>
> I updated the patch a bit further: simplified the function name
> (s/build_subquery_rel_tlists/build_subquery_tlists/), and revised comments a
> little bit. Attached is an updated version
> (postgres-fdw-subquery-support-v14.patch). And I rebased another patch for
> PHVs against that patch, w
Hi,
I'm developing a logical decoding plugin to extract changes from the
database. This is working pretty well so far, but I have a question on the
architectural aspect of the application. I want to filter changes based on
the tables that are subscribed for CDC in my application and avoid network
t
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> I am wondering what happens if a 2PC file gets created, at the time of
> checkpoint we flush the pg_twophase directory, then the file gets
> removed. Do we need to flush the directory to ensure that the removal
> persists? Whatever material I
On 3 January 2017 at 17:11, valeriof wrote:
> My question is if there is a way to call some sort of initializer where I
> pass all the filtering data information beforehand, so that I can keep
> calling the pg_logical_slot_get_binary_changes without having to
> re-initialize this list all the tim
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I noticed a bug in your latest revision:
>
>> + /*
>> +* In HJ_NEED_NEW_OUTER, we already selected the current inner batch for
>> +* reading from. If there is a shared hash table, we may have already
>> +* partially loaded the
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2016/12/27 18:30, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi wrote:
> > Hi Amit,
> >
> > I have pulled latest sources from git and tried to create multi-level
> > partition, getting a server crash, below are steps to reproduce. please
> > check if it is reprod
On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> Now, we can further extend this to parallelize queries containing
> correlated subplans like below:
>
> explain select * from t1 where t1.i in (select t2.i from t2 where t2.i=t1.i);
> QUERY PLAN
> ---
Hi
2016-07-21 6:57 GMT+02:00 David Fetter :
> Folks,
>
> Please find attached a patch which makes it possible to disallow
> UPDATEs and DELETEs which lack a WHERE clause. As this changes query
> behavior, I've made the new GUCs PGC_SUSET.
>
> What say?
>
> Thanks to Gurjeet Singh for the idea an
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
wrote:
> I changed the status to "In Progress".
Thanks for covering my absence.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgs
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
>> I am wondering what happens if a 2PC file gets created, at the time of
>> checkpoint we flush the pg_twophase directory, then the file gets
>> removed. Do we need to flush the direc
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 4:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm also -1 on this idea. If we're going to provide backwards
> compatibility, we should just leave the old names in the core.
> Providing an extension is more work for *everybody* --- for us, and
> for the users who will have to learn about and i
Hello Pavel,
PLEASE, could you remove the parts of emails you are not responding to
when replying in the thread? THANKS.
The current status is that both proposals are useless because the use
case needs "some" transactional property for security. But probably
some improvements are possible.
On 21 December 2016 at 21:14, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> I agree that the capability to measure the remote_apply lag is very useful.
>> Also I want to measure the remote_write and remote_flush lags, for example,
>> in order to diagnose the cause o
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 8:41 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> Are you talking about
> /*
> * Now we can mark ourselves as out of the commit critical section: a
> * checkpoint starting after this will certainly see the gxact as a
> * candidate for fsyncing.
> */
> MyPgXact->de
On 12/14/2016 01:33 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I just noticed that the manual for CREATE ROLE says:
Note that older clients might lack support for the MD5 authentication
mechanism that is needed to work with passwords that are stored
encrypted.
That's is incorrect. The alternative to MD5 a
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:23 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> + /* Check if wal_segment_size is in the power of 2 */
> + for (i = 0;; i++, pow2 = pow(2, i))
> + if (pow2 >= wal_segment_size)
> + break;
> +
> + if (w
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 12/1/16 9:47 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
>> I think this patch looks good now so I am setting it to ready for committer.
>
> committed, thanks
The regression tests for hot standby check fails since it uses the
following statement:
-sele
Thank you all for inputs.
Kindly help me clarify the scope of the patch.
