On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-09-18 07:24:43 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 18 September 2017 at 05:50, Andres Freund wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Just noticed that we're returning the underlying values for
>> > pg_control_recovery() without any checks:
>> > postgr
On 2017-09-18 07:24:43 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 18 September 2017 at 05:50, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just noticed that we're returning the underlying values for
> > pg_control_recovery() without any checks:
> > postgres[14388][1]=# SELECT * FROM pg_control_recovery();
> > ┌──
On 18 September 2017 at 05:50, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just noticed that we're returning the underlying values for
> pg_control_recovery() without any checks:
> postgres[14388][1]=# SELECT * FROM pg_control_recovery();
> ┌──┬───┬──
From: Peter Eisentraut
> The process names shown in pg_stat_activity.backend_type as of PG10
and
> the process names used in the ps display are in some cases
gratuitously
> different, so here is a patch to make them more alike. Of course it
> could be debated in some cases which spelling was bette
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> Here is a patch to fix that.
Here's a better one (same code, corrected commit message).
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
0001-Fix-uninitialized-variable-in-dshash.c.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mai
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Amit Khandekar wrote:
> On 12 September 2017 at 12:39, Amit Khandekar wrote:
>> On 12 September 2017 at 11:57, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Amit Khandekar
>>> wrote:
>>>
> I found out that, in case when there is a DELETE statement tr
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Thomas Munro
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 12:30 AM, Tomas Vondra
>> wrote:
>>> I've been running some regression tests under valgrind, and it seems
>>> select_parallel triggers some uses of uninitializ
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, passed
Documentation:not tested
I applied this patch via patch -p1. (Had an issue using git appl
On 16 September 2017 at 11:45, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:30 PM, Amit Khandekar
> wrote:
>> On 11 September 2017 at 18:55, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>>
>>> How? See, if you have four partial subpaths and two non-partial
>>> subpaths, then for parallel-aware append it conside
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>>
>> I have repeated one of the tests after fixing the problems pointed by
>> you but this time results are not that impressive. Seems like below
>> check was the problem in the previous patch
>>
>>if (tbm->nentries > tbm->maxentries / 2)
>
Hi,
Just noticed that we're returning the underlying values for
pg_control_recovery() without any checks:
postgres[14388][1]=# SELECT * FROM pg_control_recovery();
┌──┬───┬──┬┬───┐
│ min_recover
Sometime back Tom Lane has reported [1] about $Subject. I have looked
into the issue and found that the problem is not only with parallel
workers but with general background worker machinery as well in
situations where fork or some such failure occurs. The first problem
is that after we register t
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> E.g. very little of the new stuff in
> https://codecov.io/gh/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/commit/ceaa3dbece3c9b98abcaa28009320fde45a83f88
> is exercised.
Hoist by my own petard.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pg
Hi,
On 2017-09-18 14:26:53 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> A couple of new experimental features on commitfest.cputube.org:
Yay.
> 2. It'll now dump a gdb backtrace for any core files found after a
> check-world failure (if you can find your way to the build log...).
> Thanks to Andres for the G
On 9/16/17 08:52, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 9/15/17 13:35, Arseny Sher wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>>
>>> Here is a simple patch that fixes this, based on my original proposal
>>> point #4.
>> I checked, it passes the tests and solves the problem. However, isn't
>> this
>>
>> +
Hi hackers,
A couple of new experimental features on commitfest.cputube.org:
1. I didn't have --enable-cassert enabled before. Oops.
2. It'll now dump a gdb backtrace for any core files found after a
check-world failure (if you can find your way to the build log...).
Thanks to Andres for the
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Amit Langote
> wrote:
>> On 2017/09/14 16:00, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Amit Langote
>>> wrote:
Sure, no problem.
>>>
>>> OK, I took a closer look at all patches, but
I have not looked at the issue with the btree_gin tests yet, but here is
the first part of my review.
= Review
This is my first quick review where I just read the documentation and
quickly tested the feature. I will review it more in-depth later.
This is a very useful feature, one which I ha
Arthur Zakirov writes:
> CREATE SUBSCRIPTING FOR type_name
> INITFUNC = subscripting_init_func
> FETCHFUNC = subscripting_fetch_func
> ASSIGNFUNC = subscripting_assign_func
> DROP SUBSCRIPTING FOR type_name
Reasonable, but let's make the syntax more like other similar
utility commands such
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I understand the --drop-slot part. But I don't understand what it means
> to ignore a missing replication slot when running --start.
