Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization

2017-04-26 Thread Konstantin Knizhnik
On 26.04.2017 00:47, Andres Freund wrote: On 2017-04-25 21:11:08 +, Doug Doole wrote: When I did this in DB2, I didn't use the parser - it was too expensive. I just tokenized the statement and used some simple rules to bypass the invalid cases. For example, if I saw the tokens "ORDER" and

Re: [HACKERS] subscription worker doesn't start immediately on eabled

2017-04-26 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 25 Apr 2017 14:45:03 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote in <3d6a1bd0-08ce-301d-3336-ec9f623a3...@2ndquadrant.com> > On 4/6/17 08:24, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > The attached patch wakes up launcher when a subscription is > > enabled. This fails when a subscription is enabled immedaitely > >

Re: [HACKERS] [PostgreSQL 10] default of hot_standby should be "on"?

2017-04-26 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 26 April 2017 at 08:30, Huong Dangminh wrote: > >> Default for hot_standby parameter should be "on" from PostgreSQL 10? >> >> In PostgreSQL 10, -w option is default for [pg_ctl start]. >> So in order to start standby we have to setting hot

Re: [HACKERS] [PostgreSQL 10] default of hot_standby should be "on"?

2017-04-26 Thread Tsunakawa, Takayuki
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Masahiko Sawada > The idea of changing the default value seems good to me but I'm not sure > it's good idea to change the default value now under the circumstances where > we're focus on stabilizatio

Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization

2017-04-26 Thread Konstantin Knizhnik
On 26.04.2017 01:34, Andres Freund wrote: Hi, (FWIW, on this list we don't do top-quotes) On 2017-04-25 22:21:22 +, Doug Doole wrote: Plan invalidation was no different than for any SQL statement. DB2 keeps a list of the objects the statement depends on. If any of the objects changes in

Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization

2017-04-26 Thread Konstantin Knizhnik
On 26.04.2017 04:00, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Konstantin Knizhnik Well, first of all I want to share results I already get: pgbench with default parameters, scale 10 and one connection: So aut

Re: [HACKERS] statement_timeout is not working as expected with postgres_fdw

2017-04-26 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 25 Apr 2017 15:43:59 +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote in > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: > >> > >> The logs above show that 34 seconds elapsed between starting to abort > >> the transaction and knowing that the foreign server is unreachable. It > >> looks like

Re: [HACKERS] an outdated comment for hash_seq_init.

2017-04-26 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 25 Apr 2017 11:00:16 -0400, Robert Haas wrote in > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 3:55 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: > > While I looked into dynahash.c, I found that the following > > sentense became outdated by 5dfc198. The commit removed the only > > usage of hash_freeze(). > > > >> * NOTE:

Re: [HACKERS] Foreign Join pushdowns not working properly for outer joins

2017-04-26 Thread David Rowley
On 26 April 2017 at 02:12, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 4/24/17 22:50, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 4/14/17 00:24, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: >>> This looks better. Here are patches for master and 9.6. >>> Since join pushdown was supported in 9.6 the patch should be >>> backported to 9.6 as well. Atta

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

2017-04-26 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 25 Apr 2017 21:21:29 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote in > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > > wrote: > >> > >> I'm not good at composition, so I cannot insist on my > >> proposal. For the convenience of others, her

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table

2017-04-26 Thread Amit Langote
Hi Stephen, On 2017/04/26 0:42, Stephen Frost wrote: > Amit, > > * Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: >> I think why getPartitions() is separate from getInherits() and then >> flagPartitions() separate from flagInhTables() is because I thought >> originally that mixing the two wo

Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take

2017-04-26 Thread Amit Khandekar
On 26 April 2017 at 00:28, Robert Haas wrote: > So what I'd prefer -- on > the totally unprincipled basis that it would let us improve > performance in the future -- if you operate on a partition directly, > you fire the partition's triggers, but if you operate on the parent, > only the parent's t

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

2017-04-26 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 04/25/2017 06:26 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Thoughts? Unless someone has better ideas or objections, I'll go implement that. This is what I came up with in the end. Some highlights and differences vs the plan I posted earlier: * If algorithm is not given explicitly, PQencryptPasswordCo

Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization

2017-04-26 Thread Konstantin Knizhnik
On 26.04.2017 10:49, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote: On 26.04.2017 04:00, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: Are you considering some upper limit on the number of prepared statements? In this case we need some kind of LRU for maintaining cache of autoprepared statements. I think that it is good idea t

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

2017-04-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 09:56:58PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > SCRAM-SHA-256 improves deficiencies of MD5 password hashing by > > preventing any kind of pass-the-hash vulnerabilities, where a user > > would be able to connect to a PostgreSQL instance by just knowing the > > hash of a password a

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

2017-04-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 09:34:02AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > >> Just wondering if the mention of commit > >> 0414b26bac09379a4cbf1fbd847d1cee2293c5e4 is missed? Not sure if this > >> requires a separate entry or could be merged with -- Support parallel > >> btree index scans. > > > > This item wa

Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization

2017-04-26 Thread Pavel Stehule
2017-04-26 12:30 GMT+02:00 Konstantin Knizhnik : > > > On 26.04.2017 10:49, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote: > > > > On 26.04.2017 04:00, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: Are you considering some > upper limit on the number of prepared statements? > In this case we need some kind of LRU for maintaining cach

Re: [HACKERS] [PostgreSQL 10] default of hot_standby should be "on"?

2017-04-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 07:33:27AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: > From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Masahiko Sawada > > The idea of changing the default value seems good to me but I'm not sure > > it's good idea to change the

Re: [HACKERS] [PostgreSQL 10] default of hot_standby should be "on"?

2017-04-26 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 07:33:27AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: > > From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > > > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Masahiko > Sawada > > > The idea of changing the default value s

Re: [HACKERS] Foreign Join pushdowns not working properly for outer joins

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/26/17 04:32, David Rowley wrote: >> For backpatching to 9.6, I came up with the attached reduced version. >> Since we don't have add_foreign_grouping_paths() in 9.6, we can omit the >> refactoring and keep the changes much simpler. Does that make sense? > > That makes sense to me. It fixes t

Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

2017-04-26 Thread Rahila Syed
Hello Jeevan, Thank you for comments. I will include your comments in the updated patch. >7.The output of describe needs to be improved. The syntax for DEFAULT partitioning is still under discussion. This comment wont be applicable if the syntax is changed. >6. >I am wondering, isn't it possib

Re: [HACKERS] StandbyRecoverPreparedTransactions recovers subtrans links incorrectly

2017-04-26 Thread Nikhil Sontakke
> I'm suggesting we take the approach that if there is a problem we can > recreate it as a way of exploring what conditions are required and > therefore work out the impact. Nikhil Sontakke appears to have > re-created something, but not quite what I had expected. I think he > will post here tomorr

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

2017-04-26 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 09:00:45AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 08:30:50AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: >> >> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Bruce Momjian wro

Re: [HACKERS] [PostgreSQL 10] default of hot_standby should be "on"?

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Magnus Hagander writes: > +1. I definitely think we should do it, and 10 would be the time to do it. Agreed. It's mainly a historical accident that the default is what it is, I think. > I wonder if we should also consider changing the standby error message to > be a WARNING instead of an ERROR.

Re: [HACKERS] StandbyRecoverPreparedTransactions recovers subtrans links incorrectly

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Nikhil Sontakke writes: > A SELECT query on the newly promoted master on any of the tables involved > in the 2PC hangs. The hang is due to a loop in > SubTransGetTopmostTransaction(). Due to incorrect linkages, we get a > circular reference in parentxid <-> subxid inducing the infinite loop. I'm

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table

2017-04-26 Thread Stephen Frost
Amit, * Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: > On 2017/04/26 0:42, Stephen Frost wrote: > > I'm not sure what you mean here. We're always going to call both > > getInherits() and getPartitions() and run the queries in each, with the > > way the code is written today. In my experie

Re: [HACKERS] tablesync patch broke the assumption that logical rep depends on?

