Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 1:32 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > Hi all, > > If a logical replication worker cannot apply the change on the > subscriber for some reason (e.g., missing table or violating a > constraint, etc.), logical replication stops until the problem is > resolved. Ideally, we

Re: Move pg_attribute.attcompression to earlier in struct for reduced size?

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 02:46:11PM +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote: > Like this. > if (TupleDescAttr(newTupDesc, i)->attisdropped) > isnull[i] = true; > else > tup_values[i] = values[i]; That would work. Your suggestion, as I understood it first, makes the code simpler by not using

Re: Refactor "mutually exclusive options" error reporting code in parse_subscription_options

On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 10:59:37AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > I'm not able to grasp what are the incompatibilities we can have if > the enums are used as bit masks. It will be great if anyone throws > some light on this? 0176753 is one example. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP

Re: Refactor "mutually exclusive options" error reporting code in parse_subscription_options

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:37 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > On 2021-May-24, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 7:04 AM Michael Paquier wrote: > > > What you are writing here and your comment two paragraphs above are > > > inconsistent as you are using an enum here. Please see

Re: Different compression methods for FPI

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 06:31:15PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > I still don't understand why XID consistency has anything to do with > the compression of FPIs. There is nothing preventing the testing of > compression of FPIs, and plese note this argument: >

Re: Re: Parallel scan with SubTransGetTopmostTransaction assert coredump

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:56 PM Pavel Borisov wrote: > > Using a recipe similar to what has been described above in the thread, I > reliably reproduced the bug in many Postgres versions. (v.11, v.13 etc.). > 1. Make & make install > 2. Make check > 3. run SubTransGetTopmostTransaction-rep.sh

Re: Test of a partition with an incomplete detach has a timing issue

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 09:12:40PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > The experiments I did awhile ago are coming back to me now. I tried > a number of variations on this same theme, and none of them closed > the gap entirely. The fundamental problem is that it's possible > for backend A to complete its

Re: Possible pointer var TupleDesc rettupdesc used not initialized (src/backend/optimizer/util/clauses.c)

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 7:21 PM Ranier Vilela wrote: > Em seg., 24 de mai. de 2021 às 22:42, Mark Dilger < > mark.dil...@enterprisedb.com> escreveu: > >> >> >> > On May 24, 2021, at 5:37 PM, Ranier Vilela wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > Possible pointer TupleDesc rettupdesc used not initialized?

Re: Possible pointer var TupleDesc rettupdesc used not initialized (src/backend/optimizer/util/clauses.c)

Em seg., 24 de mai. de 2021 às 22:42, Mark Dilger < mark.dil...@enterprisedb.com> escreveu: > > > > On May 24, 2021, at 5:37 PM, Ranier Vilela wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Possible pointer TupleDesc rettupdesc used not initialized? > > > > if (!isNull) at line 4346 taking a true branch, the

Re: Possible pointer var TupleDesc rettupdesc used not initialized (src/backend/optimizer/util/clauses.c)

> On May 24, 2021, at 5:37 PM, Ranier Vilela wrote: > > Hi, > > Possible pointer TupleDesc rettupdesc used not initialized? > > if (!isNull) at line 4346 taking a true branch, the function > check_sql_fn_retval at line 4448 can use rettupdesc uninitialized. Care to submit a patch? — Mark

Re: Force disable of SSL renegociation in the server

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:09:38AM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > 1.1.0d killed what was left of SSL3_FLAGS_NO_RENEGOTIATE_CIPHERS while keeping > it defined, so there is also very little value in even attempting it there. > > +1 on the patch, LGTM. Thanks, applied. I was having a very hard

Re: Test of a partition with an incomplete detach has a timing issue

Michael Paquier writes: > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 02:07:12PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> Maybe we can change the "cancel" query to something like >> SELECT pg_cancel_backend(pid), somehow_wait_for_detach_to_terminate() FROM >> d3_pid; >> ... where maybe that function can check the "state"

