Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting

2017-03-31 5:32 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com>: > On 30 March 2017 at 19:36, Arthur Zakirov wrote: >> >> The last point is about the tutorial. As Tom pointed it is not useful when >> the tutorial doesn't execute. It happens because there is not "custom"

Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size

Hello, On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Kuntal Ghosh wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Beena Emerson > wrote: > > On 30 Mar 2017 15:10, "Kuntal Ghosh" wrote: > > > I do not think a generalised function

Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Beena Emerson wrote: > On 30 Mar 2017 15:10, "Kuntal Ghosh" wrote: >> 03-modify-tools.patch - Makes XLogSegSize into a variable, currently set >> as >> XLOG_SEG_SIZE and modifies the tools to fetch the size

Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > On 03/02/2017 03:10 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> There is a lot of mumbo-jumbo in the patch to create the exact same >> index definition as the original one being reindexed, and that's a >> huge maintenance burden for

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding on standby

On 31 March 2017 at 12:49, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 31 March 2017 at 01:16, Andres Freund wrote: >> The comment and code don't quite square to me - it's far from obvious >> that LogStandbySnapshot does something like that. I'd even say it's a >> bad

Re: [HACKERS] New CORRESPONDING clause design

Hi 2017-03-30 21:55 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule : > > > 2017-03-30 21:43 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane : > >> Pavel Stehule writes: >> > Is following use case defined in standard? >> >> > postgres=# SELECT 0 AS x1, 1 AS a, 0 AS x2, 2 AS b,

Re: [HACKERS] Other formats in pset like markdown, rst, mediawiki

2017-03-30 21:53 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule : > > > 2017-03-29 20:11 GMT+02:00 Jan Michálek : > >> >> >> 2017-03-27 19:41 GMT+02:00 Jan Michálek : >> >>> >>> >>> 2017-03-23 17:26 GMT+01:00 Pierre Ducroquet

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] A better way to expand hash indexes.

Thanks, I have tried to fix all of the comments. On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Mithun Cy wrote: >> Thanks Robert, I have tried to fix the comments given as below. > > Thanks. > > Since

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] reorder tablespaces in basebackup tar stream for backup_label

At Fri, 31 Mar 2017 13:37:38 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size

Hello, Thanks for testing my patch. On 30 Mar 2017 15:10, "Kuntal Ghosh" wrote: On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 1:06 AM, Beena Emerson wrote: > On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: >> >> At

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug in Physical Replication Slots (at least 9.5)?

Thank you having a look on this. # I removed -bugs in CC:. At Fri, 31 Mar 2017 13:40:00 +1100, Venkata B Nagothi wrote in > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI < >

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Reduce src/test/recovery verbosity

On 31 March 2017 at 04:29, Stephen Frost wrote: > Unless people wish to object, I'll use Michael's patch to remove > --verbose from the top level tomorrow. Sounds good. Maybe add To get more detailed output from tests set PROVE_FLAGS='--verbose' or examine the detailed

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

Hi hackers, Thanks very much to Rafia for testing, and to Andres for his copious review feedback. Here's a new version. Changes: 1. Keep all the backing files that are part of a BufFileSet in subdirectories, as suggested by Andres. Now, instead of that unpopular logic for scanning ranges of

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw IMPORT SCHEMA and partitioned tables

On 2017/03/31 13:46, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Amit Langote > wrote: >> + >> +For partitioned tables, partitions are automatically excluded from the >> +schema data imported. Only the definition of partitioned tables is >>

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding on standby

On 31 March 2017 at 01:16, Andres Freund wrote: >> @@ -9633,6 +9643,12 @@ xlog_redo(XLogReaderState *record) >> SetTransactionIdLimit(checkPoint.oldestXid, >> checkPoint.oldestXidDB); >> >> /* >> + * There can be no concurrent writers

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw IMPORT SCHEMA and partitioned tables

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > + > +For partitioned tables, partitions are automatically excluded from the > +schema data imported. Only the definition of partitioned tables is > included > +to give access to the full data set

Re: [HACKERS] strange parallel query behavior after OOM crashes

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 5:43 AM, Neha Khatri wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:29 AM, Kuntal Ghosh > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 2:05 AM, Kuntal Ghosh >> wrote: >> > >> > 1. Put an Assert(0) in

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw IMPORT SCHEMA and partitioned tables

On 2017/03/31 13:23, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> Users like things that are friendly, and we are most likely going to >> piss them off when using postgres_fdw if they need to list manually >> each parent table