>However, I thought the idea was to silently coerce affected columns from
>unknown to text. This doesn't look like the behavior we want:
This patch prevents creation of relation with unknown columns and
in addition fixes th
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 10:55 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> In the hope of making things better in 10.0, I remove my objection. If
> people want to use wal_level = minimal they can restart their server
> and they can find that out in the release notes.
>
> Should we set wal_level = replica or wal_level
On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 2:26 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
> wrote:
>>
>> > From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
>> > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Robert Haas
>> > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Tsunakawa,
Hi Ashutosh,
First of all thanks for your review.
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 3:06 AM, Ashutosh Bapat <
ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> The patch has white space error
> git apply /mnt/hgfs/tmp/comment_on_current_database_v1.patch
> /mnt/hgfs/tmp/comment_on_current_database_v1.patch:52: t
On 2 January 2017 at 21:23, Jim Nasby wrote:
> It's not clear from the thread that there is consensus that this feature is
> desired. In particular, the performance aspects of changing segment size from
> a C constant to a variable are in question. Someone with access to large
> hardware shoul
2017-01-03 13:03 GMT+01:00 Fabien COELHO :
>
> Hello Pavel,
>
> PLEASE, could you remove the parts of emails you are not responding to
> when replying in the thread? THANKS.
>
> The current status is that both proposals are useless because the use case
> needs "some" transactional property for
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> Yeah, let's make the life of users just easier if we can, without any
> extension. Some people are likely going to forget to enable it anyway,
> and some more don't like installing the package dedicated to contrib
> modules.
>
I think I +
Craig Ringer-3 wrote
> Take a look at how pglogical does it in its replication set handling
> and relation metadata cache.
I checked it out but for what I understand it uses the inline parameter.
Would it be possible to store this info in some config table and then run a
select from inside the plu
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 3:20 AM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> attached is v21 of the patch series, rebased to current master (resolving
> the duplicate OID and a few trivial merge conflicts), and also fixing some
> of the issues you reported.
I wanted to test the grouping estimation behaviour with TPCH,
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 2 January 2017 at 21:23, Jim Nasby wrote:
>
>> It's not clear from the thread that there is consensus that this feature is
>> desired. In particular, the performance aspects of changing segment size
>> from a C constant to a variable are i
On 3 January 2017 at 13:45, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 2 January 2017 at 21:23, Jim Nasby wrote:
>>
>>> It's not clear from the thread that there is consensus that this feature is
>>> desired. In particular, the performance aspects of changing
On 12/21/2016 04:09 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
Thanks for having a look! Attached is a new version, with that bug fixed.
I have been able more advanced testing without the crash and things
seem to work properly. The attached set of tests is also able to pass
for all the combinations of hba conf
On 12/30/16 9:10 AM, Yuriy Zhuravlev wrote:
> cmake_v2_2_c_define.patch
>
> Small chages in c.h . At first it is “#pragma fenv_access (off)” it is
> necessary if we use /fp:strict for MSVC compiler. Without this pragma we
> can’t calc floats for const variables in compiller time (2 * M_PI for
> ex
On 1/3/17 7:23 AM, Kuntal Ghosh wrote:
> The regression tests for hot standby check fails since it uses the
> following statement:
> -select min_value as sequence_min_value from hsseq;
> which is no longer supported I guess. It should be modified as following:
> select min_value as sequence_min_val
On 1/2/17 10:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Before we leave this area, though, there is a loose end that requires
> more thought. That is, what about passphrase-protected server keys?
I don't have experience with this in practice, but my hunch would be
that you can continue to use passphrases as before
On 1/3/17 1:26 AM, amul sul wrote:
> One more requirement for pg_background is session, command_qh,
> response_qh and worker_handle should be last longer than current
> memory context, for that we might need to allocate these in
> TopMemoryContext. Please find attach patch does the same change in
Hello again,
*** PLEASE, could you remove the parts of emails you are not responding to
when replying in the thread? THANKS. ***
[...] Did I understand?