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/25/17 15:42, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> Here is the patch doing just that. > > And one more revision which also checks in_use when attaching shared > memory. This is mainly to improve the user visible behavior in > theoretical corner case when the worker is supposed to be cleaned up but > actuall

Re: [HACKERS] Fix a typo in subscriptioncmd.c

2017-04-26 Thread Fujii Masao
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Hi, > > Attached patch for $subject. > > s/accomodate/accommodate/ Pushed. Thanks! Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgre

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

2017-04-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 07:38:05PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > >> I have already mentioned the commit id (5e6d8d2b). Text can be "Allow > >> queries containing subplans to execute in parallel". We should also > >> mention in some way that this applies only when the query contains > >> uncorrelate

Re: [HACKERS] tablesync patch broke the assumption that logical rep depends on?

2017-04-26 Thread Jeff Janes
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 4/25/17 15:42, Petr Jelinek wrote: > >> Here is the patch doing just that. > > > > And one more revision which also checks in_use when attaching shared > > memory. This is mainly to improve the user v

Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9mi_Zara?= writes: >> coypu was not stuck (no buildfarm related process running), but failed to >> clean-up shared memory and semaphores. >> I’ve done the clean-up. > Huh, that's even more interesting. I installed NetBSD 5.1.5 on an old Mac G4; I believe this is a rea

Re: [HACKERS] subscription worker doesn't start immediately on eabled

2017-04-26 Thread Fujii Masao
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Tue, 25 Apr 2017 14:45:03 -0400, Peter Eisentraut > wrote in > <3d6a1bd0-08ce-301d-3336-ec9f623a3...@2ndquadrant.com> >> On 4/6/17 08:24, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: >> > The attached patch wakes up launcher when a subscription is >> >

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 7:06 AM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > This assumes that datums in partition bounds have one to one mapping > with the partitions, which isn't true for list partitions. For list > partitions we have multiple datums corresponding to the items listed > associated with a given parti

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication fixes

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/18/17 12:17, Euler Taveira wrote: > While inspecting the logical replication code, I found a bug that could > pick the wrong remote relation if they have the same name but different > schemas. Also, I did some spelling/cosmetic changes and fixed an > oversight in the ALTER SUBSCRIPTION documen

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] ON CONFLICT with constraint name doesn't work

2017-04-26 Thread Nikolay Samokhvalov
This is a kindly reminder, that this problem (message about "constraint" violation, while there is no such a constraint defined, just an index) is still unresolved. Let's fix that naming? Patch is attached in the previous message (posted to -bugs list) On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 9:15 PM, Nikolay Sa

Re: [HACKERS] Dropping a partitioned table takes too long

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >> The attached patch try to replace 'heap_open' with 'LockRelationOid' when >> locking parent table. >> It improved dropping a table with 7000 partitions. > > Your patch seems to be a much better solution to the problem, thanks. Does anyone w

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > I'm going to say this one more time: I really, really, really think > you need to avoid trying to convert the partition bounds to a common > type. I said before that the infrastructure to do that is not present > in our type system, and I'm pretty sure that statement is 100%

Re: [HACKERS] Dropping a partitioned table takes too long

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/26/17 12:15, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Amit Langote > wrote: >>> The attached patch try to replace 'heap_open' with 'LockRelationOid' when >>> locking parent table. >>> It improved dropping a table with 7000 partitions. >> >> Your patch seems to be a much better s

Re: [HACKERS] Dropping a partitioned table takes too long

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Amit Langote > wrote: >> Your patch seems to be a much better solution to the problem, thanks. > Does anyone wish to object to this patch as untimely? > If not, I'll commit it. It's certainly not untimely to address such problems. What I

Re: [HACKERS] some review comments on logical rep code

2017-04-26 Thread Fujii Masao
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Wed, 26 Apr 2017 14:31:12 +0900, Masahiko Sawada > wrote in > >> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Petr Jelinek >> wrote: >> > On 26/04/17 01:01, Fujii Masao wrote: >> However this is overkill for small gain and false wakeup

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > What I'm going to ask one more time, though, is why we are even discussing > this. Surely the partition bounds of a partitioned table must all be of > the same type already. If there is a case where they are not, that is > a bug we had better c

Re: [HACKERS] Dropping a partitioned table takes too long

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Amit Langote >> wrote: >>> Your patch seems to be a much better solution to the problem, thanks. > >> Does anyone wish to object to this patch as untimely? > >> If not, I'll commit it. >

