On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 08:33:52PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 03:44:06PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> That's the last known issue with the patch. I doubt anyone will elect to
>> pick
>> it up in the next 8 hours, but I think it's in very good shape for v14 :)
>
> I
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 03:44:06PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > I mean to literally use vac_analyze_option_list for reindex and cluster as
> > well. Please, check attached 0007. Now, vacuum, reindex and cluster filter
> > options list and reject everything that is not supported, so it seems
> >
On 10/4/20 21:38, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2020-04-10 12:20:01 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
- We're only talking about writing a handful of tar files, and that's
in the context of a full-database backup, which is a much
heavier-weight operation than a query.
- There is not really any state
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 19:36, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Yeah, their stuff is nice. Another nice thing is that git has the
> possibility to scan as well for custom scripts as long as they respect
> the naming convention, like having a custom script called "git-foo",
> that can be called as "git
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 05:50:56PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2020-Apr-11, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I *would* like to find a way to address the proliferation of binaries,
>> because I've got other things I'd like to do that would require
>> creating still more of them, and until we come up
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 02:48:05PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> I don't agree with any of that. Combining the manifest validation with
> checksum validation halves the IO. It allows to offload some of the
> expense of verifying page level checksums from the primary.
>
> And all of the operations
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 04:44:34PM -0400, David Steele wrote:
> On 4/10/20 4:41 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> It's only the default in v13.. Surely when we connect to a v12 or
>> earlier system we should just keep working and accept that we don't get
>> a manifest as part of that.
>
> Yeah, OK.
Hi,
I've looked into this a bit, and at first I thought that maybe the issue
is in how cost_incremental_sort picks the EC members. It simply does this:
EquivalenceMember *member = (EquivalenceMember *)
linitial(key->pk_eclass->ec_members);
so I was speculating that maybe there
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 04:17:21PM +0100, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 02:38:27PM +0100, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 04:14:04PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > I see some basic problems with the patch. The way it tries to compute
> > > WAL usage for
Masahiko Sawada writes:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 at 23:16, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>>> Therefore, the band-aid fix seems to be to set the lowest priority to
>>> very large number at the beginning of SyncRepGetSyncStandbysPriority().
>> I think we can use max_wal_senders.
> Sorry, that's not
On 2020-Apr-11, Robert Haas wrote:
> I *would* like to find a way to address the proliferation of binaries,
> because I've got other things I'd like to do that would require
> creating still more of them, and until we come up with a scalable
> solution that makes everybody happy, there's going to
Adding -hackers, originally forgotten.
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:26:39PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Thanks! I'll investigate.
>
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 02:19:52PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > frequent crash looks like:
> >
> > #0 __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at
Hi,
On 2020-04-11 15:53:11 -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 2:01 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > - If not, is there a way in that framework to know if the array expr
> > > has stayed the same through multiple evaluations of the expression
> > > tree (i.e., so you could expand
James Coleman writes:
>>> It seems like this might be somewhat related to the currently-moribund
>>> patch to allow caching of the values of stable subexpressions from
>>> one execution to the next.
> Is this the patch [1] you're thinking of?
> [1]:
>
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 3:57 PM James Coleman wrote:
> ..
> > It seems like this might be somewhat related to the currently-moribund
> > patch to allow caching of the values of stable subexpressions from
> > one execution to the next. If we had that infrastructure you could
> > imagine extending
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 3:38 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Wouldn't there be state like a S3/ssh/https/... connection? And perhaps
> a 'backup_id' in the backup metadata DB that'd one would want to update
> at the end?
Good question. I don't know that there would be but, uh, maybe? It's
not obvious
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 5:24 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Meh. I would argue that that's an actively BAD idea. The use-cases
> are entirely different, the implementation is going to be quite a lot
> different, the relevant options are going to be quite a lot different.
> It will not be better for
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 3:33 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2020-04-11 08:58:46 -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> >> - Does the execExpr/execExprInterp framework allow a scalar array op
> >> to get an already expanded array (unless I'm missing something we
> >> can't easily
Hi,
On 2020-04-11 15:33:09 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> For the most part it seems like this is asking the question at the wrong
> level. It's not execExpr's job to determine the form of either values
> coming in from "outside" (Vars from table rows, or Params from elsewhere)
> or the results of
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 2:01 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> Tom, CCing you because of expanded datum question at bottom.
>
>
> On 2020-04-11 08:58:46 -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> > - Does the execExpr/execExprInterp framework allow a scalar array op
> > to get an already expanded array
>
>
> Term 'relation': A sequence is internally a table with one row - right?
> Shall we extend the list of concrete relations by 'sequence'? Or is this
> not necessary because 'table' is already there?
>
I wrote one for sequence, it was a bit math-y for Alvaro's taste, so we're
going to try
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2020-04-11 08:58:46 -0400, James Coleman wrote:
>> - Does the execExpr/execExprInterp framework allow a scalar array op
>> to get an already expanded array (unless I'm missing something we
>> can't easily lookup a given index in a flattened array)?
> Well, I'm not
Hi,
Tom, CCing you because of expanded datum question at bottom.
On 2020-04-11 08:58:46 -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> - Does the execExpr/execExprInterp framework allow a scalar array op
> to get an already expanded array (unless I'm missing something we
> can't easily lookup a given index in
Mark Dilger writes:
> I'm less concerned with which perlcritic features you enable than I am with
> accidentally submitting perl which looks fine to me but breaks the build. I
> mostly use perl from within TAP tests, which I run locally before submission
> to the project. Can your changes be
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 08:23:32AM +, asaba.takan...@fujitsu.com wrote:
Hello,
I was off the point.
I want to organize the discussion and suggest feature design.
There are two opinions.