I guess that the answer is "no":-)
When you are running under only one transaction, then you don't need to
solve reset variables on rollb
On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 12/1/16 9:32 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I think it would be better to get rid of objargs and have objname be a
>> general Node that can contain more specific node types so that there is
>> some amount of type tracking. FuncWithArg
2017-01-03 15:40 GMT+01:00 Fabien COELHO :
>
> Hello again,
>
> *** PLEASE, could you remove the parts of emails you are not responding to
> when replying in the thread? THANKS. ***
>
> [...] Did I understand?
>>>
>>
> I guess that the answer is "no":-)
>
> When you are running under only one tran
On 12/31/16 11:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> But doesn't this result in a boatload of warnings on compilers that
> don't have typeof()?
> Also, if your answer is "you shouldn't get any warnings because
> copyObject is already declared to return void *", then why aren't
> we just relying on that today?
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 12/27/16 4:56 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Pavel Stehule
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> First I describe my initial position. I am strongly against introduction
>>> "new" language - plpgsql2 or new plpgsql, or any else
Vladamir, all,
* Vladimir Rusinov (vrusi...@google.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, let's make the life of users just easier if we can, without any
> > extension. Some people are likely going to forget to enable it anyway,
> > and some more don'
On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 4:38 AM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> To be able to do this, the patch modifies the isolation tester so that
> it recognises wait_event SafeSnapshot.
I'm not going to say that's unacceptable, but it's certainly not beautiful.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.
On 12/30/16 9:28 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
> The attached patch is reworked from a previous one [1] to better deal
> with get_object_address and pg_get_object_address.
>
> Regards,
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150317171836.gc10...@momjian.us
The syntax we have used fo
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 4:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Before we leave this area, though, there is a loose end that requires
>> more thought. That is, what about passphrase-protected server keys?
>> ...
>> 2. Add a password callback function that would supply the passphrase
On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Trying to fit recovery targets into one parameter was really not
> feasible, though I tried.
What was the problem?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 1/2/17 10:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Before we leave this area, though, there is a loose end that requires
>> more thought. That is, what about passphrase-protected server keys?
> I don't have experience with this in practice, but my hunch would be
> that you can con
2017-01-03 16:23 GMT+01:00 Merlin Moncure :
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Jim Nasby
> wrote:
> > On 12/27/16 4:56 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Pavel Stehule >
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> First I describe my initial position. I am strongly against
> intro
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> But that doesn't really detract from my point, which is that it's
>> totally silly for us to imagine that char and word-wide atomic ops are
>> interchangeable on all platforms and we can flip a coin to decide which
>> to use as long as
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 3 January 2017 at 13:45, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> On 2 January 2017 at 21:23, Jim Nasby wrote:
>>>
It's not clear from the thread that there is consensus that this feature
is d
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 1:36 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Okay, but I think if we know how much is the additional cost in
> average and worst case, then we can take a better call.
Yeah. We shouldn't just rip out optimizations that are inconvenient
without doing some test of what the impact is on the
On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 07:57:33PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 12:34 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> > I've rolled your patches into this next one and clarified the commit
> > message, as there appears to have been some confusion about the scope.
>
> Not all the comments have
On 3 January 2017 at 15:44, Robert Haas wrote:
> Yeah. I don't think there's any way to get around the fact that there
> will be bigger latency spikes in some cases with larger WAL files.
One way would be for the WALwriter to zerofill new files ahead of
time, thus avoiding the latency spike.
>
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> If they're maintained, then they'll be updated. I don't have any
>
sympathy if they aren't maintained.
>
Updating may be non-trivial effort even if they are maintained. E.g. some
project may need to support both 9.6 and 10.0, and a lot of t
On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 11:59:19AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hi
> I am sending review of this patch
>
> 1. there are not any problem with patching, compiling, doc
> 2. the patch is simple, the documentation is good enough
> 3. all regress tests passed without problems
>
> My questions:
>
> 1
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> After further study, I'm inclined to just propose that we flip the default
>> width of pg_atomic_flag in generic-gcc.h: use int not char if both are
>> available. The only modern platform where that's the wrong thing is x86
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 12:36 AM, Regina Obe wrote:
>> cmp would return 0 if the estimated distance returned by the index AM were
>> greater than the actual distance.