Re: Add PortalDrop in exec_execute_message

Tom Lane писал 2021-05-21 21:23: Yura Sokolov writes: I propose to add PortalDrop at the 'if (completed)' branch of exec_execute_message. This violates our wire protocol specification, which specifically says If successfully created, a named portal object lasts till the end of the

Re: Test of a partition with an incomplete detach has a timing issue

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 02:07:12PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I suppose a fix would imply that the error report waits until after the > "cancel" step is over, but I'm not sure how to do that. > > Maybe we can change the "cancel" query to something like > > SELECT pg_cancel_backend(pid),

RE: Test of a partition with an incomplete detach has a timing issue

On Tuesday, May 25, 2021 3:07 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2021-May-24, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com wrote: > > > Also, I've gotten some logs left. > > * src/test/isolation/output_iso/regression.out > > > > test detach-partition-concurrently-1 ... ok 682 ms > > test

Possible pointer var TupleDesc rettupdesc used not initialized (src/backend/optimizer/util/clauses.c)

Hi, Possible pointer TupleDesc rettupdesc used not initialized? if (!isNull) at line 4346 taking a true branch, the function check_sql_fn_retval at line 4448 can use rettupdesc uninitialized. regards, Ranier Vilela

Re: Testing autovacuum wraparound (including failsafe)

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 12:10 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Since there is the condition "vacrel->num_index_scans == 0" we could > enter the failsafe mode even if the table is less than 4GB, if we > enter lazy_check_wraparound_failsafe() after executing more than one > index scan. Whereas a vacuum

Re: Performance degradation of REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW

On 5/24/21 8:21 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > On 2021-05-24 12:37:18 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote: >> Another option might be changes in the binary layout - 5% change is well >> within the range that could be attributed to this, but it feels very >> hand-wavy and more like an excuse than real

Re: Issue on catalogs.sgml

Guillaume Lelarge writes: > While working on the french translation of the manual, I found that one > column of pg_stats_ext was on the pg_stats columns' list. Here is a quick > patch to fix this. Right you are, and after casting a suspicious eye on the responsible commit, I found another

Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments

I wrote: >> I think we ought to fix this so that OUT-only arguments are ignored >> when calling from SQL not plpgsql. Here's a draft patch for that. The docs probably need some more fiddling, but I think the code is in good shape. (I'm unsure about the JDBC compatibility issue, and would

Re: Performance degradation of REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW

Hi, On 2021-05-24 12:37:18 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote: > Another option might be changes in the binary layout - 5% change is well > within the range that could be attributed to this, but it feels very > hand-wavy and more like an excuse than real analysis. I don't think 5% is likely to be

Re: Test of a partition with an incomplete detach has a timing issue

Alvaro Herrera writes: > On 2021-May-24, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com wrote: >> t >> -step s2detach: <... completed> >> -error in steps s1cancel s2detach: ERROR: canceling statement due to user >> request >> step s1c: COMMIT; >> +step s2detach: <... completed> >> +error in steps

Re: Refactor "mutually exclusive options" error reporting code in parse_subscription_options

On 2021-May-24, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 7:04 AM Michael Paquier wrote: > > What you are writing here and your comment two paragraphs above are > > inconsistent as you are using an enum here. Please see a3dc926 and > > the surrounding discussion for reasons why we've

Re: Test of a partition with an incomplete detach has a timing issue

On 2021-May-24, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com wrote: > Also, I've gotten some logs left. > * src/test/isolation/output_iso/regression.out > > test detach-partition-concurrently-1 ... ok 682 ms > test detach-partition-concurrently-2 ... ok 321 ms > test

Re: Commitfest app vs. pgsql-docs

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:03 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 5/24/21 10:55 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 4:18 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >> > >> On 5/24/21 8:42 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > On 24 May 2021, at 11:47, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Wed,

Re: Python 3.10 breaks regression tests with traceback changes

Anybody had a chance to look at the proposed patch? Honza On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:31 PM Honza Horak wrote: > I missed Tom already started the thread, so just passing the other mail > with a patch proposal here: > > >

