On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:27 PM Euler Taveira wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021, at 1:18 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 4:21 PM Marcos Pegoraro wrote:
>
> No, I´m talking about that configuration you can have on standby servers
> recovery_min_apply_delay = '8h'
>
>
> oh okay,
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 10:04 AM Sadhuprasad Patro wrote:
>
> > > One more thing to consider is that it seems that the planner requires
> > > a condition for the first column of an index before considering an
> > > indexscan plan. See Tom's email [1] in this regard. I think it would
> > > be
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:43 PM Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>
> On 9/20/21, 10:07 PM, "Amul Sul" wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 4:44 AM Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> >> On 9/19/21, 11:07 PM, "Amul Sul" wrote:
> >> > I have one additional concern about the way we update the control
> >> > file, at
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 8:52 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 3:02 AM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> ---
> This patch introduces some new static functions to publicationcmds.c
> but some have function prototypes but some don't. As far as I checked,
>
> ObjectsInPublicationToOids()
>
> > One more thing to consider is that it seems that the planner requires
> > a condition for the first column of an index before considering an
> > indexscan plan. See Tom's email [1] in this regard. I think it would
> > be better to see what kind of work is involved there if you want to
> >
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:03 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> Personally, I think we'd better move the code about changing publication's
> tablelist into AlterPublicationTables and the code about changing
> publication's
> schemalist into AlterPublicationSchemas. It's similar to what the
2021年7月14日 10:56，Ming Li 写道：
Hi Wenjing,
Some suggestions may help:
1) It seems that no test case covers the below scenario: 2 sessions attach
the same gtt, and insert/update/select concurrently. It is better to use
the test framework in src/test/isolation like the code changes in
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 7:33 PM Mark Dilger
wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 22, 2021, at 6:39 AM, Amul Sul wrote:
> >
> > Yes, that is a bit longer, here is the snip from v35-0010 patch
>
> Right, that's longer, and only tests one interaction. The isolation spec I
> posted upthread tests multiple
Hi,
Currently the following messages are shown in server log if bail_out
errors occur in guc_file.l. This leaves the (naive) users with no clue
as to where to look for the exact errors:
errmsg("configuration file \"%s\" contains errors",
errmsg("configuration file \"%s\" contains errors;
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 3:06 AM Jeremy Schneider wrote:
>
> On 9/21/21 20:58, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On 9/20/21 22:14, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> Attached please find the patch which just modifies the current error
> message as proposed by you. I am planning to commit it in a day or two
> unless
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 9:33 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> >
> > How do you suggest changing it?
>
> Personally, I think we'd better move the code about changing publication's
> tablelist into AlterPublicationTables and the code about changing
> publication's
> schemalist into
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 5:04 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 7:00 PM Alexander Lakhin wrote:
> > 07.09.2021 09:05, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 09:00:01AM +0300, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
> > >> The new approach looks very promising. Knowing that the file is
On 9/22/21 10:43 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 7:06 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Ummm ... RC1 was wrapped on Monday. It will go out with the "TO BE ADDED"
>> placeholder for this list. I'm not panicked about time --- we just need
>> to finalize this text by Sunday-ish.
>
> I
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 7:06 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Ummm ... RC1 was wrapped on Monday. It will go out with the "TO BE ADDED"
> placeholder for this list. I'm not panicked about time --- we just need
> to finalize this text by Sunday-ish.
I assumed that the web team had the discretion to keep
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 2:01 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Certainly. But my sentence about "Numerous performance improvements"
>> already mashes down dozens of other it-just-works-better-now
>> performance improvements. Wny call out that one in particular?
> RC 1 is
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 2:01 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Certainly. But my sentence about "Numerous performance improvements"
> already mashes down dozens of other it-just-works-better-now
> performance improvements. Wny call out that one in particular?
RC 1 is supposed to be released in less than 24
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 6:30 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> I thought the point about FDWs was important because actual work (by
>> FDW authors) is needed to make anything happen. The extra parallelism
>> inside plpgsql functions doesn't require user effort, so I don't see
>>
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 6:30 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> "Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> > On 9/22/21 11:15 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:12 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> Numerous performance improvements have been made for parallel queries,
> >>> heavily-concurrent workloads,
> On 22 Sep 2021, at 20:59, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I think we need to be consistent on this. NSS builds and OpenSSL builds
> should act the same, mutatis mutandis.