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] reorder tablespaces in basebackup tar stream for backup_label

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:06 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: > I don't think that using psql to run BASE_BACKUP command is good > approach. That's basically what pg_basebackup is made for, and it makes sure that some sanity checks and measures happen. > Instead, IMO you basically

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw IMPORT SCHEMA and partitioned tables

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Users like things that are friendly, and we are most likely going to > piss them off when using postgres_fdw if they need to list manually > each parent table from the IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA command. > >>

Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning vs. information_schema

On 2017/01/26 3:19, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: >> On 1/18/17 2:32 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> Unless we can find something official, I suppose we should just >>> display BASE TABLE in that case as we do in other

Re: [HACKERS] Something broken around FDW connection close

At Fri, 31 Mar 2017 12:32:39 +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote in > On 2017/03/31 8:28, David Rowley wrote: .. > > create server test_server foreign data wrapper postgres_fdw options > > (host 'localhost', port '5432',

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding on standby

On 31 March 2017 at 01:16, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-03-29 08:01:34 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote: >> On 28 March 2017 at 23:22, Andres Freund wrote: >> >> >> --- a/doc/src/sgml/protocol.sgml >> >> +++ b/doc/src/sgml/protocol.sgml >> >> @@ -2034,6 +2034,8

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] few fts functions for jsonb

On 31 March 2017 at 00:01, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > I have just noticed as I was writing/testing the non-existent docs for > this patch that it doesn't supply variants of to_tsvector that take a > regconfig as the first argument. Is there a reason for that? Why >

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

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Rafia Sabih wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Thomas Munro > wrote: >> >> On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Thomas Munro >> wrote: >> > But... what you said

Re: [HACKERS] Something broken around FDW connection close

On 2017/03/31 8:28, David Rowley wrote: create table t (a int, b int); insert into t1 select x/100,x/100 from generate_series(1,10) x; create extension if not exists postgres_fdw; create server test_server foreign data wrapper postgres_fdw options (host 'localhost', port '5432', dbname

Re: [HACKERS] Variable substitution in psql backtick expansion

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 2:33 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Awhile back in the discussion about the \if feature for psql, > I'd pointed out that you shouldn't really need very much in > the way of boolean-expression evaluation smarts, because you > ought to be able to use a backtick

Re: [HACKERS] release notes for v10

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 06:23:04PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > Hi, > > One of the things we'll need to do to get 10beta1 out the door is have > a set of release notes. I spoke with Bruce Momjian today at PGCONF.US > and he told me that he has set aside time during April to write them > and will

Re: [HACKERS] identity columns

On 3/29/17, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 3/24/17 05:29, Vitaly Burovoy wrote: >> It would be great if "DROP IDENTITY IF EXISTS" is in the current patch >> since we don't have any disagreements about "DROP IDENTITY" behavior >> and easiness of implementation of

Re: [HACKERS] sequence data type

On 3/30/17, Vitaly Burovoy wrote: > On 3/29/17, Vitaly Burovoy wrote: >> On 3/29/17, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Vitaly Burovoy >>> wrote: I think

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug in Physical Replication Slots (at least 9.5)?

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI < horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > Hello, > > At Mon, 13 Mar 2017 11:06:00 +1100, Venkata B Nagothi > wrote in gmail.com> > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 9:36

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] A better way to expand hash indexes.

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Mithun Cy wrote: > Thanks Robert, I have tried to fix the comments given as below. Thanks. Since this changes the on-disk format of hash indexes in an incompatible way, I think it should bump HASH_VERSION. (Hopefully that doesn't

Re: [HACKERS] sequence data type

On 3/30/17, Vitaly Burovoy wrote: > On 3/29/17, Vitaly Burovoy wrote: >> On 3/29/17, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Vitaly Burovoy >>> wrote: I think

Re: [HACKERS] Supporting huge pages on Windows

From: Amit Kapila [mailto:amit.kapil...@gmail.com] > The latest patch looks good to me apart from one Debug message, so I have > marked it as Ready For Committer. Thank you so much! > + ereport(DEBUG1, > + (errmsg("disabling huge pages"))); > > I think this should be similar to what we display

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting

On 30 March 2017 at 19:36, Arthur Zakirov wrote: > > The last point is about the tutorial. As Tom pointed it is not useful when the tutorial doesn't execute. It happens because there is not "custom" type in subscripting.sql. I'm confused. Maybe I'm missing something,

