Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)

Starting to poke at this... the proposal to add prove checks for psql just to see whether \if respects ON_ERROR_STOP seems like an incredibly expensive way to test a rather minor point. On my machine, "make check" in bin/psql goes from zero time to close to 8 seconds. I'm not really on

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Joe Conway wrote: > On 03/11/2017 03:15 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Yeah but it can be called as well while the application is calling >> PQgetResult() and still looping until it gets a NULL result. Not sure >> if this is a use-case to worry

Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > * Whether or not you think it's important not to expand skipped variables, > I think that it's critical that skipped backtick expressions not be > executed. > ​ [...] ​ > I do not think that a skipped \if or \elif > should

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4

Hi, On 03/07/2017 04:01 AM, Andres Freund wrote: Hi, Attached is an updated version of the patchset, but more importantly some benchmark numbers. I wanted to do a bit of testing and benchmarking on this, but 0004 seems to be a bit broken. The patch does not apply anymore - there are some

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 6:01 AM, Tels wrote: > Just a question for me to understand the implementation details vs. the > strategy: > > Have you considered how the scheduling decision might impact performance > due to "inter-plan parallelism vs. in-plan parallelism"?

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Amit Khandekar wrote: >> +static inline void >> +exec_append_scan_first(AppendState *appendstate) >> +{ >> +appendstate->as_whichplan = 0; >> +} >> >> I don't think this is buying you anything, and suggest backing it out. > > This is

Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 9:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I thought the same of the version you were complaining about, but > the current patch seems to have dialed it back a good deal. Do you > still find the current error messages unmaintainable? I haven't looked, but I had the

Re: [HACKERS] Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner

Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-03-11 11:48:31 -0800, Andres Freund wrote: >> I think that'd be a good plan. We probably should also keep --outputdir >> seperate (which test_decoding/Makefile does, but >> pg_isolation_regress_check doesn't)? > Here's a patch doing that

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/regress's check-prepared-txns target

On 03/11/2017 06:00 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > In > https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=ae55d9fbe3871a5e6309d9b91629f1b0ff2b8cba > src/test/regress grew a check-prepared-txns (and an accompanying > installcheck-prepared-txns) target. > > Is that still sensible

Re: [HACKERS] Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > I agree that more analysis can help us to decide if we can use subxids > from PGPROC and if so under what conditions. Have you considered the > another patch I have posted to fix the issue which is to do this >

Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)

Robert Haas writes: > I think that I have not taken a firm position on what the behavior > should be with respect to errors.I took the position that the > messages being printed saying what happened were too detailed, because > they not only described what had happened

[HACKERS] Re: [GSOC 17] Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions

> -Original Messages- > From: "Kevin Grittner" > Sent Time: 2017-03-12 04:24:29 (Sunday) > To: "Mengxing Liu" > Cc: "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" > Subject: Re: [GSOC 17] Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from

Re: [HACKERS] Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:20 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> /* >> + * Change the shared buffer state in critical section, >> + * otherwise any error could make it unrecoverable after >> + * recovery. >> +

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 07:15:59PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 3/10/17 14:40, Andres Freund wrote: >> > I'd really like to get it in. The performance improvements on its own >> > are significant, and it provides

Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > I'm ok with this patch. I think that the very simple automaton code > structure achieved is worth the very few code duplications. It is also > significantly shorter than the nested if/switch variants, and it does >

Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)

Corey Huinker writes: > [ 0001.if_endif.v21.diff ] I had thought that this patch was pretty close to committable, but the more I poke at it the less I think so. The technology it uses for skipping unexecuted script sections has got too many bugs. * Daniel Verite

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

On 03/11/2017 03:15 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Yeah but it can be called as well while the application is calling > PQgetResult() and still looping until it gets a NULL result. Not sure > if this is a use-case to worry about, but sending a query to the > server in PQencryptPassword() could as

Re: [HACKERS] possible encoding issues with libxml2 functions

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 07:48:18PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Today I played with xml_recv function and with xml processing functions. > > xml_recv function ensures correct encoding from document encoding to server > encoding. But the decl section holds original encoding info - that should >

Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Corey Huinker writes: > > [ 0001.if_endif.v21.diff ] > > Starting to poke at this... the proposal to add prove checks for psql > just to see whether \if respects ON_ERROR_STOP seems like an

Re: [HACKERS] Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner

On 2017-03-11 11:48:31 -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-03-11 12:05:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > I wrote: > > > I believe the core problem is that contrib/test_decoding's regresscheck > > > and isolationcheck targets each want to use ./tmp_check as their > > > --temp-instance. make has no