>> The estimated distance can be less than the actual distance, but it isn't
>> allowed to be more. See gist_bbox_distance for an
On 3 January 2017 at 15:50, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> Trying to fit recovery targets into one parameter was really not
>> feasible, though I tried.
>
> What was the problem?
There are 5 different parameters that affect the recovery target, 3 of
wh
On 01/03/2017 02:42 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 3:20 AM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
attached is v21 of the patch series, rebased to current master (resolving
the duplicate OID and a few trivial merge conflicts), and also fixing some
of the issues you reported.
I wanted to test the
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 3 January 2017 at 15:44, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Yeah. I don't think there's any way to get around the fact that there
>> will be bigger latency spikes in some cases with larger WAL files.
>
> One way would be for the WALwriter to zerofill n
** PLEASE **
COULD YOU REMOVE THE PARTS OF EMAILS YOU ARE NOT RESPONDING TO WHEN
REPLYING IN THE THREAD?
** THANKS **
[...] Then B believes that A succeeded, which is not the case.
No, just your design is unhappy
SELECT A(..)
SET SESSION VARIABLE status_ok = false;
* Vladimir Rusinov (vrusi...@google.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > If they're maintained, then they'll be updated. I don't have any
> >
> sympathy if they aren't maintained.
> >
>
> Updating may be non-trivial effort even if they are maintained. E.g. some
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> A survey of s_lock.h shows that we prefer char-width slock_t only on
>>> these architectures:
>>>
>>> x86
>>> sparc (but not sparcv9, there we use int)
>>> m68k
>>> vax
>
>> I don't think that's right, because on my MacBook Pro:
>
> ... which is
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 12:06 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> Instead of changing get_object_address_unqualified(),
> get_object_address_unqualified() and pg_get_object_address(), should
> we just stick get_database_name(MyDatabaseId) as object name in
> gram.y?
No. Note this comment at the top of gr
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 7:32 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:25:05AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> > I don't have a clear recollection how I solved this in July; possibly by
>> > restoring the (historic, partition) table from backup.
>> >
>> > Last week again again just now (
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 3 January 2017 at 15:50, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> Trying to fit recovery targets into one parameter was really not
>>> feasible, though I tried.
>>
>> What was the problem?
>
> There are
On 3 January 2017 at 16:47, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 3 January 2017 at 15:50, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
Trying to fit recovery targets into one parameter was really not
feasible, thou
On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 11:45:33AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > ts=# begin; drop view umts_eric_ch_switch_view,
> > eric_umts_rnc_utrancell_view, umts_eric_cell_integrity_view; ALTER TABLE
> > eric_umts_rnc_utrancell_metrics ALTER COLUMN PMSUMPACKETLATENCY_000 TYPE
> > BIGINT USING PMSUMPACKETL
On 1/2/17 1:51 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
1) Neither is enabled by default, so 90% of users have no idea they
exist. Obviously that's an easy enough fix, but...
We can strongly talk about it - there can be a chapter in plpgsql doc.
Now, the patterns and antipatterns are not officially docu
2017-01-03 17:33 GMT+01:00 Fabien COELHO :
>
> ** PLEASE **
>
> COULD YOU REMOVE THE PARTS OF EMAILS YOU ARE NOT RESPONDING TO WHEN
> REPLYING IN THE THREAD?
>
> ** THANKS **
>
> [...] Then B believes that A succeeded, which is not the case.