[HACKERS] tuple-routing and constraint violation error message, revisited

Hi, Last message regarding this was by Robert on the original partitioning thread: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoZjGzSM5WwnyapFaw3GxnDLWh7pm8Xiz8_QWQnUQy%3DSCA%40mail.gmail.com Summary is: We decided in f1b4c771ea7 [1] that passing the original slot (one containing the tuple

Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions

> > I agree that we can make skip list a general data structure. But > > can we use the fixed-level skip list as a Plan B? Or a quick attempt > > before the general data structure ? > > Because I am not familiar with shared memory structure and tricks > > used in it, and I cannot estimate how

Re: [HACKERS] Somebody has not thought through subscription locking considerations

On 30/03/17 07:25, Tom Lane wrote: > I noticed this failure report: > https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=dangomushi=2017-03-29%2019%3A45%3A27 > > in which we find > > *** > /home/buildfarm/data/buildroot/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/test/regress/expected/updatable_views.out >

Re: [HACKERS] strange parallel query behavior after OOM crashes

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:29 AM, Kuntal Ghosh wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 2:05 AM, Kuntal Ghosh > wrote: > > > > 1. Put an Assert(0) in ParallelQueryMain(), start server and execute > > any parallel query. > > In

[HACKERS] Something broken around FDW connection close

create table t (a int, b int); insert into t1 select x/100,x/100 from generate_series(1,10) x; create extension if not exists postgres_fdw; create server test_server foreign data wrapper postgres_fdw options (host 'localhost', port '5432', dbname 'postgres'); create foreign table ft_t (a

[HACKERS] release notes for v10

Hi, One of the things we'll need to do to get 10beta1 out the door is have a set of release notes. I spoke with Bruce Momjian today at PGCONF.US and he told me that he has set aside time during April to write them and will begin working on it once we reach feature freeze. I think this is good,

[HACKERS] End of CommitFest + Feature Freeze Delayed To April 7th

Hi, We had a brief stand-up meeting today at PGCONF.US to discuss the proposal to delay the end of the CommitFest and feature freeze. Those present include 9 members of the pgsql-release team (including Peter Eisentraut and myself as members of the RMT) and David Steele as the current CommitFest

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] few fts functions for jsonb

On 29 March 2017 at 16:19, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 29 March 2017 at 18:28, Andrew Dunstan >> wrote: >> >> These patches seem fundamentally OK. But I'm still not happy with the >> naming etc. > > I've changed names for all functions and

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication existing data copy

(At the moment using these patches for tests:) 0001-Reserve-global-xmin-for-create-slot-snasphot-export.patch + 0002-Don-t-use-on-disk-snapshots-for-snapshot-export-in-l.patch+ 0003-Prevent-snapshot-builder-xmin-from-going-backwards.patch +

Re: [HACKERS] strange parallel query behavior after OOM crashes

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 2:05 AM, Kuntal Ghosh wrote: > > 1. Put an Assert(0) in ParallelQueryMain(), start server and execute > any parallel query. > In LaunchParallelWorkers, you can see >nworkers = n nworkers_launched = n (n>0) > But, all the workers will

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

30.03.2017 19:49, Robert Haas: On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Teodor Sigaev wrote: I had a look on patch and played with it, seems, it looks fine. I splitted it to two patches: core changes (+bloom index fix) and btree itself. All docs are left in first patch - I'm too

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding on standby

On 2017-03-30 19:40:08 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 30 March 2017 at 18:16, Andres Freund wrote: > > >> /* > >> * Each page of XLOG file has a header like this: > >> */ > >> -#define XLOG_PAGE_MAGIC 0xD097 /* can be used as WAL version > >> indicator */ > >>

[HACKERS] REFERENCES privilege should not be symmetric (was Re: [GENERAL] Postgres Permissions Article)

Paul Jungwirth writes: >> Also I don't understand why you wrote “You need the permission on both >> tables”: Only the owner of a table can add constraints to it > Ah, this piece was really helpful for me in making it click. Thanks so > much! I added a couple new

Re: [HACKERS] strange parallel query behavior after OOM crashes

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:32 AM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Tomas Vondra > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> While doing some benchmarking, I've ran into a fairly strange issue with OOM >> breaking

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Reduce src/test/recovery verbosity

Tom, all, * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > I'd be fine with removing --verbose globally, as your patch does, but > > there was some argument that we then would have long 'quiet' periods. > > I haven't had a chance to go test if that's really

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Default monitoring roles

I wrote: > Simon Riggs writes: >> Weird. make check-world just skipped that directory. I guess for Dave also. > If you just did check-world, it probably didn't build contrib modules that > don't have tests, because the "check" target wouldn't do anything without > tests to