1. COMMIT should not take a long time because errors are more likely to occur.
I don't think it's a
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 4/11/20 12:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Is there a way to modify the test so that it only complains when
>> the final return is missing and there are other return(s) with values?
>> That would seem like a more narrowly tailored check.
> Not AFAICS:
>
> On Apr 11, 2020, at 9:47 AM, Andrew Dunstan
> wrote:
>
>
> On 4/11/20 12:28 PM, Mark Dilger wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 11, 2020, at 9:13 AM, Andrew Dunstan
>>> wrote:
>> Hi Andrew. I appreciate your interest and efforts here. I hope you don't
>> mind a few questions/observations about
On 2020-Apr-11, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 9:36 AM Paul A Jungwirth
> wrote:
> > Btw I'm working on typanalyze + selectivity, and it seems like the
> > test suite doesn't run those things?
>
> Nevermind, I just had to add `analyze numrange_test` to
>
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 4/11/20 12:30 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> In summary, among those warnings, I see non-negative value in "Code before
>> warnings are enabled" only. While we're changing this, I propose removing
>> Subroutines::RequireFinalReturn. Implicit return values were not a
On 4/11/20 12:28 PM, Mark Dilger wrote:
>
>> On Apr 11, 2020, at 9:13 AM, Andrew Dunstan
>> wrote:
> Hi Andrew. I appreciate your interest and efforts here. I hope you don't
> mind a few questions/observations about this effort:
Not at all.
>
>> The
>> last one fixes the mixture of
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 9:36 AM Paul A Jungwirth
wrote:
> Btw I'm working on typanalyze + selectivity, and it seems like the
> test suite doesn't run those things?
Nevermind, I just had to add `analyze numrange_test` to
src/test/regress/sql/rangetypes.sql. :-) Do you want a separate patch
for
> On Apr 11, 2020, at 9:13 AM, Andrew Dunstan
> wrote:
Hi Andrew. I appreciate your interest and efforts here. I hope you don't mind
a few questions/observations about this effort:
>
> The
> last one fixes the mixture of high and low precedence boolean operators,
I did not spot
On 10/4/20 15:49, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 6:44 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
Good point, but if there are multiple APIs, it makes shell script
flexibility even more useful.
[snip]
One thing I do think would be realistic would be to invent a set of
tools that are perform certain
On 4/11/20 12:30 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 11:44:11AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> 39 Always unpack @_ first
> Requiring a "my @args = @_" does not improve this code:
>
> sub CreateSolution
> {
> ...
> if ($visualStudioVersion eq '12.00')
> {
>
Noah Misch writes:
> In summary, among those warnings, I see non-negative value in "Code before
> warnings are enabled" only. While we're changing this, I propose removing
> Subroutines::RequireFinalReturn.
If it's possible to turn off just that warning, then +several.
It's routinely caused
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> How about a compile-time option to turn all the warnings in resowner.c
> into errors? This could be enabled automatically by --enable-cassert,
> similar to other defines that that option enables.
[ itch... ] Those calls occur post-commit; throwing an error there
is
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 9:37 PM Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 8:17 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Would you like to send a consolidated patch that includes Euler's
> > suggestion and Justin's patch (by making changes for points we
> > discussed.)? I think we can keep the point
Short version:
In what I'm currently working on I had a few questions about arrays
and the execExpr/execExprInterp framework that didn't seem obviously
answered in the code or README.
- Does the execExpr/execExprInterp framework allow a scalar array op
to get an already expanded array (unless
On 2020-Apr-05, Jürgen Purtz wrote:
a) Some rearrangements of the sequence of terms to meet alphabetical order.
Thanks, will get this pushed.
b) --> in
two cases. Or should it be a ?
Ah, yeah, those should be linkend.
Term 'relation': A sequence is internally a table with one row -
so 11. 4. 2020 v 11:04 odesílatel Erik Rijkers napsal:
> On 2020-04-11 10:21, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > so 11. 4. 2020 v 8:54 odesílatel Pavel Stehule
> >
> > napsal:
>
> > [psql-status-target.patch]
>
> Hi Pavel,
>
> This looks interesting, and I built an instance with the patch to try
> it,
On 2020-04-11 10:21, Pavel Stehule wrote:
so 11. 4. 2020 v 8:54 odesílatel Pavel Stehule
napsal:
[psql-status-target.patch]
Hi Pavel,
This looks interesting, and I built an instance with the patch to try
it, but I can't figure out how to use it.
Can you perhaps give a few or even just
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:09:59AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I just fixed a relcache leak that I accidentally introduced (5a1d0c9925).
> Because it was a TAP test involving replication workers, you don't see the
> usual warning anywhere unless you specifically check the log files manually.
so 11. 4. 2020 v 8:54 odesílatel Pavel Stehule
napsal:
> Hi
>
> Now, the content of redirect output has two parts
>
> 1. tabular output
> 2. cmd tags
>
> There is a problem with command tags, because it is specific kind of
> information and can be nice if can be redirected to stdout every time
I just fixed a relcache leak that I accidentally introduced
(5a1d0c9925). Because it was a TAP test involving replication workers,
you don't see the usual warning anywhere unless you specifically check
the log files manually.
How about a compile-time option to turn all the warnings in
On 2020-04-11 06:30, Noah Misch wrote:
In summary, among those warnings, I see non-negative value in "Code before
warnings are enabled" only.
Now that you put it like this, that was also my impression when I first
introduced the level 5 warnings and then decided to stop there.
--
Peter
Hi
Now, the content of redirect output has two parts
1. tabular output
2. cmd tags
There is a problem with command tags, because it is specific kind of
information and can be nice if can be redirected to stdout every time like
\h output. There can be new psql variable like REDIRECTED_OUTPUT
46 matches
Mail list logo
