doc: expand description of how non-SELECT queries are processed
The previous description of how the executor processes non-SELECT
queries was very dense, causing lack of clarity. This expanded text
spells it out more simply.
Reported-by: [email protected]
Discussion:
https://postgr.es
doc: expand description of how non-SELECT queries are processed
The previous description of how the executor processes non-SELECT
queries was very dense, causing lack of clarity. This expanded text
spells it out more simply.
Reported-by: [email protected]
Discussion:
https://postgr.es
doc: expand description of how non-SELECT queries are processed
The previous description of how the executor processes non-SELECT
queries was very dense, causing lack of clarity. This expanded text
spells it out more simply.
Reported-by: [email protected]
Discussion:
https://postgr.es
doc: expand description of how non-SELECT queries are processed
The previous description of how the executor processes non-SELECT
queries was very dense, causing lack of clarity. This expanded text
spells it out more simply.
Reported-by: [email protected]
Discussion:
https://postgr.es
doc: expand description of how non-SELECT queries are processed
The previous description of how the executor processes non-SELECT
queries was very dense, causing lack of clarity. This expanded text
spells it out more simply.
Reported-by: [email protected]
Discussion:
https://postgr.es
doc: expand description of how non-SELECT queries are processed
The previous description of how the executor processes non-SELECT
queries was very dense, causing lack of clarity. This expanded text
spells it out more simply.
Reported-by: [email protected]
Discussion:
https://postgr.es
doc: expand description of how non-SELECT queries are processed
The previous description of how the executor processes non-SELECT
queries was very dense, causing lack of clarity. This expanded text
spells it out more simply.
Reported-by: [email protected]
Discussion:
https://postgr.es
On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 1:09 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Amit Kapila writes:
> > I think I know whats going on here. I have responded to the thread on
> > pgsql-hackers [1].
>
> Ah, yeah, the autovacuum theory fits the facts: chipmunk is pretty
> slow, and it's not failed 100% of the time.
>
I have pu
Fix the test for decoding of two-phase transactions.
Commit 5a3574d7b3 added the test for decoding of two-phase transactions
during the build of a consistent snapshot. The test forgot to skip empty
xacts which can lead to decoding of extra empty transactions due to
background activity by autovacuu
