On Sat, Aug 07, 2021 at 04:44:07PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> As currently implemented those pgstat_get_my_query_id() calls are not
> safe. It's fine during backend startup because MyBEEntry is not set, but
> during shutdown that's not ok, because we never unset MyBEEntry.
>
>
On Sat, Aug 7, 2021 at 4:33 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 6:31 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > When reading the doc of ALTER SUBSCRIPTION I realized that 'refresh
> > options' in the following paragraph is not tagged:
> >
> > ---
> > Additionally, refresh
I wrote:
> ... What surprises me about this is not that
> crash, but that we didn't see fundamental breakage of backref-using
> patterns all over the place. It evidently breaks only in corner
> cases, but I'm not quite sure why the effects are so limited.
Ah-hah, I've sussed it. I'd supposed
Hi,
In the course of [1] I again looked at all pgstat_* callsites and noticed the
new calls to pgstat_get_my_query_id() in elog.c.
As currently implemented those pgstat_get_my_query_id() calls are not
safe. It's fine during backend startup because MyBEEntry is not set, but
during shutdown that's
ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
> Hi hackers,
>
> In the patches for improving the MSVC build process, I noticed a use of
> `map` in void context. This is considered bad form, and has a
> perlcritic policy forbidding it:
>
Hi Tang,
"tanghy.f...@fujitsu.com" writes:
> Hi
>
> Attached a patch to improve the tab completion for backslash commands.
> I think it’s common for some people(I'm one of them) to use full-name
> commands than abbreviation. So it's more convenient if we can add the
> full-name backslash
On Sat, Aug 7, 2021 at 12:43 PM Michael Meskes wrote:
> Again, I didn't know the RMT was expecting anything from me. Yes, I
> knew I needed to spend some time on a technical issues, but that's
> exactly the information I had at the time.
As Andrew mentioned, I sent you an email on the 30th -- a
ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
> Hi Hackers,
>
> The other day I noticed that there's no tab completion after ALTER TABLE
> … ADD, so here's a patch. In addition to COLUMN and all the table
> constraint types, it also completes with the list of unique indexes on
> the table
ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
> Hi hackers,
>
> Here's a patch adding EXECUTE to the list of of commands tab completed
> after the various EXPLAIN variants.
Added to the 2021-09 commitfest: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/34/3279/
- ilmari
On 8/7/21 10:56 AM, Platon Pronko wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> I also find this annoying and would be happy to be rid of it.
>
> Have you tried "\pset format wrapped"? Pavel suggested it, and it
> solved most of the problem for me, for example.
Yes, but it changes the data line
I wrote:
>> Hm. I thought that this might be an old issue, but I'm not seeing the
>> crash in pre-v14 branches. That means it's some bug introduced in
>> the performance improvements I did a few months ago. Open item added.
> git bisect says the trouble started with
>
Hi hackers,
Here's a patch adding EXECUTE to the list of of commands tab completed
after the various EXPLAIN variants.
- ilmari
>From a303b7b2e505d4cdd65a0bd1fdc031488a14 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Dagfinn=20Ilmari=20Manns=C3=A5ker?=
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2021 12:07:24 +0100
On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 7:36 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> Patches that are not being updated regularly have no
> business being part of a CommitFest.
>
As the main issue seems to be "Needs Review" getting punted, the patch
author rightly expects feedback before supplying new patches. If they are
ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
> ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) writes:
>
>> Hi Hackers,
>>
>> I just noticed there's no tab completion for CREATE SCHEMA
>> AUTHORIZATION, nor for anything after CREATE SCHEMA .
>>
>> Please find attached a patch that adds this.
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 8:53 AM Simon Riggs
wrote:
> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
> before. We've been trying hard, but it's overflowing.
>
> Of those, about 50 items have been waiting
On 8/7/21 3:43 PM, Michael Meskes wrote:
>
>> No other committer (certainly nobody on the RMT) knows anything about
>> ecpg. How much longer were you expecting us to wait for a simple
>> status update?
