Hello Christian,
Currently, `bytea` does not have any bitwise logical operations yet.
This issue came up in an old thread from 2006 [1], but nobody seemed to
have picked this issue so far.
I remember this one because I needed them for checksuming set of rows.
There is a whole set of missing
(2018/01/12 10:41), Thomas Munro wrote:
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
Now, if you're still super-concerned about this breaking something, we
could commit it only to master, where it will have 9 months to bake
before it gets released. I think that's overly conservative,
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 8:06 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Amul,
>
> * amul sul (sula...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> Agree, updated in the attached patch. Patch 0001 also includes your
>> previous review comment[1] and typo correction suggested by Alvaro[2].
>
> Looks like this needs to be rebased (though
Hi, here's a new patch.
This one makes some changes to the criteria for which functions to
include; namely filtering out trigger functions and those that take or
return values of type "internal"; and including aggregate and window
functions. Some of the other checks could be removed as they were
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 09:37:43PM -0500, Corey Huinker wrote:
> A few months ago, I was researching ways for formalizing calling functions
> on one postgres instance from another. RPC, basically. In doing so, I
> stumbled across an obscure part of the the SQL Standard called ROUTINE
> MAPPING, whi
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 03:55:04PM +1100, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> > Before posting the patch, first I did the same, upon further study
> > I didn't find any scenario where the value is not present in
> > conn->connhost[conn->whichhost].hos
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 03:55:04PM +1100, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> Before posting the patch, first I did the same, upon further study
> I didn't find any scenario where the value is not present in
> conn->connhost[conn->whichhost].host and present in conn->pghost.
>
> If user provides "host" as con
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:37:22AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > I have redone my set of previous tests and can confirm that PQhost is
> > behaving as I would expect it should, and those results are the same as
> > yours.
>
> if (c
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So define it as an ordered-set aggregate, and just ignore the question
>> of whether you need to sort the input (which is something that we leave
>> to the aggregate function to do anyway). The syntax would be a little
>>
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:37:22AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I have redone my set of previous tests and can confirm that PQhost is
> behaving as I would expect it should, and those results are the same as
> yours.
if (conn->connhost != NULL &&
- conn->connhost[conn->whichhost].type
David,
On 2018/01/12 12:30, David Rowley wrote:
> Can you also perform a self-review of the patch? Some of the things
> I'm picking up are leftovers from a previous version of the patch. We
> might never get through this review if you keep leaving those around!
Sorry, I will look more closely bef
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> IIRC the patches that makes the cleanup scan skip has a problem
> pointed by Peter[1], that is that we stash an XI
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:01 PM, Thomas Munro
> wrote:
>> [ the data isn't session lifetime ]
>>
>> So I agree with Tom's suggestion:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Perhaps serialize the contents into an array in DS
Magnus,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> >> I’ve moved this to the next CF, but since this no longer applies cleanly
> >> I’ve
> >> reset it to Waiting f
On 12 January 2018 at 15:27, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2018/01/11 19:23, David Rowley wrote:
>> ERROR: operator 531 is not a member of opfamily 1976
>
> You'll be able to see that the error no longer appears with the attached
> updated set of patches, but I'm now seeing that the resulting plan wi
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:01 PM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> [ the data isn't session lifetime ]
>
> So I agree with Tom's suggestion:
>
> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Perhaps serialize the contents into an array in DSM, then rebuild a hash
>> table from that in the worker. Rober
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Esteban Zimanyi writes:
>> How to tell PostgreSQL that my final function also needs a parameter? I am
>> working on PostgreSQL 10.1. I know that according to the documentation
>> direct parameters are only allowed for ordered-set aggregates, but
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 9:17 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Great, thanks, I'll mark it as Ready For Committer then.
>
> Robert, since you were on this thread and the patch is mostly yours
> anyway, did you want to commit it? I'm happy to do so also, either way.
Feel free.