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Joe Conway wrote: > On 03/11/2017 02:21 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 5:35 AM, Joe Conway wrote: >>> So if the password is not already set, \password uses >>> password_encryption to determine which

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

On 03/11/2017 02:21 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 5:35 AM, Joe Conway wrote: >> So if the password is not already set, \password uses >> password_encryption to determine which format to use, and if the >> password is already set, then the current method

[HACKERS] src/test/regress's check-prepared-txns target

Hi, In https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=ae55d9fbe3871a5e6309d9b91629f1b0ff2b8cba src/test/regress grew a check-prepared-txns (and an accompanying installcheck-prepared-txns) target. Is that still sensible given that pg_regress actually enables prepared

Re: [HACKERS] Changing references of password encryption to hashing

On 03/09/2017 06:16 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > As discussed here: > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/98cafcd0-5557-0bdf-4837-0f2b7782d...@joeconway.com > We are using in documentation and code comments "encryption" to define > what actually is hashing, which is confusing. > > Attached is a

Re: [HACKERS] Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner

On 2017-03-11 14:17:42 -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-03-07 09:36:51 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > FWIW, +1 on improving matters here. > > > > Andres Freund wrote: > > > > > The best I can come up so far is a toplevel target that creates the temp > > > install, starts a cluster and then

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 5:35 AM, Joe Conway wrote: > On 03/10/2017 02:43 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Instead of changing the default, I think that we should take this >> occasion to rename PQencryptPassword to something like >> PQhashPassword(), and extend it with a method

Re: [HACKERS] Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner

On 2017-03-07 09:36:51 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > FWIW, +1 on improving matters here. > > Andres Freund wrote: > > > The best I can come up so far is a toplevel target that creates the temp > > install, starts a cluster and then runs the 'installcheck-or-check' > > target on all the

[HACKERS] Preserving param location

Hello, When a query contains parameters, the original param node contains the token location. However, this information is lost when the Const node is generated, this one will only contain position -1 (unknown). FWIW, we do have a use case for this (custom extension that tracks quals

Re: [HACKERS] How to get the 'ctid' from a record type?

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 2:14 PM Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-03-11 04:31:16 +, Eric Ridge wrote: > > Well shoot. That kinda spoils my plans. > > I think you should elaborate on what you're trying to achieve - > otherwise our advice will be affected by the recent,

Re: [HACKERS] [bug fix] dblink leaks unnamed connections

On 03/09/2017 08:31 AM, Joe Conway wrote: > On 03/09/2017 07:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Fujii Masao writes: >>> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki >>> wrote: dblink fails to close the unnamed connection as follows when a

Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)

Corey Huinker writes: > [ 0001.if_endif.v21.diff ] Starting to poke at this... the proposal to add prove checks for psql just to see whether \if respects ON_ERROR_STOP seems like an incredibly expensive way to test a rather minor point. On my machine, "make check" in

Re: [HACKERS] How to get the 'ctid' from a record type?

On 2017-03-11 04:31:16 +, Eric Ridge wrote: > Well shoot. That kinda spoils my plans. I think you should elaborate on what you're trying to achieve - otherwise our advice will be affected by the recent, widely reported, crystal ball scarcity. - Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing

Re: [HACKERS] INSERT INTO arr2(array[1].d, array[2].d)

On 2017-03-11 14:43:55 -0600, Jim Nasby wrote: > Over in [1], I was very surprised to discover $SUBJECT[2]. I looked in the > docs, and they clearly indicate that INSERT accepts "column names". They also say "The column name can be qualified with a subfield name or array subscript, if needed."

Re: [HACKERS] How to get the 'ctid' from a record type?

On 3/10/17 10:31 PM, Eric Ridge wrote: What about this? Is the tuple currently being evaluated (I suppose in the case of a sequential scan) available in the context of a function call? AFAIK that *very* specific case would work, because the executor would be handing you the raw tuple. Not a

[HACKERS] INSERT INTO arr2(array[1].d, array[2].d)

Over in [1], I was very surprised to discover $SUBJECT[2]. I looked in the docs, and they clearly indicate that INSERT accepts "column names". What's the best way to describe this? "column expression"? "field expression"? 1:

Re: [HACKERS] scram and \password

On 03/10/2017 02:43 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: >> Should the \password tool in psql inspect password_encryption and act on it >> being 'scram'? > > Not sure if it is wise to change the default fot this release. > >> I