Re: [HACKERS] some review comments on logical rep code

2017-04-26 Thread Fujii Masao
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: >> At Wed, 26 Apr 2017 14:31:12 +0900, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote in >> >>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Petr Jelinek >>> wrote: >>> > On 26/04/17 01:01, Fujii Masao wrote: >>

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 04/25/2017 06:26 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> Thoughts? Unless someone has better ideas or objections, I'll go >> implement that. > This is what I came up with in the end. Some highlights and differences vs > the plan I posted ear

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > So this is about a cross-type join, > not multiple types within a single partitioning hierarchy, as you > might also gather from the subject line of this thread. OK, but I still don't understand why any type conversion is needed in such a case. The existing join estimators

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> So this is about a cross-type join, >> not multiple types within a single partitioning hierarchy, as you >> might also gather from the subject line of this thread. > > OK, but I still don't understand why any type conversi

[HACKERS] Fix a typo in worker.c

2017-04-26 Thread Masahiko Sawada
HI, Attached patch for $subject. s/strigs/strings/ Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center fix_typo_in_worker_c.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes

Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > FWIW, I too prefer the latter, that is, fire only the parent's triggers. > In that case, applying only the patch 0001 will do. Do we need to update the documentation? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > That appears to be wrong. I intended to make cost_sort prefer plain sort > over incremental sort for this dataset size. But, that appears to be not > always right solution. Quick sort is so fast only on presorted data. As you may kno

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise aggregation/grouping

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 6:28 AM, Antonin Houska wrote: > Attached is a diff that contains both patches merged. This is just to prove my > assumption, details to be elaborated later. The scripts attached produce the > following plan in my environment: > >QUERY PLAN > ---

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> * If algorithm is not given explicitly, PQencryptPasswordConn() queries >> "SHOW password_encryption", and uses that. That is documented, and it is >> also documented that it will *not* issue queries, and hence wi

[HACKERS] Logical replication in the same cluster

2017-04-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
I tried setting up logical replication on the same server between two different databases, and got, from database test: test=> CREATE TABLE test (x INT PRIMARY KEY); CREATE TABLE test=> test=> INSERT INTO test VALUES (1); INSERT 0 1 test=> CREATE PUB

Re: [HACKERS] StandbyRecoverPreparedTransactions recovers subtrans links incorrectly

2017-04-26 Thread Simon Riggs
On 26 April 2017 at 15:28, Tom Lane wrote: > Nikhil Sontakke writes: >> A SELECT query on the newly promoted master on any of the tables involved >> in the 2PC hangs. The hang is due to a loop in >> SubTransGetTopmostTransaction(). Due to incorrect linkages, we get a >> circular reference in pare

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Would it be worth making password_encryption be GUC_REPORT so that > it could be guaranteed available, without a server transaction, > from any valid connection? I'm generally resistant to adding > GUC_REPORT flags, but maybe this is a time for

[HACKERS] RFC: ALTER SYSTEM [...] COMMENT

2017-04-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
-hackers, We have had ALTER SYSTEM for some time now. It is awesome to be able to make changes that can be system wide without ever having to hit a shell but it does lack a feature that seems like an oversight, the ability to comment. Problem we are trying to solve: Having documentation for

Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization

2017-04-26 Thread Doug Doole
> > A naive option would be to invalidate anything that depends on table or > view *.FOOBAR. You could probably make it a bit smarter by also requiring > that schema A appear in the path. > This has been rumbling around in my head. I wonder if you could solve this problem by registering dependenci

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort

2017-04-26 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 7:56 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > That appears to be wrong. I intended to make cost_sort prefer plain sort > > over incremental sort for this dataset size. But, that appears to be not > > always right solu

[HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] WIP: [[Parallel] Shared] Hash

2017-04-26 Thread Oleg Golovanov
Hi. Thanks for rebased patch set v12. Currently I try to use this patch on my new test site and get following: Hmm...  The next patch looks like a unified diff to me... The text leading up to this was: -- |diff --git a/src/include/access/parallel.h b/src/include/access/pa