>>>
>>
>> No, just your design is unhapp
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
A survey of s_lock.h shows that we prefer char-width slock_t only on
these architectures:
x86
sparc (but not sparcv9, there we use int)
m68k
vax
>>> I don't think that's right, because on m
2017-01-03 17:57 GMT+01:00 Jim Nasby :
> On 1/2/17 1:51 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>> 1) Neither is enabled by default, so 90% of users have no idea they
>> exist. Obviously that's an easy enough fix, but...
>>
>> We can strongly talk about it - there can be a chapter in plpgsql doc.
>> No
On 1/3/17 9:58 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> ** The real problem is that we have no mechanism for allowing a PL's
> language/syntax/API to move forward without massive backwards
compatibility
> problems. **
Just got back from break :-). Have some thoughts on this. Backwards
c
On 01/03/2017 08:47 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 3 January 2017 at 15:50, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
Trying to fit recovery targets into one parameter was really not
feasible, though I
On 1/3/17 11:19 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2) There's no way to incrementally change those values for a
single
function. If you've set extra_errors = 'all' globally, a single
function can't say "turn off the too many rows setting for this
func
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 06:46:32PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Is this a big enough boo that we actually want to reset the master repo to get
> rid of it?
>
> If so, we need to do it *now* beore people get a chance to mirror it
> properly..
>
> Thoughts?
>
> If not, just a revert should wor
** PLEASE **
COULD YOU REMOVE THE PARTS OF EMAILS YOU ARE NOT RESPONDING TO WHEN
REPLYING IN THE THREAD?
** THANKS **
Hmmm. It seems that you can't. You should, really.
If you use patterns that I wrote - the security context will be valid
always.
No: This pattern assumes
2017-01-03 18:41 GMT+01:00 Jim Nasby :
> On 1/3/17 11:19 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>> 2) There's no way to incrementally change those values for a
>> single
>> function. If you've set extra_errors = 'all' globally, a
>> single
>> function can't say "tur
On 01/03/2017 07:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 06:46:32PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Is this a big enough boo that we actually want to reset the master repo to get
rid of it?
If so, we need to do it *now* beore people get a chance to mirror it properly..
Thoughts?
If
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 01/03/2017 07:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 06:46:32PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>>> Is this a big enough boo that we actually want to reset the master repo
>>> to get
>>> rid of it?
>>>
>>> If so, we
On 1/3/17 10:33 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
** PLEASE **
COULD YOU REMOVE THE PARTS OF EMAILS YOU ARE NOT RESPONDING TO WHEN
REPLYING IN THE THREAD?
** THANKS **
+1. Frankly, I've been skipping most of your (Pavel) replies in this
thread because of this.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Arc
On 1/3/17 11:57 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
I've pushed a reset to the master repo. Working on the mirror now.
Please don't forget github. :)
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble!
On 01/03/2017 07:57 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 01/03/2017 07:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 06:46:32PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Is this a big enough boo that we actually want to reset the master repo
to
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 01/03/2017 07:57 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 01/03/2017 07:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 06:46:32PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 06:57:44PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I'm leaning for +1 for resetting. It'll be a pain for any mirrors of the
> repo, but I think the clean history is worth it.
>
>
>
> It seems bruce pushed a whole bunch of merge conflicts, and possibly more. I
> think h
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 1/3/17 11:57 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>> I've pushed a reset to the master repo. Working on the mirror now.
>>
>
> Please don't forget github. :)
>
> Handled, thanks for the reminder.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
W
2017-01-03 19:39 GMT+05:00 Peter Eisentraut :
> On 1/3/17 1:26 AM, amul sul wrote:
> > One more requirement for pg_background is session, command_qh,
> > response_qh and worker_handle should be last longer than current
> > memory context, for that we might need to allocate these in
> > TopMemoryCo
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Ok. Now let's wait for the fallout from the reset. This is an interesting
>> experiment, we'll find out how many people are annoyed by a reset :-).