Re: rand48 replacement

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: tested, passed Spec compliant: tested, passed Documentation:tested, passed Although the patch looks OK I would like to keep the

Re: Commitfest app vs. pgsql-docs

On 5/24/21 10:55 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 4:18 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> >> On 5/24/21 8:42 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: On 24 May 2021, at 11:47, Magnus Hagander wrote: On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 11:08 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On

Re: Commitfest app vs. pgsql-docs

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 4:18 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > On 5/24/21 8:42 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > >> On 24 May 2021, at 11:47, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 11:08 PM Alvaro Herrera > >> wrote: > >>> On 2021-May-19, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >>> > It's

Re: Removed extra memory allocations from create_list_bounds

> You checked LIST but not HASH (patches 3-4) or RANGE (patch 4-5), right? Yes. I did not check about HASH and RANGE partitioning related patches as the changes are mostly similar to the list partitioning related changes. > Another test is to show the time/memory used by SELECT. That's far more

Re: Commitfest app vs. pgsql-docs

On 5/24/21 8:42 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> On 24 May 2021, at 11:47, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 11:08 PM Alvaro Herrera >> wrote: >>> On 2021-May-19, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >>> It's just a reference after all. So someone supplies a reference to an email

Re: rand48 replacement

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: tested, passed Spec compliant: tested, passed Documentation:tested, passed Although the patch looks OK I would like to keep the status

Re: rand48 replacement

Sorry for a duplicate entry on CF web application

Re: Re: Parallel scan with SubTransGetTopmostTransaction assert coredump

пн, 24 мая 2021 г. в 09:22, Greg Nancarrow : > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 2:50 PM Michael Paquier > wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 12:04:37PM +1000, Greg Nancarrow wrote: > > > Keep cfbot happy, use the PG14 patch as latest. > > > > This stuff is usually very tricky. > > Agreed. That's why

Issue on catalogs.sgml

Hey, While working on the french translation of the manual, I found that one column of pg_stats_ext was on the pg_stats columns' list. Here is a quick patch to fix this. Regards. -- Guillaume. diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml index 8aebc4d12f..1063168646

Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments

Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 5/23/21 8:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Before I spend too much time on it though, I wanted to mention that >> it includes undoing 2453ea142's decision to include OUT arguments >> in pg_proc.proargtypes for procedures (but not for any other kind of >> routine). I thought

Re: rand48 replacement

Hello Aleksander, - better software engineering - similar speed (slightly slower) - better statistical quality - quite small state - soundness Personally, I think your patch is great. Thanks for having a look! Speaking of the speed I believe we should consider the performance

RE: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key

Hi Amit-san, From: Amit Langote Sent: Monday, May 24, 2021 4:27 PM > Hou-san, > > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 10:31 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com > wrote: > > From: Amit Langote > > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 8:23 PM > > > This one seems bit tough. ExecPartitionCheck() uses the generic > > >

Re: rand48 replacement

Hello Andrey, - NOT to invent a new design! Radical version of this argument would be to use de-facto standard and ubiquitous MT19937. Indeed, I started considering this one for this reason, obviously. Though, I suspect, it's not optimal solution to the date. "not optimal" does not

Re: rand48 replacement

Hi Fabien, > To summarize: > - better software engineering > - similar speed (slightly slower) > - better statistical quality > - quite small state > - soundness Personally, I think your patch is great. Speaking of the speed I believe we should consider the performance of the entire

Re: Commitfest app vs. pgsql-docs

> On 24 May 2021, at 11:47, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 11:08 PM Alvaro Herrera > wrote: >> >> On 2021-May-19, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> >>> It's just a reference after all. So someone supplies a reference to an >>> email on an out of the way list. What's the evil that