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: ALTER SYSTEM [...] COMMENT

2017-04-26 Thread Stephen Frost
JD, * Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote: > Does not use existing comment functionality. Alternate solution > which would decrease functionality is: > > COMMENT ON SETTING setting IS 'comment'; That seems like a pretty reasonable idea, at least from where I sit. > Looking forward, w

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > OK, I get it. Our qsort is so fast not only on 100% presorted case. > However, that doesn't change many things in context of incremental sort. The important point is to make any presorted test case only ~99% presorted, so as to not gi

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: ALTER SYSTEM [...] COMMENT

2017-04-26 Thread Thom Brown
On 26 April 2017 at 18:03, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > -hackers, > > We have had ALTER SYSTEM for some time now. It is awesome to be able to make > changes that can be system wide without ever having to hit a shell but it > does lack a feature that seems like an oversight, the ability to comment. > >

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: ALTER SYSTEM [...] COMMENT

2017-04-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On 04/26/2017 10:14 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: JD, Having COMMENT ON accept a general query whose result is then cast to text and stored as the comment would allow this to be done, eg: COMMENT ON table IS (pg_get_comment('table') || ' new text'); Dig it, although we probably want the equivale

Re: [HACKERS] StandbyRecoverPreparedTransactions recovers subtrans links incorrectly

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs writes: > I've added code following Michael and Tom's comments to the previous > patch. New patch attached. Couple of minor suggestions: * Rather than deleting the comment for SubTransSetParent entirely, maybe make it say "It's possible that the parent was already recorded. However,

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: ALTER SYSTEM [...] COMMENT

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
"Joshua D. Drake" writes: > I wouldn't fight hard to change it but really if we think about it, what > makes more sense from usability perspective? > CREATE TABLE foo() COMMENT IS I think it's likely to be impossible to shoehorn such a thing into every type of CREATE command without making COMM

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort

2017-04-26 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > OK, I get it. Our qsort is so fast not only on 100% presorted case. > > However, that doesn't change many things in context of incremental sort. > > The important point is

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: ALTER SYSTEM [...] COMMENT

2017-04-26 Thread Hunley, Douglas
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Problem we are trying to solve: > > Having documentation for changes to GUC parameters that are modified via > ALTER SYSTEM. > > Why? > > Because documentation is good and required for a proper production system. > > How? > +1 for comment

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: ALTER SYSTEM [...] COMMENT

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost writes: > Having COMMENT ON accept a general query whose result is then cast to > text and stored as the comment would allow this to be done, eg: > COMMENT ON table IS (pg_get_comment('table') || ' new text'); Putting general subexpressions into utility statements has some implemen

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: ALTER SYSTEM [...] COMMENT

2017-04-26 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On 04/26/2017 10:31 AM, Tom Lane wrote: "Joshua D. Drake" writes: I wouldn't fight hard to change it but really if we think about it, what makes more sense from usability perspective? CREATE TABLE foo() COMMENT IS I think it's likely to be impossible to shoehorn such a thing into every typ

Re: [HACKERS] tablesync patch broke the assumption that logical rep depends on?

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Jeff Janes writes: > This gives me compiler warning: > launcher.c: In function 'logicalrep_worker_launch': > launcher.c:257: warning: 'slot' may be used uninitialized in this function Yeah, me too. Fix pushed. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: ALTER SYSTEM [...] COMMENT

2017-04-26 Thread Stephen Frost
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > Having COMMENT ON accept a general query whose result is then cast to > > text and stored as the comment would allow this to be done, eg: > > > COMMENT ON table IS (pg_get_comment('table') || ' new text'); > > Putting general sub

Re: [HACKERS] Fixup some misusage of appendStringInfo and friends

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/19/17 08:42, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > I reviewed the patch. It compiles clean, make check-world passes. I do > not see any issue with it. Looks reasonable. Let's keep it for the next commit fest. > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 9:13 AM, David Rowley > wrote: >> The attached cleans up a few sma

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: ALTER SYSTEM [...] COMMENT

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost writes: > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: >> It'd be better to invent inverse pg_get_comment and pg_set_comment >> functions, then you could do bulk-update things like >> select pg_set_comment('table', pg_get_comment('table') || ' more') >> from pg_class where ... > Of course

Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization

2017-04-26 Thread Konstantin Knizhnik
On 04/26/2017 08:08 PM, Doug Doole wrote: A naive option would be to invalidate anything that depends on table or view *.FOOBAR. You could probably make it a bit smarter by also requiring that schema A appear in the path. This has been rumbling around in my head. I wonder if you could so

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > So, I think we really need something like the syntax in Amul's patch > in order for this to work at all. Of course, the details can be > changed according to what seems best but I think the overall picture > is about right. I spent some time

Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > I'd still like to get something like your CLOEXEC patch applied > independently however. Here's an updated version of that, which makes use of our previous conclusion that F_SETFD/FD_CLOEXEC are available everywhere except Windows, and fixes some sloppy thinking about the

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication in the same cluster

2017-04-26 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 26/04/17 18:59, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I tried setting up logical replication on the same server between two > different databases, and got, from database test: > > test=> CREATE TABLE test (x INT PRIMARY KEY); > CREATE TABLE > test=> > test=> INSERT INTO test VALUES (1)

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication in the same cluster

2017-04-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:41:51PM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 26/04/17 18:59, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I tried setting up logical replication on the same server between two > > different databases, and got, from database test: > > > > test=> CREATE TABLE test (x INT PRIMARY KEY); > >

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication in the same cluster

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Petr Jelinek writes: > On 26/04/17 18:59, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> ... it just hangs. My server logs say: > Yes that's result of how logical replication slots work, the transaction > that needs to finish is your transaction. It can be worked around by > creating the slot manually via the SQL inte

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: [[Parallel] Shared] Hash

2017-04-26 Thread Thomas Munro
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 5:13 AM, Oleg Golovanov wrote: > Can you actualize your patch set? The error got from > 0010-hj-parallel-v12.patch. I really should get around to setting up a cron job to tell me about that. Here's a rebased version. The things currently on my list for this patch are: 1

Re: [HACKERS] Foreign Join pushdowns not working properly for outer joins

2017-04-26 Thread David Rowley
On 27 April 2017 at 01:31, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > committed Great. Thanks! -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to you

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication in the same cluster

2017-04-26 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Petr Jelinek writes: >> On 26/04/17 18:59, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> ... it just hangs. My server logs say: > >> Yes that's result of how logical replication slots work, the transaction >> that needs to finish is your transaction. It can be worke

Re: [HACKERS] Fixup some misusage of appendStringInfo and friends

2017-04-26 Thread David Rowley
On 27 April 2017 at 06:41, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 4/19/17 08:42, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: >> I reviewed the patch. It compiles clean, make check-world passes. I do >> not see any issue with it. > > Looks reasonable. Let's keep it for the next commit fest. Thank you to both of you for looking.

[HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] BUG #14629: ALTER TABLE VALIDATE CONSTRAINTS does not obey NO INHERIT clause

2017-04-26 Thread Amit Langote
On 2017/04/24 13:16, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/04/22 3:40, buschm...@nidsa.net wrote: >> The following bug has been logged on the website: >> >> Bug reference: 14629 >> Logged by: Hans Buschmann >> Email address: buschm...@nidsa.net >> PostgreSQL version: 9.6.2 >> Operating s

Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start

2017-04-26 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-04-26 11:42:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > 1. Let HEAD stand as it is. We have a problem with slow response to > bgworker start requests that arrive while ServerLoop is active, but that's > a pretty tight window usually (although I believe I've seen it hit at > least once in testing). > > 2.

Re: [HACKERS] [PostgreSQL 10] default of hot_standby should be "on"?

2017-04-26 Thread Vaishnavi Prabakaran
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 9:52 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > I wonder if we should also consider changing the standby error message to > be a WARNING instead of an ERROR. So that if you try to start up a standby > with hot_standby=on but master with wal_level=replica it would turn into a > cold st

Re: [HACKERS] [PostgreSQL 10] default of hot_standby should be "on"?

