom
Dmitry Ivanov writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm coming around to the idea that it'd be better to disable physical
>> tlists for custom scans.
>> However, I'm hesitant to make such a change in the back branches; if
>> there's anyone using custom scans who's negatively affected, they'd be
>> rightful
On 2017-04-17 15:59, Stas Kelvich wrote:
On 17 Apr 2017, at 10:30, Erik Rijkers wrote:
On 2017-04-16 20:41, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2017-04-16 10:46:21 +0200, Erik Rijkers wrote:
On 2017-04-15 04:47, Erik Rijkers wrote:
>
> 0001-Reserve-global-xmin-for-create-slot-snasphot-export.patch +
> 00
On 4/17/17 12:30, Andres Freund wrote:
So I guess that CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT code calls LogStandbySnapshot()
and which generates WAL record about snapshot of running transactions.
>>>
>>> Erroring out in these cases sounds easy enough. Wonder if there's not a
>>> bigger problem with WA
On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 11:17:14AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 04/15/2017 09:58 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > The instructions on how to create a self-signed certificate in s 18.9.3
> > of the docs seem unduly cumbersome. AFAICT we could replace all the
> > commands (except the chmod) w
On 4/16/17 22:01, Noah Misch wrote:
> This PostgreSQL 10 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send
> a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status
> update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2017040
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 12:48:56AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> O
Craig Ringer wrote:
> Personally I have to agree that the learning curve is very steep. Some
> of the docs and presentations help, but there's a LOT to understand.
There is a wiki page "Developer_FAQ" which is supposed to help answer
these questions. It is currently not very useful, because peop
Andres Freund writes:
> Btw, I think Tom's "more that could be done" was referring more to doing
> more upfront work, checking, easier input format, whatnot in the genbki,
> not so much performance work... Tom, correct me if I'm wrong.
Yeah, as per what we were just saying, performance of that c
On 2017-04-17 17:49:54 +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > There's certainly lots more that could be done in the genbki code,
> > but I think all we can justify at this stage of the development
> > cycle is to get the low-hanging fruit for testing speedups.
>
> I thre
David Rowley wrote:
> ERROR: extended statistics could not be collected for column "a" of
> relation public.ab1
> HINT: Consider ALTER TABLE "public"."ab1" ALTER "a" SET STATISTICS -1
>
> I don't think the error is useful here, as it means nothing gets done.
> Probably better to just not (re)bu
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2017-04-17 17:49:54 +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> I threw Devel::NYTProf at it and picked some more low-hanging fruit.
> I'm a bit doubtful about improving the performance of genbki at the cost
> of any sort of complication - it's only executed during the ac
On 2017-04-17 17:49:54 +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > There's certainly lots more that could be done in the genbki code,
> > but I think all we can justify at this stage of the development
> > cycle is to get the low-hanging fruit for testing speedups.
>
> I thre
Tom Lane writes:
> There's certainly lots more that could be done in the genbki code,
> but I think all we can justify at this stage of the development
> cycle is to get the low-hanging fruit for testing speedups.
I threw Devel::NYTProf at it and picked some more low-hanging fruit.
Attached are
Amit,
* Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
> OK, I agree. I tweaked the existing bullet point about differences from
> traditional inheritance when using ONLY with partitioned tables.
Please take a look at the attached and let me know your thoughts on it.
I changed the code to c
On 27 March 2017 at 13:00, Kang Yuzhe wrote:
> I have found PG source Code reading and hacking to be one the most
> frustrating experiences in my life. I believe that PG hacking should not be
> a painful journey but an enjoyable one!