I 100% agree. Different TLS backends should be able use different truststores
etc but once the server is running they must be
On 9/22/21 12:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
>> On 9/22/21 11:15 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> I have a feeling emergency mode vacuum fits on that list. Not in the
>>> press release, but in the major features list of the release notes.
>
>> Given some recent news I saw
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 8:11 AM Sergei Kornilov wrote:
> > +CHECKPOINT { 'fast' | 'spread'
> > }
>
> Unpaired tag in docs.
>
> That was all I noticed in 0001. Still not sure where is the difference
> between "change NOWAIT to WAIT" and "change NOWAIT to something else
> descriptive".
On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 2:27 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> It's pretty clear from the discussion, I think, that the database OID
> one is going to need rework to be considered.
>
> Regarding the other one:
>
> - The comment in binary_upgrade_set_pg_class_oids() is still not
> accurate. You removed the
On 9/22/21 2:36 PM, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Sat, 2021-09-18 at 14:20 +0200, Cameron Murdoch wrote:
>> Having sslrootcert use the system trust store if
>> ~/.postgresql/root.crt doesn’t exist would seem like a good change.
> Fallback behavior can almost always be exploited given the right
>
On Sat, 2021-09-18 at 14:20 +0200, Cameron Murdoch wrote:
> Having sslrootcert use the system trust store if
> ~/.postgresql/root.crt doesn’t exist would seem like a good change.
Fallback behavior can almost always be exploited given the right
circumstances. IMO, if I've told psql to use a root
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 12:00:07PM -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> On 9/22/21 11:15 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:12 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> "Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> >>> On 9/19/21 12:32 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 01:37:19PM -0400, Tom
>
> No, I´m talking about that configuration you can have on standby servers
> recovery_min_apply_delay = '8h'
>
>
> oh okay, I think this can be useful in some cases where we want to avoid
> data loss similar to its use for physical standby. For example, if the user
> has by mistake truncated the
Some super quick nitpicks; feel free to ignore/apply/laugh off.
...
administrators to deploy their data-backed applications. PostgreSQL
continues to
add innovations on complex data types, including more conveniences for
accessing
JSON and support for noncontiguous ranges of data. This latest
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021, at 1:18 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 4:21 PM Marcos Pegoraro wrote:
>> No, I´m talking about that configuration you can have on standby servers
>> recovery_min_apply_delay = '8h'
>>
>
> oh okay, I think this can be useful in some cases where we want to
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 10:50 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> + if (opt->compression == BACKUP_COMPRESSION_LZ4)
>
> else if
>
> + /* First of all write the frame header to destination buffer. */
> + Assert(CHUNK_SIZE >= LZ4F_HEADER_SIZE_MAX);
> + headerSize = LZ4F_compressBegin(mysink->ctx,
> +
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 10:27 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:08 AM Jeevan Ladhe
> wrote:
> > Yes, you are right here, and I could verify this fact with an experiment.
> > When autoflush is 1, the file gets less compressed i.e. the compressed
> file
> > is of more size than
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> On 9/22/21 11:15 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:12 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Numerous performance improvements have been made for parallel queries,
>>> heavily-concurrent workloads, partitioned tables, logical replication, and
>>> vacuuming.
If you would like I can test the patch you send to me.
Regards
Fabrice
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:02 AM Amit Kapila
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:12 PM Fabrice Chapuis
> wrote:
> >
> > > IIUC, these are called after processing each WAL record so not
> > sure how is it possible in your
"Joe Wildish" writes:
> The main change is a switch to using SPI for expression evaluation. The
> plans are also cached along the same lines as the RI trigger plans.
I really dislike this implementation technique. Aside from the likely
performance hit for existing triggers, I think it opens
On 9/22/21 11:15 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:12 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> "Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
>>> On 9/19/21 12:32 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 01:37:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> We don't yet have a list-of-major-features for the v14
Hello,
Stored procedures can now return data via OUT parameters.
The SQL-standard SEARCH and CYCLE options for common table expressions
have been implemented.