Re: [HACKERS] New CORRESPONDING clause design

2017-03-30 21:43 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane : > Pavel Stehule writes: > > Is following use case defined in standard? > > > postgres=# SELECT 0 AS x1, 1 AS a, 0 AS x2, 2 AS b, 0 AS x3, -1 AS x3 > >UNION ALL CORRESPONDING BY(a,b) SELECT 4 AS b, 0 AS

Re: [HACKERS] Other formats in pset like markdown, rst, mediawiki

2017-03-29 20:11 GMT+02:00 Jan Michálek : > > > 2017-03-27 19:41 GMT+02:00 Jan Michálek : > >> >> >> 2017-03-23 17:26 GMT+01:00 Pierre Ducroquet : >> >>> The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:

Re: [HACKERS] New CORRESPONDING clause design

Pavel Stehule writes: > Is following use case defined in standard? > postgres=# SELECT 0 AS x1, 1 AS a, 0 AS x2, 2 AS b, 0 AS x3, -1 AS x3 >UNION ALL CORRESPONDING BY(a,b) SELECT 4 AS b, 0 AS x4, 3 AS a, > 0 AS x6, -1 AS x6 >UNION ALL

Re: [HACKERS] Monitoring roles patch

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 30 March 2017 at 18:29, Simon Riggs wrote: > >> Moving to commit this over the next hour. Last chance... > > Done. Great work Dave, thanks everybody. Thanks Simon. -- Dave Page Blog:

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

Hi Robert, > Has anybody done some testing of this patch with the WAL consistency > checker? Like, create some tables with indexes that have INCLUDE > columns, set up a standby, enable consistency checking, pound the > master, and see if the standby bails? I've decided to run such a test. It

Re: [HACKERS] New CORRESPONDING clause design

Hi 2017-03-30 13:11 GMT+02:00 Surafel Temesgen : > hi > > Thank you very much for your help . > here is the patch fix that issue as you suggest > The crash is fixed I did a rebase + few more regress tests. Is following use case defined in standard? postgres=# SELECT 0

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Default monitoring roles

Simon Riggs writes: > On 30 March 2017 at 19:31, Erik Rijkers wrote: >> The buildfarm is showing red (the same errors that I get...): >> pgrowlocks.c: In function ‘pgrowlocks’: >> pgrowlocks.c:105:65: error: expected ‘)’ before ‘;’ token >>

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

On 2017-03-30 18:26:05 +0300, Teodor Sigaev wrote: > Any objection from reviewers to push both patches? > diff --git a/contrib/bloom/blutils.c b/contrib/bloom/blutils.c > index f2eda67..59029b9 100644 > --- a/contrib/bloom/blutils.c > +++ b/contrib/bloom/blutils.c > @@ -120,6 +120,7 @@

Re: [HACKERS] strange parallel query behavior after OOM crashes

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > Hi, > > While doing some benchmarking, I've ran into a fairly strange issue with OOM > breaking LaunchParallelWorkers() after the restart. What I see happening is > this: > > 1) a query is executed, and at the

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding on standby

On 30 March 2017 at 18:16, Andres Freund wrote: >> /* >> * Each page of XLOG file has a header like this: >> */ >> -#define XLOG_PAGE_MAGIC 0xD097 /* can be used as WAL version >> indicator */ >> +#define XLOG_PAGE_MAGIC 0xD100 /* can be used as WAL version

[HACKERS] strange parallel query behavior after OOM crashes

Hi, While doing some benchmarking, I've ran into a fairly strange issue with OOM breaking LaunchParallelWorkers() after the restart. What I see happening is this: 1) a query is executed, and at the end of LaunchParallelWorkers we get nworkers=8 nworkers_launched=8 2) the query does a

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] A better way to expand hash indexes.

Thanks Robert, I have tried to fix the comments given as below. On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > I think that the macros in hash.h need some more work: > > - Pretty much any time you use the argument of a macro, you need to > parenthesize it in the

Re: [HACKERS] Monitoring roles patch

On 30 March 2017 at 18:29, Simon Riggs wrote: > Moving to commit this over the next hour. Last chance... Done. Great work Dave, thanks everybody. -- Simon Riggshttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training &

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq

Vaishnavi Prabakaran wrote: > Hmm, With batch mode, after sending COPY command to server(and server > started processing the query and goes into COPY state) , client does not > immediately read the result , but it keeps sending other queries to the > server. By this time, server already

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Logical replication support for initial data copy