--
Robert Haas
Enterpris
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 05:43:02PM +0100, Christoph Dreis wrote:
> Hey,
>
> please find a patch attached that fixes duplicated "the" occurrences in the
> codebase.
>
> As this is my first patch, please let me know in case I did something wrong.
Patch applied in git head. Thanks.
--
Bruce Mo
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 04:10:35PM +1100, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 12:15 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> Hm. Any users of psql's PROMPT would be equally confused, and this can
>> actually lead to more confusion from the user prospective I think than
>> just pg_stat_wal_receiv
David, all,
* David CARLIER (devne...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > IIUC, what this code actually does is reseed itself from /dev/urandom
> > every so often and work from a PRNG in between. That's not a layer that
> > we need, because the code on top is already designed to cope with the
> > foibles of /d
A few months ago, I was researching ways for formalizing calling functions
on one postgres instance from another. RPC, basically. In doing so, I
stumbled across an obscure part of the the SQL Standard called ROUTINE
MAPPING, which is exactly what I'm looking for.
The syntax specified is, roughly:
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Anthony Bykov wrote:
>> Please, find a new version of the patch in attachments to this
>> message.
Hi again Anthony,
I wonder why make check passes for me on my Mac, but when Travis CI
(Ubuntu Trusty on amd64) runs it, it fails like this:
test jsonb_plperl
Tom,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > Updated (combined) patch attached for review. I went through and looked
> > again to make sure there weren't any cases of making an unaligned
> > pointer to a struct and didn't see any, and I added some comments to
> > _bt_r
Thomas,
* Thomas Munro (thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 8:19 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > This patch adds a new default role called 'pg_access_server_files' which
> > allows an administrator to GRANT to a non-superuser role the ability to
> > access server-side file
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:43:40AM +0900, Tatsuro Yamada wrote:
> Thanks guys! :)
>
> I also surprised that there is no complaint from extension creators.
> I suppose that if possible, it would be better to create a unit test
> for the hook function to avoid the same bug because there is no contri
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> While the patch contains, as I said before, an excellent set of how-to
> directions explaining how to use the new parallel sort facilities in
> tuplesort.c, there seems to be no such thing for logtape.c, and as a
> result I find it a bit unclea
On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 8:19 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> This patch adds a new default role called 'pg_access_server_files' which
> allows an administrator to GRANT to a non-superuser role the ability to
> access server-side files through PostgreSQL (as the user the database is
> runn
Greetings Jing,
* Jing Wang (jingwang...@gmail.com) wrote:
> I have rebased the patch on the latest version.
Thanks! Looks like there's still more work to be done here, and
unfortunately this ended up on a new thread somehow from the prior one.
I've added this newer thread to the CF app too.
>
On 01/11/18 11:30, Chapman Flack wrote:
> And indeed, my starting message in this thread was that, even in my
> recent (e35dba475a440f73dccf9ed1fd61e3abc6ee61db) build, make check
> *succeeds*, and for all I can tell, that test *is* executed (it shows
> up in the log, and if I re-run it with digit
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 4:23 AM, Arthur Zakirov
wrote:
> I've attached new version of the patch. It is a little bit simpler now than
> the previous one.
> The patch doesn't handle backslashes now, since there was a commit which
> fixes quoted-substring handling recently.
> Anyway I'm not sure th
On 2018/01/12 2:02, Tom Lane wrote:
Thomas Munro writes:
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:16 AM, Tatsuro Yamada
wrote:
I found a variable (queryEnv) which should be added in
ExplainOneQuery_hook because if it is missing, hook function
can't call ExplainOnePlan.