> Yeah, and how many had time to pull. It was only out there
On 01/03/2017 03:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 1/3/17 7:23 AM, Kuntal Ghosh wrote:
The regression tests for hot standby check fails since it uses the
following statement:
-select min_value as sequence_min_value from hsseq;
which is no longer supported I guess. It should be modified as follow
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Lewis, Ian (Microstar Laboratories)
wrote:
> Personally, I believe such an option would increase, not decrease the
> number of people who could relatively easily use PostgreSQL. If that is
> right it is a strong argument for such a modal behavior in spite of the
> o
Magnus Hagander writes:
>> Ok. Now let's wait for the fallout from the reset. This is an interesting
>> experiment, we'll find out how many people are annoyed by a reset :-).
> I bet a number of buildfarm machines will dislike it :(
Early returns don't look good, eg on termite
From git:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 7:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> >> Ok. Now let's wait for the fallout from the reset. This is an
> interesting
> >> experiment, we'll find out how many people are annoyed by a reset :-).
>
> > I bet a number of buildfarm machines will dislike it :(
>
>
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 11:45:33AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > ts=# begin; drop view umts_eric_ch_switch_view,
>> > eric_umts_rnc_utrancell_view, umts_eric_cell_integrity_view; ALTER TABLE
>> > eric_umts_rnc_utrancell_metrics ALTER COLUM
Lewis, Ian (Microstar Laboratories) wrote:
> PS. To anyone who might know the answer: My Reply All to this group does
> not seem to join to the original thread. All I am doing is Reply All
> from Outlook. Is there something else I need to do to allow my responses
> to join the original thread?
Th
2017-01-03 18:52 GMT+01:00 Fabien COELHO :
>
> ** PLEASE **
>>> COULD YOU REMOVE THE PARTS OF EMAILS YOU ARE NOT RESPONDING TO WHEN
>>> REPLYING IN THE THREAD?
>>> ** THANKS **
>>
>>
> Hmmm. It seems that you can't. You should, really.
I am sorry - The gmail client mask me thes
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 7:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Somehow the reset is clobbering local configuration on some members?
> I doubt that. I think that was probably never configured, it just didn't
> show up when everything was working.
> I don't know what the buildfarm r
On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 01:40:50PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 11:45:33AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> > ts=# begin; drop view umts_eric_ch_switch_view,
> >> > eric_umts_rnc_utrancell_view, umts_eric_cell_integrit
On 11/7/16 5:31 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Regardless, it seems like you might be on to something, and I'm
> inclined to patch your change, test it, and roll it out to production.
> If it helps or at least narrows the problem down, we ought to give it
> consideration for inclusion (unless someone
Hi
2016-12-31 6:46 GMT+01:00 Peter Eisentraut :
> During some recent patch reviews, there was some back and forth about
> where to put prototypes for fmgr-callable functions. We don't actually
> need these prototypes except to satisfy the compiler, so we end up
> sprinkling them around random he
On 11/2/16 11:45 AM, Oskari Saarenmaa wrote:
> 26.10.2016, 21:34, Andres Freund kirjoitti:
>> Any chance that plsh or the script it executes does anything with the file
>> descriptors it inherits? That'd certainly one way to get into odd corruption
>> issues.
>>
>> We processor really should use
Justin Pryzby writes:
I can cause the error at will on the existing table,
That's good news, at least.
1. Please trigger it with "\set VERBOSITY verbose" enabled, so we can see
the exact source location --- there are a couple of instances of that
text.
2. Even better would be a stack trace
In 0001-Add-PUBLICATION-catalogs-and-DDL-v16.patch.gz,
+static bool
+is_publishable_class(Oid relid, Form_pg_class reltuple)
+{
+ return reltuple->relkind == RELKIND_RELATION &&
+ !IsCatalogClass(relid, reltuple) &&
+ reltuple->relpersistence == RELPERSISTENCE_PER
On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 02:32:36PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Justin Pryzby writes:
> I can cause the error at will on the existing table,
>
> That's good news, at least.
>
> 1. Please trigger it with "\set VERBOSITY verbose" enabled, so we can see
> the exact source location --- there are a
1 - 100 of 161 matches
Mail list logo