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:59 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Logical replication support for initial data copy + case T_SQLCmd: + if (MyDatabaseId == InvalidOid) + ereport(ERROR, + (errmsg("not connected to database"))); This error message doesn't seem to follow the error message

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 04:04:58PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 04:56:16PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 04:43:58PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > > > I don't think it makes

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting

On 29.03.2017 20:14, Arthur Zakirov wrote: I wanted to implement subscripting for ltree or hstore extensions. Subscripting for ltree looks more interesting. Especially with slicing. But I haven't done it yet. I hope that I will implement it tomorrow. ltree - I've implemented fetching

[HACKERS] Variable substitution in psql backtick expansion

Awhile back in the discussion about the \if feature for psql, I'd pointed out that you shouldn't really need very much in the way of boolean-expression evaluation smarts, because you ought to be able to use a backtick shell escape: \if `expr :foo \> :bar` \echo :foo is

Re: [HACKERS] Monitoring roles patch

On 29 March 2017 at 21:42, Dave Page wrote: > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> >> Dave's currently hacking on a new patch based on our discussion, so I'd >> suggest waiting another hour or so anyway until he's done. >> >> Might be a

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding on standby

On 2017-03-29 08:01:34 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 28 March 2017 at 23:22, Andres Freund wrote: > > >> --- a/doc/src/sgml/protocol.sgml > >> +++ b/doc/src/sgml/protocol.sgml > >> @@ -2034,6 +2034,8 @@ The commands accepted in walsender mode are: > >> > >>

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding on standby

> @@ -9633,6 +9643,12 @@ xlog_redo(XLogReaderState *record) > SetTransactionIdLimit(checkPoint.oldestXid, > checkPoint.oldestXidDB); > > /* > + * There can be no concurrent writers to oldestCatalogXmin > during > + * recovery, so no need to

Re: [HACKERS] Use \if ... \elif ... \else ... \endif to simplify alternative in psql scripting.

Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-03-30 16:59:39 +, Tom Lane wrote: >> Support \if ... \elif ... \else ... \endif in psql scripting. > Could we use this to simplify maintenance of some of the larger > alternative output files? Worth thinking about, for sure.

[HACKERS] Use \if ... \elif ... \else ... \endif to simplify alternative in psql scripting.

On 2017-03-30 16:59:39 +, Tom Lane wrote: > Support \if ... \elif ... \else ... \endif in psql scripting. Could we use this to simplify maintenance of some of the larger alternative output files? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your

Re: [HACKERS] Schedule and Release Management Team for PG10

On 03/30/2017 10:59 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Tom Lane > wrote: > > Robert Haas > > writes: > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Bruce Momjian

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

Fabien COELHO writes: >> If it actually is impossible to give pgbench equivalent behavior, we'll >> just have to live with the discrepancy, > Yep. >> but ISTM it could probably be made to work. > Even if it could somehow, I do not see it as a useful feature for pgbench.

Re: [HACKERS] delta relations in AFTER triggers

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > One more thought: should this be allowed? > > postgres=# create table mytab (i int) partition by list (i); > CREATE TABLE > postgres=# create table mytab1 partition of mytab for values in (42); > CREATE TABLE

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Teodor Sigaev wrote: > I had a look on patch and played with it, seems, it looks fine. I splitted > it to two patches: core changes (+bloom index fix) and btree itself. All > docs are left in first patch - I'm too lazy to rewrite documentation

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow vacuums to report oldestxmin

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 1:06 AM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 2:26 AM, Masahiko Sawada

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

Hello Tom, pgbench (well, at least if I succeed in getting boolean expressions and setting variables, which is just a maybe), but this kind of if in the middle of expression does not make much sense for a pgbench script where "if" must be evaluated at execution time, not parse time. Well,

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

Hi Teodor, > I had a look on patch and played with it, seems, it looks fine. I splitted > it to two patches: core changes (+bloom index fix) and btree itself. All > docs are left in first patch - I'm too lazy to rewrite documentation which > is changed in second patch. > Any objection from

Re: [HACKERS] PDF build is broken

Hi Peter, On Sun, 2017-03-26 at 15:05 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Fixed.  (Sorry for the late response): Thanks, it builds fine. > But I also suggest that you try out the FOP based builds, > because the jadetex-based builds will probably go away soon. Can you please let me know how I

[HACKERS] Re: [pgsql-students] GSoC 2017 Proposal for "Explicitly support predicate locks in index access methods besides btree"

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Shubham Barai wrote: > * Hash Index > currently, I am trying to understand how the splitting of bucket works. > should we acquire predicate lock on every page from an old and new bucket in > case there is a predicate lock on a page of

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-03-30 16:43:41 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote: >> Looks like OID conflict to me.. Please try rebased set. > > Pavan, Alvaro, everyone: I know you guys are working very hard on this, > but I think at this point it's

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

> > This proposal was here already - maybe two years ago. The psql command parser doesn't allow any complex syntax - more - the more parameters in one psql commands is hard to remember, hard to read. >>> >>> Could you please provide a link to this discussion. Probably

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] A better way to expand hash indexes.