2017-04-26 Thread Huong Dangminh
Thanks all for your comments. > Magnus Hagander writes: > > +1. I definitely think we should do it, and 10 would be the time to do > it. > > Agreed. It's mainly a historical accident that the default is what it > is, > I think. > > > I wonder if we should also consider changing the standby err

Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >> 3. Go ahead with converting the postmaster to use WaitEventSet, a la >> the draft patch I posted earlier. I'd be happy to do this if we were >> at the start of a devel cycle, but right now seems a bit late --- not >> to mention that we real

Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start

2017-04-26 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-04-26 17:05:39 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Here's an updated version of that, which makes use of our previous > conclusion that F_SETFD/FD_CLOEXEC are available everywhere except > Windows, and fixes some sloppy thinking about the EXEC_BACKEND case. > > I went ahead and changed the call to ep

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication in the same cluster

2017-04-26 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 6:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Petr Jelinek writes: >> On 26/04/17 18:59, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> ... it just hangs. My server logs say: > >> Yes that's result of how logical replication slots work, the transaction >> that needs to finish is your transaction. It can be worke

Re: [HACKERS] Fix a typo in worker.c

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/26/17 12:43, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Attached patch for $subject. > > s/strigs/strings/ done, thanks -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication in the same cluster

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/26/17 19:18, Michael Paquier wrote: >> If that's a predictable deadlock, I think a minimum expectation is that >> the system should notice it and throw an error, not just hang. (Then >> the error could give a hint about how to work around it.) But the case >> Bruce has in mind doesn't seem l

Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take

2017-04-26 Thread Amit Langote
On 2017/04/27 1:52, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Amit Langote > wrote: >> FWIW, I too prefer the latter, that is, fire only the parent's triggers. >> In that case, applying only the patch 0001 will do. > > Do we need to update the documentation? Yes, I think we should.

Re: [HACKERS] Unportable implementation of background worker start

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >>> 3. Go ahead with converting the postmaster to use WaitEventSet, a la >>> the draft patch I posted earlier. I'd be happy to do this if we were >>> at the start of a devel cycle, but right now seems a bit late --- not

Re: [HACKERS] identity columns

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/23/17 16:58, Robert Haas wrote: > I agree that ADD is a little odd here, but it doesn't seem terrible. > But why do we need it? Instead of: > > ADD GENERATED { ALWAYS | BY DEFAULT } AS IDENTITY > SET GENERATED { ALWAYS | BY DEFAULT } > DROP IDENTITY [ IF EXISTS ] > > Why not just: > > SET

Re: [HACKERS] StandbyRecoverPreparedTransactions recovers subtrans links incorrectly

2017-04-26 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs writes: >> I've added code following Michael and Tom's comments to the previous >> patch. New patch attached. > > Couple of minor suggestions: > > * Rather than deleting the comment for SubTransSetParent entirely, > maybe make it say

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

2017-04-26 Thread Amit Kapila
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 07:38:05PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: >> >> I have already mentioned the commit id (5e6d8d2b). Text can be "Allow >> >> queries containing subplans to execute in parallel". We should also >> >> mention in some way tha

Re: [HACKERS] vcregress support for single TAP tests

2017-04-26 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 4/23/17 17:09, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > Here's a patch that will allow calling vcregress.pl to run a single TAP > test set. It would work like this: > > > vcregress.pl src/test/recover true > > > The second argument if true (in the perl sense, of course) would trigger > a temp install

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

2017-04-26 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:05:41PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> > I think the above commit needs a separate mention, as this is a really >> > huge step forward to control the size of hash indexes. >> >> Yes, it is unfotunate that the item i

Re: [HACKERS] [PostgreSQL 10] default of hot_standby should be "on"?

2017-04-26 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Huong Dangminh wrote: > Thanks all for your comments. > >> Magnus Hagander writes: >> > +1. I definitely think we should do it, and 10 would be the time to do >> it. >> >> Agreed. It's mainly a historical accident that the default is what it >> is, >> I think. >>

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication in the same cluster

2017-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut writes: >>> If that's a predictable deadlock, I think a minimum expectation is that >>> the system should notice it and throw an error, not just hang. > We had some discussions early on about detecting connections to the same > server, but it's not entirely clear how to do that a

  1   2   >