Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 06/09/2017 07:54 PM, Greg Stark wrote: > On 7 June 2017 at 01:01, Josh Berkus wrote: >> P3: apparently jsonb_to_tsvector with lang parameter isn't immutable? >> This means that it can't be used for indexing: >> >> libdata=# create index bookdata_fts on bookdata using gin (( >>

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 7 June 2017 at 01:01, Josh Berkus wrote: > P3: apparently jsonb_to_tsvector with lang parameter isn't immutable? > This means that it can't be used for indexing: > > libdata=# create index bookdata_fts on bookdata using gin (( > to_tsvector('english',bookdata))); > ERROR:

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 6/8/17 13:15, Josh Berkus wrote: > Well, we *could* provide a system view, as we now do for archiving, and > for the same reasons. Which view are you referring to here? -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training &

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 06/07/2017 06:37 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/7/17 21:19, Josh Berkus wrote: >> The user's first thought is going to be a network issue, or a bug, or >> some other problem, not a missing PK. Yeah, they can find that >> information in the logs, but only if they think to look for it in the

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 06/07/2017 07:01 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 08/06/17 03:50, Josh Berkus wrote: >> On 06/07/2017 06:25 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: >>> On 08/06/17 03:19, Josh Berkus wrote: Peter and Petr: On 06/07/2017 05:24 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/7/17 01:01, Josh Berkus wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 08/06/17 03:50, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 06/07/2017 06:25 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> On 08/06/17 03:19, Josh Berkus wrote: >>> >>> Peter and Petr: >>> >>> On 06/07/2017 05:24 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 6/7/17 01:01, Josh Berkus wrote: > * Having defaults on the various _workers all

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 06/07/2017 06:25 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 08/06/17 03:19, Josh Berkus wrote: >> >> Peter and Petr: >> >> On 06/07/2017 05:24 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> On 6/7/17 01:01, Josh Berkus wrote: * Having defaults on the various _workers all devolve from max_workers is also great.

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 6/7/17 21:19, Josh Berkus wrote: > The user's first thought is going to be a network issue, or a bug, or > some other problem, not a missing PK. Yeah, they can find that > information in the logs, but only if they think to look for it in the > first place, and in some environments (AWS,

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 08/06/17 03:19, Josh Berkus wrote: > > Peter and Petr: > > On 06/07/2017 05:24 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 6/7/17 01:01, Josh Berkus wrote: >>> * Having defaults on the various _workers all devolve from max_workers >>> is also great. >> >> I'm not aware of anything like that happening.

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

Peter and Petr: On 06/07/2017 05:24 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/7/17 01:01, Josh Berkus wrote: >> * Having defaults on the various _workers all devolve from max_workers >> is also great. > > I'm not aware of anything like that happening. > >> P1. On the publishing node, logical

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

Hi, On 07/06/17 07:01, Josh Berkus wrote: > Folks, > > I've put together some demos on PostgreSQL 10beta1. Here's a few > feedback notes based on my experience with it. > [...snip...] > > Problems > > > P1. On the publishing node, logical replication relies on the *implied* >

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 6/7/17 01:01, Josh Berkus wrote: > * Having defaults on the various _workers all devolve from max_workers > is also great. I'm not aware of anything like that happening. > P1. On the publishing node, logical replication relies on the *implied* > correspondence of the application_name and the

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On 2017-06-07 14:29:04 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > > Q1. Why does wal_level default to "replica" and not "logical"? > > The difference of WAL generated is way higher between > archive->hot_standby than

Re: [HACKERS] Notes on testing Postgres 10b1

On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > Q1. Why does wal_level default to "replica" and not "logical"? The difference of WAL generated is way higher between archive->hot_standby than hot_standby->logical. And unlike replica, logical decoding is not something that is