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Mithun Cy wrote: > Thanks, Amit for a detailed review. I think that the macros in hash.h need some more work: - Pretty much any time you use the argument of a macro, you need to parenthesize it in the macro definition to avoid

[HACKERS] Re: [pgsql-students] GSoC 2017 Proposal for "Explicitly support predicate locks in index access methods besides btree"

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Shubham Barai wrote: > My name is Shubham Barai and I am a final year student at Maharashtra > Institute of Technology, Pune, India. I am very interested in contributing > Postgresql this year through GSoC project. Welcome! Sorry I

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

Fabien COELHO writes: >> [...] Aside from cosmetic changes, I've made it behave reasonably for >> cases where \if is used on portions of a query, for instance > A small issue I see is that I was planning to add such an if syntax to > pgbench (well, at least if I succeed in

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

Hi, On 2017-03-30 16:43:41 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote: > Looks like OID conflict to me.. Please try rebased set. Pavan, Alvaro, everyone: I know you guys are working very hard on this, but I think at this point it's too late to commit this for v10. This is patch that's affecting the on-disk

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

I had a look on patch and played with it, seems, it looks fine. I splitted it to two patches: core changes (+bloom index fix) and btree itself. All docs are left in first patch - I'm too lazy to rewrite documentation which is changed in second patch. Any objection from reviewers to push both

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

- IDENTITY_P IF_P ILIKE IMMEDIATE IMMUTABLE IMPLICIT_P IMPORT_P IN_P + IDENTITY_P IF_P ILIKE IMMEDIATE IMMUTABLE IMPLICIT_P IMPORT_P IN_P INCLUDE I think your syntax would read no worse, possibly even better, if you just used the existing INCLUDING keyword. It was a discussion in

Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 11:17 PM, Mengxing Liu wrote: > Thanks, I've updated the proposal. Just one issue: > I agree that we can make skip list a general data structure. But > can we use the fixed-level skip list as a Plan B? Or a quick attempt > before the

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

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > 2017-03-27 13:59 GMT+02:00 Alexander Korotkov : > >> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 6:06 PM, Pavel Stehule >> wrote: >> >>> 2017-03-10 16:00 GMT+01:00 Alexander

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Reduce src/test/recovery verbosity

Stephen Frost writes: > I'd be fine with removing --verbose globally, as your patch does, but > there was some argument that we then would have long 'quiet' periods. > I haven't had a chance to go test if that's really the case yet though. I've been running it like this

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] reorder tablespaces in basebackup tar stream for backup_label

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Hello, > > At Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:23:42 +0200, Michael Banck > wrote in <149077.18436.14.ca...@credativ.de> >> Hi, >> >> Am Mittwoch, den 29.03.2017, 15:22 +0900 schrieb

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] A better way to expand hash indexes.

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > I think approach B is incorrect. Suppose we have 1536 buckets and > hash values 2048, 2049, 4096, 4097, 6144, 6145, 8192, and 8193. If I > understand correctly, each of these values should be mapped either to > bucket

Re: [HACKERS] Schedule and Release Management Team for PG10

Robert Haas wrote: > - Alvaro proposes allowing more time next time, but not to change the > dates for this time. FWIW I didn't realize that the NY conference was ongoing, so count me for postponing the end of the current CF. -- Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/

Re: [HACKERS] Schedule and Release Management Team for PG10

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> I propose we go for a week delay in closing the commit fest, and we > >> decide right now. Ideally

Re: [HACKERS] Schedule and Release Management Team for PG10

On 30/03/17 16:54, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: > >> - Alvaro proposes allowing more time next time, but not to change the >> dates for this time. > > FWIW I didn't realize that the NY conference was ongoing, so count me > for postponing the end of the current CF. > +1, the

Re: [HACKERS] Schedule and Release Management Team for PG10

* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> I propose we go for a week delay in closing the commit fest, and we > >> decide right now. Ideally I like to to see delay in

  1   2   >