I'm not sure I do either, honestly. I followed the Principle of Least
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 12:27:58AM +0200, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> spite of what form this step will be. Maybe it's possible to make something
> like `CREATE FUNCTION ... FOR SUBSCRIPTING`, then verify that assign/extract
> functions are presented and notify user if he missed them (but I would
> rath
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 5:43 AM, Dmitriy Sarafannikov
wrote:
> Hi hackers,
>
> Everybody knows, that we have unefficient execution of query like "SELECT
> DISTINCT id from mytable"
> if table has many-many rows and only several unique id values. Query plan
> looks like Unique + IndexScan.
>
> I ha
On 09/15/2017 06:55 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
I can't build against gnutls-2.12.23-21.el6.x86_64 from CentOS 6.9
Thanks for testing my patch. I have fixed both these issues plus some of
the other feedback. A new version of my patch is attached which should,
at least on theory, support all GnuTLS
David Rowley writes:
> On 17 September 2017 at 08:07, Kim Rose Carlsen wrote:
>> It seems there are some difference in VARCHAR vs TEXT when postgres tries to
>> decide if a LEFT JOIN is useful or not.
> Yeah, it looks like the code to check for distinctness in the subquery
> fails to consider th
Re: Peter Eisentraut 2017-08-14
> There are probably a bunch of Perl or Python modules that can be
> employed for this.
https://github.com/ChristophBerg/postgresql-numeral
Christoph
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
ht
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 04:43:46PM +0900, Yuto Hayamizu wrote:
> Hi hackers,
>
> Currently, cost of a filter with multiple clauses is estimated by
> summing up estimated cost of each clause. As long as a filter
> consists of simple clauses and its cost is fairly small, it works
> fine. However, w
Hi hackers, Everybody knows, that we have unefficient execution of query like "SELECT DISTINCT id from mytable"if table has many-many rows and only several unique id values. Query plan looks like Unique + IndexScan. I have tried to implement this feature in new type of node called Loose Scan.This n
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:52 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Updated patch attached. Changelog:
>
> * Rebased
> * Changed MJCompare to return an enum as suggested, but it has 4
> possible values rather than 3.
> * Added support for joining on contains or contained by (@> or <@) and
> updated tests.
The c
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 6:43 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 10:42:49PM +, Douglas Doole wrote:
> > Oliver, I took a look at your tests and they look thorough to me.
> >
> > One recommendation, instead of having 3999 separate selects to test every
> > legal roman numeral, wh
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 10:42:49PM +, Douglas Doole wrote:
> Oliver, I took a look at your tests and they look thorough to me.
>
> One recommendation, instead of having 3999 separate selects to test every
> legal roman numeral, why not just do something like this:
>
> do $$
> declare
> i
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Rafia Sabih
wrote:
> I worked on this idea of using local queue as a temporary buffer to
> write the tuples when master is busy and shared queue is full, and it
> gives quite some improvement in the query performance.
>
I have done some initial review of this patc
On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 11:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> I have repeated one of the tests after fixing the problems pointed by
> you but this time results are not that impressive. Seems like below
> check was the problem in the previous patch
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
> On 16 Sep 2017 02:32, "Nikita Glukhov" wrote:
>
> On 15.09.2017 22:36, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Robert Haas
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Daniel Gustafsson
>>> wrote:
>>>
Can we
On 3 Aug 2017 16:29, "Oliver Ford" wrote:
Adds to the to_number() function the ability to convert Roman numerals
to a number. This feature is on the formatting.c TODO list. It is not
currently implemented in either Oracle, MSSQL or MySQL so gives
PostgreSQL an edge :-)
I see use of this in full
On 2017-09-16 13:27:05 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > This does not seem like a problem that justifies a system-wide change
> > that's much more delicate than you thought.
>
> We need one more initialization call during crash-restart - that doesn't
> seem particularly hard a fix.
FWIW, attached
On 16 Sep 2017 02:32, "Nikita Glukhov" wrote:
On 15.09.2017 22:36, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Daniel Gustafsson
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Can we expect a rebased version of this patch for this commitfest?
>>> Since it’
36 matches
Mail list logo