> Where did I say I expect you to wait? How could I even do that given
> that I didn't even
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 3:46 AM kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com <
kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> I will try to remake patches based on the idea.
>
Based upon this comment, and the ongoing discussion about commitfest volume
and complexity, I've moved this to "Waiting on Author".
David J.
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 8:53 AM Simon Riggs
wrote:
> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
> before. We've been trying hard, but it's overflowing.
>
I think one simple change here would be of
> That's simply not true. Andrew Dunstan reached out personally and got
> no response. He then reached out through a backchannel (a direct
> coworker of yours), before finally getting a single terse response
> from you here.
You do know that I did not receive any email from Andrew. After all I
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 02:57:49PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 08:51:57PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > How would this be different from the CFM just rejecting patches? It does not
> > matter if there's an explicit number of patches that we allow to be moved to
> >
On Sat, Aug 7, 2021 at 1:13 AM Michael Meskes wrote:
> I get it that the goal is to release PostgreSQL 14 and I also get it
> that nobody is interested in the reasons for my slow reaction. I even,
> at least to an extend, understand why nobody tried reaching out to me
> directly.
That's simply
Hi!
I also find this annoying and would be happy to be rid of it.
Have you tried "\pset format wrapped"? Pavel suggested it, and it
solved most of the problem for me, for example.
Yes, but it changes the data line output. Ideally, you should be able
to modify these independently.
I
On Sat, Aug 7, 2021 1:36 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 9:57 PM Japin Li wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Hmm yes, it cannot cover all cases. I had somehow misunderstood that
> > > the subscriber knows which relations are associated with which
> > > publications. Given that the subscriber
> On Aug 7, 2021, at 1:35 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 9:57 PM Japin Li wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hmm yes, it cannot cover all cases. I had somehow misunderstood that
>>> the subscriber knows which relations are associated with which
>>> publications. Given that the subscriber
On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 02:18:02PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> It sounds like anything we do here should be part of a larger change to
> make it consistent. So I'm fine with the patch you posted.
As a matter of curiosity, I have checked how it would look to handle
the no-op case for the
On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 2:00 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> Experiment #1:
> As part of this experiment, I have modified the sender to keep the
> local copy of "mq_bytes_read" and "mq_bytes_written" in the local mqh
> handle so that we don't need to frequently read/write cache sensitive
> shared memory
Hi Peter,
> The RMT continues to be concerned about the lack of progress on this
> open item, especially the lack of communication from Michael Meskes,
> the committer of the original patch (commit ad8305a). We are prepared
> to exercise our authority to resolve open items directly. The only
>
On Sat, Aug 7, 2021 at 12:00 AM Zhihong Yu wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 1, 2021 at 11:30 PM Yugo NAGATA wrote:
>
>> Hi hackers,
>>
>> On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 09:24:30 +0900
>> Yugo NAGATA wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 21:22:37 +0530
>> > vignesh C wrote:
>>
>> > > The patch does not apply on
On Sun, Aug 1, 2021 at 11:30 PM Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> Hi hackers,
>
> On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 09:24:30 +0900
> Yugo NAGATA wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 21:22:37 +0530
> > vignesh C wrote:
>
> > > The patch does not apply on Head anymore, could you rebase and post a
> > > patch. I'm changing the
On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 11:49, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
>
> On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 00:13, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 21:17, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 8:53 PM Himanshu Upadhyaya
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Sadhu,
> > > >
> > > >
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 6:31 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> When reading the doc of ALTER SUBSCRIPTION I realized that 'refresh
> options' in the following paragraph is not tagged:
>
> ---
> Additionally, refresh options as described under REFRESH PUBLICATION
> may be specified, except
On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 00:13, Mahendra Singh Thalor
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 21:17, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 8:53 PM Himanshu Upadhyaya
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Sadhu,
> > >
> > > Patch working as expected with shared tables, just one Minor comment
on the patch.
Hi,
On 2021-07-12 17:28:15 +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 8:39 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 12:54 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > Today, again looking at this patch, I don't think doing elog inside
> > spinlock is a good idea. We can either release spinlock
33 matches
Mail list logo