Yeah, I think you're right. That'
On 2018/01/11 21:46, Michael Paquier wrote:
I'm surprised we haven't heard any complaints sooner if there are
advisors using that hook[1] and expecting to be able to forward to
ExplainOnePlan(), but I suppose it would nearly always works to call
ExplainOnePlan() with NULL as queryEnv. It'd curre
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
>> Now, if you're still super-concerned about this breaking something, we
>> could commit it only to master, where it will have 9 months to bake
>> before it gets released. I think that's overly conservative, but I
>> think it's still better t
On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> I am sending updated patch with some basic doc
Hi Pavel,
I am not sure what the status of this patch is, but FYI:
startup.c: In function ‘main’:
startup.c:284:3: error: too few arguments to function ‘listAllDbs’
success = listAllDbs(NUL
I've been troubleshooting an issue with slow pg_dump times on postgres 9.6.6. I
believe something changed between 9.5.10 and 9.6.6 that has made dumps
significantly slower for databases with a large number of relations. I posted
this in irc and someone suggested that I should post this here. I'm
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:42:38AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
>> guc.c already holds a find_option()
>> which can be used to retrieve the flags of a parameter. What about using
>> that and filtering by GUC_LIST_INPUT? This requires exposing the
>> function, and I am not sure
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Jing Wang wrote:
> I have rebased the patch on the latest version.
Hi Jing,
According to my testing robot this fails make check-world (or
presumably cd src/bin/pg_dump ; make check), here:
t/001_basic.pl . ok
# Failed test 'binary_upgrade: dumps COMMENT
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> Attached is an updated patch series, where the first patch fixes this by
> removing the reset of estimatedclauses (and tweaking the comment).
Hi Tomas,
FYI, from the annoying robot department:
ref/create_statistics.sgml:170: parser error : O
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> Attached is a rebased patch set. Álvaro, as you have introduced most
>> of the problems with 4464303 & friends dated of 2015 when you
>> introduced get_object_address(), could yo
On 2018/01/12 1:54, Tom Lane wrote:
Tatsuro Yamada writes:
The declaration of estimate_path_cost_size uses baserel, but
the actual definition uses foreignrel. It would be better to sync.
Yeah, the join_conds parameter's been renamed at some point too :-(
Fixed.
regard
On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Konstantin Knizhnik (k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru) wrote:
>> Updated version of the patch is attached.
>
> This patch appears to apply with just a bit of fuzz and make check
> passes, so I'm not sure why this is currently marked as 'Waiting fo
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 12:40 AM, Anthony Bykov wrote:
> Hello,
> fixed the issues:
> 1. Rising errors when invalid object being transformed.
> 2. We don't rise the exception when transforming range(3) only in
> python 2. In third one it is an error.
>
> Please, find the 4-th version of the patch i
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 6:24 AM, Catalin Iacob wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 10:09 PM, Thomas Munro
> wrote:
>>> On 11/30/17 23:35, Thomas Munro wrote:
Hmm. Yeah, it does, but apparently it's not so transparent. So if we
mention that we'd better indicate in the same paragraph that yo
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> That leaves the uses in rowtypes.c. Those were introduced as a
> portability fix by commit 4cbb646334b. I'm curious why these are
> necessary. The Datums they operate come from heap_deform_tuple(), which
> gets them from fetchatt(), which does run all pass-by-value va
On 11 January 2018 at 19:41, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> Two, what to do when the memory limit is reached. With the old
> accounting, this was easy, because we'd decide for each subtransaction
> independently whether to spill it to disk, when it has reached its 4096
> limit. Now, we are looking a
Stephen Frost writes:
> Updated (combined) patch attached for review. I went through and looked
> again to make sure there weren't any cases of making an unaligned
> pointer to a struct and didn't see any, and I added some comments to
> _bt_restore_page().
Looks OK from here.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Thomas Munro <
thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 7:36 PM, Haribabu Kommi
> wrote:
>
> > +OUT plans int8,
> >
> > Addition of this column is good to find out how many time the plan is
> > generated
> > for the same query. But I am
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 4:55 PM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran <
vaishnaviprabaka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Michael Paquier <
> michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran
>> wrote:
>> > Thanks for the suggestion and, OK I w
Esteban Zimanyi writes:
> How to tell PostgreSQL that my final function also needs a parameter? I am
> working on PostgreSQL 10.1. I know that according to the documentation
> direct parameters are only allowed for ordered-set aggregates, but I would
> also need a direct parameter for "normal" agg
On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> Do you have any suggestion as to how we should transmit the blacklist to
>>> parallel workers?