I think that from the application developer point of view very important
feature:
* Allow SQL-language functions and procedures to
On Wed, 2021-09-22 at 10:20 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> This should be added to each level of a function call that represents a
> test. This ensures that when a test fails, the line number points to
> the top-level location of the test_role() call. Otherwise it would
> point to the
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:12 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> "Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> > On 9/19/21 12:32 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> >> On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 01:37:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> We don't yet have a list-of-major-features for the v14 release notes.
> >>> Anybody care to propose
"Jonathan S. Katz" writes:
> On 9/19/21 12:32 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 01:37:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> We don't yet have a list-of-major-features for the v14 release notes.
>>> Anybody care to propose one?
> I can try proposing some wording on this in a bit; I'm
On 2021/09/22 0:16, Fujii Masao wrote:
Thanks for the review! Barring any objection, I will commit the patch.
Pushed. Thanks!
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
> Michael is right. You updated some of the units based on Robert's suggestion
> to use MS, but didn't update all of the corresponding parts of the patch.
> guc.c says that the units are in MS, which means that unqualified values are
> interpretted as such. But postgresql.conf.sample still says
On 9/22/21 10:17 AM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> Updated draft attached. As a reminder, please provide any feedback on
> the press release no later than **Thu, Sep 23, 2021 @ 18:00 UTC**.
I'm sure it helps if I actually attach the draft.
Jonathan
The PostgreSQL Global Development Group today
On 9/21/21 12:09 AM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 10:19:32PM -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>
>> PostgreSQL 14 provides a significant throughput boost on workloads that use
>> many
>> connections, with some benchmarks showing a 2x speedup. This release
>> continues
>> on the
> On Sep 22, 2021, at 6:39 AM, Amul Sul wrote:
>
> Yes, that is a bit longer, here is the snip from v35-0010 patch
Right, that's longer, and only tests one interaction. The isolation spec I
posted upthread tests multiple interactions between the session which uses
cursors and the system
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 6:59 PM Mark Dilger
wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 22, 2021, at 6:14 AM, Amul Sul wrote:
> >
> >> Attached patch v34-0010 adds a test of cursors opened FOR UPDATE
> >> interacting with a system that is set read-only by a different session.
> >> The expected output is worth
> On Sep 22, 2021, at 6:14 AM, Amul Sul wrote:
>
>> Attached patch v34-0010 adds a test of cursors opened FOR UPDATE interacting
>> with a system that is set read-only by a different session. The expected
>> output is worth reviewing to see how this plays out. I don't see anything
>> in
On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 4:34 AM Mark Dilger
wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 16, 2020, at 6:55 AM, amul sul wrote:
> >
> > (2) if the session is idle, we also need the top-level abort
> > record to be written immediately, but can't send an error to the client
> > until the next
> > command is issued
Hello
Thanks, I missed this thread.
> +CHECKPOINT { 'fast' | 'spread'
> }
Unpaired tag in docs.
That was all I noticed in 0001. Still not sure where is the difference between
"change NOWAIT to WAIT" and "change NOWAIT to something else descriptive". But
fine, I can live with WAIT.
>
> oh okay, I think this can be useful in some cases where we want to avoid
> data loss similar to its use for physical standby. For example, if the user
> has by mistake truncated the table (or deleted some required data) on the
> publisher, we can always it from the subscriber if we have such a
Hello Rachel,
On Wed, 22 Sept 2021 at 17:13, Rachel Heaton wrote:
>
> > On 4/23/20 8:04 PM, Gareth Palmer wrote:
> > >
> > > Thank you for the review, attached is v7 of the patch which should
> > > apply correcly to HEAD.
> > >
>
> Hello Gareth,
>
> This patch no longer applies to HEAD, can you
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 1:29 PMAmit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 8:02 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 2:02 AM vignesh C
> wrote:
> > > Attached v30 patch has the fixes for the same.
> >
> > Thanks for updating the patches.
> >
> > I have one
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 10:55 AM Antonin Houska wrote:
>
> Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 8:33 PM Antonin Houska wrote:
>
> > > The problem of the temporary undo log is that it's loaded into local
> > > buffers
> > > and that backend can exit w/o flushing local buffers to
Good day.
I found BufferAlloc unnecessary goes through dynahash's freelist when it
reuses valid buffer.
If it is avoided and dynahash's entry directly moved, 1-2% is gained in
select only pgbench (with scale factor 100 in 50 connections/50 threads
on 4 core 8ht notebook cpu 185krps=>190krps).