>
> It is my strong believe that out of my PG hacking frustrat
On 2017-04-17 18:28:16 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 17/04/17 18:02, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2017-04-15 02:33:59 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Petr Jelinek
> >> wrote:
> >>> On 12/04/17 15:55, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When I shut down the
On 17/04/17 18:02, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-04-15 02:33:59 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Petr Jelinek
>> wrote:
>>> On 12/04/17 15:55, Fujii Masao wrote:
Hi,
When I shut down the publisher while I repeated creating and dropping
the subscri
On 2017-04-15 02:33:59 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Petr Jelinek
> wrote:
> > On 12/04/17 15:55, Fujii Masao wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> When I shut down the publisher while I repeated creating and dropping
> >> the subscription in the subscriber, the publisher emitt
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> Personally I have to agree that the learning curve is very steep. Some
> of the docs and presentations help, but there's a LOT to understand.
Some small patches can be kept to a fairly narrow set of areas, and
if you can find a similar capa
Join us in Ottawa for the 11th annual PGCon. On May 23-26, users and
developers from
around the world arrive for what has become a traditional gathering of the
PostgreSQL
community.
There will be two days of tutorials on Tuesday and Wednesday. The best of the
best
will be available to help
On 2017-04-15 14:34:28 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-04-15 17:30:21 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > > On 2017-04-15 16:48:05 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Concretely, I propose the attached patch. We'd have to put it into
> > >> all supported branches, since culicidae
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
>
> Jeff, does this patch make the situation better? The fix is rather
> simple as it just makes sure that the next XID never gets updated if
> there are no 2PC files.
>
Yes, that fixes the reported case when 2PC are not being used.
Than
Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 08:58:54AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Noah Misch wrote:
> > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item. Álvaro,
> > > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this
> > > open
> > > item.
> >
> > I
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> wrote:
>> At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 18:02:57 +0900, Masahiko Sawada
>> wrote in
>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 4:47 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > Though I've read only a part o
On 4/16/17 23:00, Amit Langote wrote:
>> To fix this, pg_dump should emit ADD TABLE ONLY foo.
>
> Yeah, that's one way. Attached is a tiny patch for that.
>
> By the way, I noticed that although grammar accepts ONLY and * against a
> table name to affect whether descendant tables are included, t
On 10.04.2017 14:20, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Maksim Milyutin
wrote:
1. I have added a new relkind for local indexes named RELKIND_LOCAL_INDEX
(literal 'l').
Seems like it should maybe be RELKIND_PARTITIONED_INDEX. There's
nothing particularly "local" about it. I
> On 17 Apr 2017, at 10:30, Erik Rijkers wrote:
>
> On 2017-04-16 20:41, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2017-04-16 10:46:21 +0200, Erik Rijkers wrote:
>>> On 2017-04-15 04:47, Erik Rijkers wrote:
>>> >
>>> > 0001-Reserve-global-xmin-for-create-slot-snasphot-export.patch +
>>> > 0002-Don-t-use-on-dis
2017-04-14 22:36 GMT-03:00 Petr Jelinek :
> I tried something bit different which seems cleaner to me - use the
> pstate->r_table instead of ad-hock locally made up range table and fill
> that using standard addRangeTableEntryForRelation. Both in tablesync and
> in DoCopy instead of the old coding
On 16/04/17 08:12, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:55:08PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> When I shut down the publisher while I repeated creating and dropping
>> the subscription in the subscriber, the publisher emitted the following
>> PANIC error during shutdown checkpoint.
>>
>> PA
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
> At Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:04:12 -0400, Robert Haas wrote
> in
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Michael Paquier
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Etsuro Fujita
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
> At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 18:02:57 +0900, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote in
>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 4:47 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Though I've read only a part of the logical rep code yet, I'd like to
>> > share some (relatively
Hello,
I think you'd better to change the following comments because there's
no psqlscan.l or psqlscanslash.l in pgbench source tree.
+ * underscore. Keep this in sync with the definition of variable_char in
+ * psqlscan.l and psqlscanslash.l.
Here is a v3 with a more precise comment.
--
F
At Mon, 17 Apr 2017 18:02:57 +0900, Masahiko Sawada
wrote in
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 4:47 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Though I've read only a part of the logical rep code yet, I'd like to
> > share some (relatively minor) review comments that I got so far.