>>
>> How about storing them in the a dshash table instead of dynahash?
>> Similar to how we
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 08:51:27PM +0100, Esteban Zimanyi wrote:
> I am creating a user-defined aggregate function that needs an additional
> parameter. More precisely it is a cumulative (aka window) minimum that
> takes as second parameter a time interval defining the window. Since the
> aggregate
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> There's a lot here I haven't grokked yet, but I'm running out of
> mental energy so I think I'll send this for now and work on this some
> more when time permits, hopefully tomorrow.
Looking at the logtape changes:
While the patch contains, a
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:44 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> A third option here is to specifically recognize that
>> compute_parallel_worker() returned a value based on the table storage
>> param max_workers, and for that reason alone no "insufficient memory
>> per participant" decrementing/vetoing sho
On 1/9/18 00:17, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> * When a type narrower than Datum is stored in a Datum, we place it in the
>> * low-order bits and are careful that the DatumGetXXX macro for it discards
>> * the unused high-order bits (as opposed to, say, assuming they are zero).
>> * This is needed
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 3:25 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:06 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> It might make sense to have the "minimum memory per participant" value
>> come from a GUC, rather than be hard coded (it's currently hard-coded
>> to 32MB).
>
>> What do you think
Greetings Tom, Robert, Ildar, all,
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
> That said, since it's not aligned, regardless of the what craziness the
> compiler might try to pull, we probably shouldn't go casting it
> to something that later hackers might think will be aligned, but we
> should
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:06 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> It might make sense to have the "minimum memory per participant" value
> come from a GUC, rather than be hard coded (it's currently hard-coded
> to 32MB).
> What do you think of that idea?
A third option here is to specifically recognize
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think the force_parallel_mode thing is too ugly to live. I'm not
> sure that forcing low memory in workers is a thing we need to have,
> but if we do, then we'll have to invent some other way to have it.
It might make sense to have the "mi
This was discussed upthread and the solution found was "objects need to
be rebuilt, indexes need to be reindexed". The point of Alexander's
query was to find affected objects that need such treatment. Teodor
explicitly disregarded any change in pg_upgrade because the database
you're upgrading *f
I am creating a user-defined aggregate function that needs an additional
parameter. More precisely it is a cumulative (aka window) minimum that
takes as second parameter a time interval defining the window. Since the
aggregate function operates on my user-defined data types I have conveyed a
dummy
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:29 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > What we've done in the past for comparable situations is to make the
> > change in a new major version and teach pg_upgrade to detect and report
> > the need for changes --- in this case, it might do something like crea
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:42 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I share your general feelings on all of this, but I really don't know
>>> what to do about it. Which of these alternatives is the least worst,
>>> all things considered?
>>
>> Let's g
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> But I think we've probably beaten this topic to death ...
Yep.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:07 AM, Amit Khandekar wrote:
> In the first paragraph of my explanation, I was explaining why two
> Transition capture states does not look like a good idea to me :
Oh, sorry. I didn't read what you wrote carefully enough, I guess.
I see your points. I think that ther
On 12/22/17 23:57, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> PART 1: adding logical_work_mem memory limit (0001)
> ---
>
> Currently, limiting the amount of memory consumed by logical decoding is
> tricky (or you might say impossible) for several reasons:
I would like
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > This was discussed upthread and the solution found was "objects need to
> > be rebuilt, indexes need to be reindexed". The point of Alexander's
> > query was to find affected objects that need such treatment. Teodor
> > explicitly disregarded any cha
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Right, but in the case of stored arrays, we've decided that it *is*
>> our problem (as indeed it must be, because the user has no tools with
>> which they could fix a representation change for stored data). The
>> question
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't think I missed the point at all -- this is the exact same set
>> of issues that arise with respect to functions. Indeed, I gave an
>> example of a function that needs to be updated if a column of the
>> input type is altered. In the cas
Hackers,
Currently, `bytea` does not have any bitwise logical operations yet.