Hi hackers,
I attached the updated patch including fixes reported by
Zhihong Yu and Ryohei Takahashi.
Regards,
Yugo Nagata
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 19:12:27 +0900
Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> Hello Takahashi-san,
>
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 10:06:37 +
> "r.takahash...@fujitsu.com" wrote:
>
> > Hi
Hello Takahashi-san,
On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 10:06:37 +
"r.takahash...@fujitsu.com" wrote:
> Hi Nagata-san,
>
>
> I'm still reading the patch.
> I have additional comments.
Thank you for your comments!
>
> (1)
> In v23-0001-Add-a-syntax-to-create-Incrementally-Maintainabl.patch, ivm
>
Hello Takahashi-san,
On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 08:53:47 +
"r.takahash...@fujitsu.com" wrote:
> Hi Nagata-san,
>
>
> Thank you for your reply.
>
> > I'll investigate this more, but we may have to prohibit views on partitioned
> > table and partitions.
>
> I think this restriction is strict.
>
On 30.08.21 20:06, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On 2021-Aug-28, Tom Lane wrote:
I think what we are doing there is following the message style
guideline that says to put double quotes around inserted strings.
In this case schema.object (as a whole) is the inserted string.
People often confuse this
Hello Zhihong Yu,
Thank you for your suggestion!
I am sorry for late replay. I'll fix them and submit the
updated patch soon.
On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 00:52:24 -0700
Zhihong Yu wrote:
> > Hi,
> > For v23-0007-Add-Incremental-View-Maintenance-support.patch :
> >
> > bq. In this implementation, AFTER
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 4:07 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> Thanks, your patches look good to me. I'll push them sometime next
> week after Tuesday unless there are any comments.
>
Pushed.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:12 PM Fabrice Chapuis wrote:
>
> > IIUC, these are called after processing each WAL record so not
> sure how is it possible in your case that these are not reached?
>
> I don't know, as you say, to highlight the problem we would have to debug the
>
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:14 AM Noah Misch wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 12:30:35PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > solution to windows.h being just so damn big, the delightfully named
> > WIN32_LEAN_AND_MEAN.
> >
> > This reduces the non-incremental buildtime in my 8 core windows VM from
On 22.09.21 09:39, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 08:59:38AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I noticed this patch eliminated one $Test::Builder::Level assignment. Was
there a reason for this?
I think we should add it back, and also add a few missing ones in similar
places. See
> On 22 Sep 2021, at 09:49, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 02:04:23PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 10 Aug 2021, at 15:27, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>
>>> These have now been committed, when OpenSSL 3.0.0 ships and there is
>>> coverage
>>> in the buildfarm I’ll
On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 02:04:23PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> On 10 Aug 2021, at 15:27, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
>> These have now been committed, when OpenSSL 3.0.0 ships and there is coverage
>> in the buildfarm I’ll revisit this for the backbranches.
>
> As an update to this, I’ve
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 08:59:38AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I noticed this patch eliminated one $Test::Builder::Level assignment. Was
> there a reason for this?
>
> I think we should add it back, and also add a few missing ones in similar
> places. See attached patch.
>
> [...]
>
> {
>
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 09:38:29AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Sep-20, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> The test gets the right PIDs, as the logs showed:
>> ok 17 - have walsender pid 12663
>> ok 18 - have walreceiver pid 12662
>
> As I understood, Horiguchi-san's point isn't that the PIDs
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 1:56 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2021-09-21 20:26:36 -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > Em ter., 21 de set. de 2021 às 16:30, Andres Freund
> > escreveu:
> > > But that's too much work for my taste. As it turns out there's a
> partial
> > > solution to windows.h being just
On 03.04.21 14:30, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 01:45:31PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
As a whole, this is a consolidation of its own, so let's apply this
part first.
Slight rebase for this one to take care of the updates with the SSL
error messages.
I noticed this patch
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:39 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:03 AM Greg Nancarrow wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 10:09 PM vignesh C wrote:
> > >
> > > Attached v29 patch has the fixes for the same.
> > >
> >
> > Some minor comments on the v29-0002 patch:
> >
> > (1)
>
68 matches
Mail list logo