Re: rand48 replacement

> 24 мая 2021 г., в 15:31, Fabien COELHO написал(а): > > > - NOT to invent a new design! Radical version of this argument would be to use de-facto standard and ubiquitous MT19937. Though, I suspect, it's not optimal solution to the date. Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments

On 5/23/21 8:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: >> I think we ought to fix this so that OUT-only arguments are ignored >> when calling from SQL not plpgsql. > I'm working on a patch to make it act that way. I've got some issues > yet to fix with named arguments (which seem rather undertested

Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 6:07 PM Noah Misch wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 04:38:55PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > [fix to let CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS pass] > > > Barring objections, I will get this pushed early tomorrow. > > prairiedog and wrasse failed a $SUBJECT test after this (commit

Re: rand48 replacement

Hello Tomas, I have given a go at proposing a replacement for rand48. So what is the motivation for replacing rand48? Speed, quality of produced random numbers, features rand48 can't provide, or what? Speed can only be near rand48, see below. Quality (eg no trivial cycles, does not fail

Re: rand48 replacement

Hi, On 5/24/21 12:31 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote: Hello pg-devs, I have given a go at proposing a replacement for rand48. So what is the motivation for replacing rand48? Speed, quality of produced random numbers, features rand48 can't provide, or what? POSIX 1988 (?) rand48 is a LCG PRNG

Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 1:32 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > If a logical replication worker cannot apply the change on the > subscriber for some reason (e.g., missing table or violating a > constraint, etc.), logical replication stops until the problem is > resolved. Ideally, we resolve the

Re: Performance degradation of REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW

On 5/24/21 9:53 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 3:10 AM Tomas Vondra wrote: On 5/21/21 6:43 PM, Andres Freund wrote: Hi, > ... > Attached are the flame graphs for all three cases. The change in master is pretty clearly visible, but I don't see any clear

rand48 replacement

Hello pg-devs, I have given a go at proposing a replacement for rand48. POSIX 1988 (?) rand48 is a LCG PRNG designed to generate 32 bits integers or floats based on a 48 bits state on 16 or 32 bits architectures. LCG cycles on the low bits, which can be quite annoying. Given that we run on

Re: Commitfest app vs. pgsql-docs

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 11:08 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > On 2021-May-19, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > It's just a reference after all. So someone supplies a reference to an > > email on an out of the way list. What's the evil that will occur? Not > > much really AFAICT. Well, if you include

Re: Move pg_attribute.attcompression to earlier in struct for reduced size?

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 2:23 PM Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:32:22AM +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > I think you don't need to initialize tup_values[i] with the > > values[i];, other than that looks fine to me. > > You mean because heap_deform_tuple() does this job, right?

Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY

On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 04:38:55PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: [fix to let CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS pass] > Barring objections, I will get this pushed early tomorrow. prairiedog and wrasse failed a $SUBJECT test after this (commit 8aba932). Also, some non-CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS animals failed a test

Re: Force disable of SSL renegociation in the server

> On 24 May 2021, at 03:29, Michael Paquier wrote: > I got to look at that in details, and the attached would be able to do > the job with OpenSSL 1.0.2 and older versions. The main idea is to > set up SSL3_FLAGS_NO_RENEGOTIATE_CIPHERS once the SSL object is > created when opening the TLS

Re: Move pg_attribute.attcompression to earlier in struct for reduced size?

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:32:22AM +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote: > I think you don't need to initialize tup_values[i] with the > values[i];, other than that looks fine to me. You mean because heap_deform_tuple() does this job, right? Sure. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Logical Replication - behavior of TRUNCATE ... CASCADE

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:22 AM Amit Kapila wrote: > I don't deny that this can allow some additional cases than we allow > today but was just not sure whether users really need it. If we want > to go with such an option then as mentioned earlier, we should > consider another proposal for

Re: [PATCH] Add `truncate` option to subscription commands

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:01 AM Amit Kapila wrote: > > 1) Whether a table the sync worker is trying to truncate is having any > > referencing (foreign key) tables on the subscriber? If yes, whether > > all the referencing tables are present in the list of subscription > > tables (output of