This issue came up in an old thread from 2006 [1], but nobody seemed to
have picked this issue so far.
Being in the need for this myself, I copied the bit vector's bitwise
logical operations and converted them to bytea.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I certainly hadn't been thinking about that. I didn't see any
>> issues in my testing (where I created a table with a btree index and
>> insert'd a bunch of records into and then killed the server, forcing WAL
>> replay and then checked that the
On 1/10/18 22:24, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 09:45:56PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 1/8/18 23:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Should we just remove it? Apparently, it was never functional to begin
>> with. Otherwise, we'd have to write a second query to return the val
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think you missed the point. The question is whether the existence of a
>> subscripting function means that we need to treat the subscriptable type
>> as physically containing the subscript result type.
> I don't think I
On 2018-01-11 13:26:27 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wonder whether there is a way to get alignment traps on Intel-type
> hardware. It's getting less and less likely that most hackers are
> developing on anything else, so that we don't see gotchas of this
> type until code hits the buildfarm (and eve
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think you missed the point. The question is whether the existence of a
> subscripting function means that we need to treat the subscriptable type
> as physically containing the subscript result type. For example, if the
> subscript result type
Stephen Frost writes:
> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> I'm on board with Stephen's changes, except in _bt_restore_page.
>> The issue there is that the "from" pointer isn't necessarily adequately
>> aligned to be considered an IndexTuple pointer; that's why we're doing
>> the memcpy danc
Tom,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > I'll leave the patch status in 'Needs review' since there's more
> > changes, but hopefully someone can take a look and we can move this
> > along, seems like a pretty small and reasonable improvement.
>
> I'm on board with
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 7:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> * The complaint I had about the "container" terminology isn't just
>> terminology. Rather, there is a bunch of knowledge in the system that
>> some data types can be found embedded in other types; for one example,
>> see f
Stephen Frost writes:
> I'll leave the patch status in 'Needs review' since there's more
> changes, but hopefully someone can take a look and we can move this
> along, seems like a pretty small and reasonable improvement.
I'm on board with Stephen's changes, except in _bt_restore_page.
The issue
Hi,
On 2018-01-11 20:21:11 +0300, Marina Polyakova wrote:
> Hello, hackers! I got a permanent failure of master (commit
> ca454b9bd34c75995eda4d07c9858f7c22890c2b) make check on Solaris 10.
Did this use to work? If so, could you check whether it worked before
69c3936a1499b772a749ae629fc59b2d72722
Marina Polyakova writes:
> Hello, hackers! I got a permanent failure of master (commit
> ca454b9bd34c75995eda4d07c9858f7c22890c2b) make check on Solaris 10.
> Regression output and diffs are attached.
Hm, buildfarm member protosciurus is running a similar configuration
without problems. Lookin
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 7:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> * The complaint I had about the "container" terminology isn't just
> terminology. Rather, there is a bunch of knowledge in the system that
> some data types can be found embedded in other types; for one example,
> see find_composite_type_dependen
Robert, all,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > +1. I was also once confused with these macros. I think this is a
> > good cleanup. On a quick look, I don't see any problem with your
> > changes.
>
> One difference between th
Hello, hackers! I got a permanent failure of master (commit
ca454b9bd34c75995eda4d07c9858f7c22890c2b) make check on Solaris 10.
Regression output and diffs are attached.
I used the following commands:
./configure CC="ccache gcc" CFLAGS="-m64 -I/opt/csw/include"
LDFLAGS="-L/opt/csw/lib/sparcv9
Thomas Munro writes:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:16 AM, Tatsuro Yamada
> wrote:
>> I found a variable (queryEnv) which should be added in
>> ExplainOneQuery_hook because if it is missing, hook function
>> can't call ExplainOnePlan.