>
> It seems nobody is w
> >> commit 728bd991c3c4389fb39c45dcb0fe57e4a1dccd71
> >> Author: Simon Riggs
> >> Date: Tue Apr 4 15:56:56 2017 -0400
> >>
> >>Speedup 2PC recovery by skipping two phase state files in normal path
> >
> > Thanks Jeff for your tests.
> >
> > So that's now two crash bugs in as many days and l
> On 17 Apr 2017, at 12:14, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> On 15 April 2017 at 23:37, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> After this commit, I get crash recovery failures when using prepared
>> transactions.
>>
>> commit 728bd991c3c4389fb39c45dcb0fe57e4a1dccd71
>> Author: Simon Riggs
>> Date: Tue Apr 4 15:56:56 2
2017-04-17 10:58 GMT+02:00 Fabien COELHO :
>
> I don't think so :?xxx is good idea, because for me :xxx is related to
>> content, not to metadata
>>
>
> Hmmm. Indeed it is not. I do not see it as an issue, but it is a good
> point.
>
> Consider perl "defined $x" or "exists $f{k}". $x/$f{k} should
On 15 April 2017 at 23:37, Jeff Janes wrote:
> After this commit, I get crash recovery failures when using prepared
> transactions.
>
> commit 728bd991c3c4389fb39c45dcb0fe57e4a1dccd71
> Author: Simon Riggs
> Date: Tue Apr 4 15:56:56 2017 -0400
>
> Speedup 2PC recovery by skipping two phase
Fabien,
> Hello Tatsuo-san,
>
>> Thank you for the patch. I tested a little bit and found that it does
>> not allow value replacement against non ascii variables in given SQL
>> statements . Is it intentional?
>
> No, this is a bug.
>
>> If not, I think you need to fix parseVariable() as well.
Hi,
Attached is a patch fixing simple typos in the CREATE TRIGGER document.
--
Yugo Nagata
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_trigger.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_trigger.sgml
index 24195b3..c5f7c75 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_trigger.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_trigger.sgml
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 4:47 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Though I've read only a part of the logical rep code yet, I'd like to
> share some (relatively minor) review comments that I got so far.
It seems nobody is working on dealing with these review comments, so
I've attached patches. Since
I don't think so :?xxx is good idea, because for me :xxx is related to
content, not to metadata
Hmmm. Indeed it is not. I do not see it as an issue, but it is a good
point.
Consider perl "defined $x" or "exists $f{k}". $x/$f{k} should be contents,
but it is not, the dereferencing is suspen
On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 09:05:14 -0400
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 4:23 AM, Yugo Nagata wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 16:40:29 -0400
> > Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Yugo Nagata wrote:
> >> > I also understanded that my design has a problem during pg_d
Hello,
On 15.04.2017 20:38, Thomas Mercieca wrote:
Hi all, I am interested in getting simple statistics of a GiST index
structure. For example, heightof tree.
It seems that the other indexes have a metapage for this. I am still
unsure but it looks to me like the GiST access method internal d
At Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:04:12 -0400, Robert Haas wrote
in
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Michael Paquier
> > wrote:
> >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Etsuro Fujita
> >> wrote:
> >>> Attached is an updated version of the patch, wh
On 2017-04-16 20:41, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2017-04-16 10:46:21 +0200, Erik Rijkers wrote:
On 2017-04-15 04:47, Erik Rijkers wrote:
>
> 0001-Reserve-global-xmin-for-create-slot-snasphot-export.patch +
> 0002-Don-t-use-on-disk-snapshots-for-snapshot-export-in-l.patch+
> 0003-Prevent-snapshot-bui
>
>
> 4. because pgbench doesn't do early variable evaluation, implementation of
>> "defined" function is easy - we can introduce some new syntax for
>> implementation some bash patterns like "default value" or "own undefined
>> message"
>>
>
> Maybe. ISTM that a :* syntax should be thought for so
90 matches
Mail list logo