Re: [HACKERS] Index usage for elem-contained-by-const-range clauses

On 3/10/17 8:29 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: That's cool idea. But I would say more. Sometimes it's useful to transform "intcol between x and y" into "intcol <@ 'x,y'::int4range". btree_gin supports "intcol between x and y" as overlap of "intcol >= x" and "intcol <= y". That is very

[HACKERS] Re: [GSOC 17] Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Mengxing Liu wrote: > My name is Mengxing Liu. I am interested in the project "Eliminate > O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable > transactions”. After discussing with Kevin off-list, I think it's > time to post

Re: [HACKERS] Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner

On 3/11/17 2:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Jim Nasby writes: It's actually a lot harder to mess up providing a git repo link than manually submitting patches to the mailing list. Yeah, we've heard that proposal before. We're still not doing it though. Insisting on patches

Re: [HACKERS] Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner

Jim Nasby writes: > It's actually a lot harder to mess up providing a git repo link than > manually submitting patches to the mailing list. Yeah, we've heard that proposal before. We're still not doing it though. Insisting on patches being actually submitted to the

Re: [HACKERS] Explicit subtransactions for PL/Tcl

Pavel Stehule writes: > I'll mark this patch as ready for commiter I've pushed this after mostly-cosmetic cleanup. One thing I changed that's not cosmetic is to put MemoryContextSwitchTo(oldcontext); after the BeginInternalSubTransaction call. I see there was

Re: [HACKERS] Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner

On 2017-03-11 12:05:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > I believe the core problem is that contrib/test_decoding's regresscheck > > and isolationcheck targets each want to use ./tmp_check as their > > --temp-instance. make has no reason to believe it shouldn't run those > > two sub-jobs in

[HACKERS] proposal - Default namespaces for XPath expressions (PostgreSQL 11)

Hi This proposal is followup of implementation of XMLTABLE. Lot of XML documents has assigned document namespace. http://x.y;>10 For these XML document any search path must use schema "http://x.y;. This is not too intuitive, and from XMLTABLE usage is not too user friendly, because the default

Re: [HACKERS] Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner

On 3/10/17 6:06 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 3/10/17 19:00, Jim Nasby wrote: Maybe instead of having the commitfest app try and divine patches from the list it should be able to send patches to the list from a specified git repo/branch. Anyone that provides that info would have tests run

Re: [HACKERS] SQL/JSON in PostgreSQL

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 09/03/17 19:50, Peter van Hardenberg wrote: > > Anecdotally, we just stored dates as strings and used a convention (key > > ends in "_at", I believe) to interpret them. The lack of support for > > dates in

Re: [HACKERS] Need a builtin way to run all tests faster manner

I wrote: > I believe the core problem is that contrib/test_decoding's regresscheck > and isolationcheck targets each want to use ./tmp_check as their > --temp-instance. make has no reason to believe it shouldn't run those > two sub-jobs in parallel, but when it does, we get two postmasters trying

Re: [HACKERS] make check-world output

Alvaro Herrera writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> What about just reverting 2f227656076a? > That works for me too, if we think we no longer need that level of > detail. A general issue with this sort of messaging is that when things are working more or less normally, you'd

Re: [HACKERS] background sessions

2017-03-09 14:52 GMT+01:00 Peter Eisentraut : > On 3/8/17 14:22, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > 1. will be background session process closed automatically when parent > > process is closed? > > If the communications queue goes away the process will eventually die. >

Re: [HACKERS] make check-world output

Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > Jeff Janes wrote: > >> There was some recent discussion about making "make check-world" faster. > >> I'm all for that, but how about making it quieter? On both machines I've > >> run it on (CentOS6.8 and Ubuntu 16.04.2), it

Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed

2017-03-10 15:45 GMT+01:00 Alexander Korotkov : > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Peter Eisentraut < > peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> On 2/24/17 16:32, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> > set EXTENDED_DESCRIBE_SORT size_desc >> > \dt+ >> > \l+ >> >

Re: [HACKERS] Explicit subtransactions for PL/Tcl

2017-03-10 20:31 GMT+01:00 Victor Wagner : > On Thu, 9 Mar 2017 12:04:31 +0100 > Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > > > Now test demonstrate how errors uncaught on the Tcl level interact > > > with postgresql error system. > > > > > > > you can catch the

Re: [HACKERS] Speedup twophase transactions

Hi David and Michael, > It would be great to get this thread closed out after 14 months and many > commits. > > PFA, latest patch which addresses Michael's comments. twophase.c: In function ‘PrepareRedoAdd’: > twophase.c:2539:20: warning: variable ‘gxact’ set but not used >