> Yeah, I think you're right. That's an oversight in 18ce3a4a.
Tatsuro Yamada writes:
> The declaration of estimate_path_cost_size uses baserel, but
> the actual definition uses foreignrel. It would be better to sync.
Yeah, the join_conds parameter's been renamed at some point too :-(
Fixed.
regards, tom lane
Hello -
Attached is a proposed patch to fix a bug in the ECPG preprocessor that
generates application code that core dumps at run-time. When the input pgc
code uses a record struct for returning query results and uses an indicator
struct that has fewer fields than the record struct, the generated
On 01/11/2018 11:23 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
>>
>>> The behaviour seems to have changed in 9.6:
>>
>> Indeed, https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-6.html
>> has the following entry:
>>
>>
Jeremy Finzel wrote:
> Hello -
>
> I have found that in leveraging the parser code to decode DDL SQL, it is
> very easy to get which type of general command is being issued with
> CreateCommandTag(parsetree). However, is there a way (or a starting point)
> to identify the sub-command as well i.e.
Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
>
> > The behaviour seems to have changed in 9.6:
>
> Indeed, https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-6.html
> has the following entry:
>
> * Improve the accuracy of the ln(), log(), exp(), a
10/01/2018 21:42, Fabien COELHO пишет:
>
> Hmm. I do not think that we should want a shared seed value. The seed
> should be different for each call so as to avoid undesired
> correlations. If wanted, correlation could be obtained by using an
> explicit identical seed.
>
> ISTM that the best way
HelloYou can start with functions ATPrepCmd and ATExecCmd in src/backend/commands/tablecmds.cAlso note, one alter table statement can have multiple different actions. Regards, Sergei11.01.2018, 18:56, "Jeremy Finzel" :Hello -I have found that in leveraging the parser code to decode DDL SQL, it is v
On 01/11/2018 07:44 AM, Sergei Kornilov wrote:
> Hello
> I am surprised, but i can confirm error on versions prior 9.6: on 9.5, 9.4,
> 9.3 same error. On 9.6 and 10 query works correctly
One of my tests (in fact, the one where I first noticed) was a build
from git a couple days ago at e35dba475a4
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 8:52 AM, Diego Silva e Silva
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The first function call is 10 times slower than the other calls in the
> same session. Is it possible to shorten this long time on the first call?
> For example. Call my function for once, this call returns at 70ms on the
>
Diego Silva e Silva writes:
> The first function call is 10 times slower than the other calls in the same
> session. Is it possible to shorten this long time on the first call?
> For example. Call my function for once, this call returns at 70ms on the
> next call, the return is at 7ms.
The first
Hello -
I have found that in leveraging the parser code to decode DDL SQL, it is
very easy to get which type of general command is being issued with
CreateCommandTag(parsetree). However, is there a way (or a starting point)
to identify the sub-command as well i.e. ENABLE TRIGGER, ADD FOREIGN KEY,
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Was there any real discussion of whether we could get away with that
>> in the back branches? My opinion is no. It's not even clear to me
>> that this is acceptable in HEAD --- isn't it going to create huge
>> problems for pg_upgrade?
> This was discu
Hello Fabien,
10/01/2018 21:42, Fabien COELHO пишет:
Should we probably add some infrastructure for optional arguments?
>>>
>>> You can look at the handling of "CASE" which may or may not have an
>>> "ELSE" clause.
>>>
>>> I'd suggest you use a new negative argument with the special meaning
Hello,
On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 03:05:25PM +0300, Maksim Milyutin wrote:
> Hi, hackers!
>
>
> I want to propose the patch that allows to define custom signals and their
> handlers on extension side.
>
I've looked a little bit on the patch. The patch applyes and regression tests
pass.
I have a
Hello,
The first function call is 10 times slower than the other calls in the same
session. Is it possible to shorten this long time on the first call?
For example. Call my function for once, this call returns at 70ms on the
next call, the return is at 7ms.
thanks.
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