RE: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key

From: Hou, Zhijie/侯 志杰 > Ah, Maybe I found the issue. > Attaching a new patch, please have a try on this patch. Thanks, it has compiled perfectly without any warning. Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa

Re: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key

Hou-san, On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 10:31 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com wrote: > From: Amit Langote > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 8:23 PM > > This one seems bit tough. ExecPartitionCheck() uses the generic expression > > evaluation machinery like a black box, which means execPartition.c can't > >

RE: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key

From: houzj.f...@fujitsu.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2021 3:58 PM > > From: Tsunakawa, Takayuki > Sent: Monday, May 24, 2021 3:34 PM > > > > From: mailto:houzj.f...@fujitsu.com > > > I think this patch can solve the performance

RE: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key

From: Hou, Zhijie/侯 志杰 > It seems a little strange, I have compiled it alone in two different linux > machine > and did > not find such an error. Did you compile it on a windows machine ? On Linux, it produces: gcc -std=gnu99 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wdeclaration-after-s\

Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side

Hi all, If a logical replication worker cannot apply the change on the subscriber for some reason (e.g., missing table or violating a constraint, etc.), logical replication stops until the problem is resolved. Ideally, we resolve the problem on the subscriber (e.g., by creating the missing table

RE: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key

From: Tsunakawa, Takayuki Sent: Monday, May 24, 2021 3:34 PM > > From: houzj.f...@fujitsu.com > > I think this patch can solve the performance degradation of key > > expression after applying the [Save the last partition] patch. > > Besides, this could be a separate patch which can improve some

Re: Performance degradation of REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW

On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 3:10 AM Tomas Vondra wrote: > > On 5/21/21 6:43 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > Hi, > > > > ... > > > >> Attached are the flame graphs for all three cases. The change in master is > >> pretty clearly visible, but I don't see any clear difference between old > >> and > >>

RE: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key

From: houzj.f...@fujitsu.com > I think this patch can solve the performance degradation of key expression > after > applying the [Save the last partition] patch. > Besides, this could be a separate patch which can improve some more cases. > Thoughts ? Thank you for proposing an impressive

Re: Refactor "mutually exclusive options" error reporting code in parse_subscription_options

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 7:04 AM Michael Paquier wrote: > What you are writing here and your comment two paragraphs above are > inconsistent as you are using an enum here. Please see a3dc926 and > the surrounding discussion for reasons why we've been using bitmaps > for option parsing lately.

Remaining references to RecentGlobalXmin

Hi, dc7420c2 has removed RecentGlobalXmin, but there are still references to it in the code, and a set of FIXME references, like this one in autovacuum.c (three in total): /* * Start a transaction so we can access pg_database, and get a snapshot. * We don't have a use for the snapshot itself,

RE: Forget close an open relation in ReorderBufferProcessTXN()

On Monday, May 24, 2021 12:57 PM I wrote: > On Monday, May 24, 2021 12:23 PM Amit Langote > wrote: > > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 12:16 PM osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com > > wrote: > > > When I execute make check-world with v6 additionally, I've gotten > > > another failure. I get this about once in >

Test of a partition with an incomplete detach has a timing issue

Hi During my review of a patch in the community, I've encountered failures of OSS HEAD'S make check-world in a continuous loop. I just repeated make check-world. Accordingly, this should be an existing issue. Make check-world fails once in about 20 times in my env. I'd like to report this. The

Re: Teaching users how they can get the most out of HOT in Postgres 14

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 6:09 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 7:29 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > If this skipping > > behavior badly affects other indexes AMs, this optimization should be > > considered within btree indexes, although we will need a way for index > > AMs to

Re: Move pg_attribute.attcompression to earlier in struct for reduced size?

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 9:39 AM Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 02:19:29PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > During VACUUM FULL reform_and_rewrite_tuple() detoasts the old value if > > it was compressed with a different method, while in > > TopTransactionContext. There's nothing