Re: Added schema level support for publication.

On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 4:40 PM Greg Nancarrow wrote: > >At the > moment, the existing documentation just states FOR TABLE that > "Temporary tables, unlogged tables, foreign tables, materialized > views, and regular views cannot be part of a publication". Oh, I see that in the v36-0004 doc update

Re: Added schema level support for publication.

On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:11 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > Code has been added to prevent a table being set (via ALTER TABLE) to > > UNLOGGED if it is part of a publication, but I found that I could > > still add all tables of a schema having a table that is UNLOGGED: > > > > postgres=# create

Re: func.sgml

>> You have to be very careful these days when applying stale patches to >> func.sgml --- there's enough duplicate boilerplate that "patch' can easily >> be fooled into dumping an addition into the wrong place. > > This is yet another indication to me that there's probably a good case > for

Re: Triage on old commitfest entries

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 7:45 PM Tom Lane wrote: > It sounds like Peter is willing to take point on the executor end > of things (b-tree in particular). If he can explain what a reasonable > cost model would look like, I'm willing to see about making that happen > in the planner. I would be happy

Re: Role Self-Administration

On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 10:57:46PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > "A role is not considered to hold WITH ADMIN OPTION on itself, but it > may grant or revoke membership in itself from a database session where > the session user matches the role." > Here's the thing - having looked back through the

Re: On login trigger: take three

On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 11:32 PM Greg Nancarrow wrote: > > I've attached the updated patch. > Attached a rebased version of the patch, as it was broken by fairly recent changes (only very minor change to the previous version). Regards, Greg Nancarrow Fujitsu Australia

Re: Added schema level support for publication.

On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 6:57 AM Greg Nancarrow wrote: > > (5) > > Code has been added to prevent a table being set (via ALTER TABLE) to > UNLOGGED if it is part of a publication, but I found that I could > still add all tables of a schema having a table that is UNLOGGED: > > postgres=# create

Re: [PATCH] document

On 2021/10/04 15:18, Fujii Masao wrote: On 2021/08/26 1:39, Justin Pryzby wrote: On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 09:50:13AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Fujii Masao writes: When I applied the patch to the master, I found that the table entries for those function were added into the table for aclitem

Re: parallelizing the archiver

On 10/4/21, 8:19 PM, "Stephen Frost" wrote: > It's also been discussed, at least around the water cooler (as it were > in pandemic times- aka our internal slack channels..) that the existing > archive command might be reimplemented as an extension using these. Not > sure if that's really

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 8:19 PM Mark Dilger wrote: > I am changing pg_amcheck to filter out indexes as you say. Since the btree > check should no longer error in these cases, the issue of pg_amcheck exit(2) > sorts itself out without further code changes. Cool. > I am changing verify_heapam

Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles (Was: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers)

On 10/4/21, 7:08 PM, "Stephen Frost" wrote: > I really think we need to stop addressing roles explicitly as > 'superuser' vs. 'non-superuser', because a non-superuser role can be > GRANT'd a superuser role, which makes that distinction really not > sensible. This has continued to be a problem

Re: Make relfile tombstone files conditional on WAL level

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 11:32 PM Thomas Munro wrote: > I managed to produce a case where live data is written to an unlinked > file and lost I guess this must have been broken since release 9.2 moved checkpoints out of here[1]. The connection between checkpoints, tombstone files and file

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

> On Oct 4, 2021, at 6:19 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > I don't see what the point of this example is. It doesn't matter. I am changing pg_amcheck to filter out indexes as you say. Since the btree check should no longer error in these cases, the issue of pg_amcheck exit(2) sorts itself

Re: parallelizing the archiver

Greetings, * Bossart, Nathan (bossa...@amazon.com) wrote: > On 10/4/21, 7:21 PM, "Stephen Frost" wrote: > > This has something we've contemplated quite a bit and the last thing > > that I'd want to have is a requirement to configure a whole bunch of > > additional parameters to enable this. Why

Re: plperl: update ppport.h and fix configure version check

=?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= writes: > Andres' recent post¹ about PL/Perl on Windows and linked-to² patch > containing an erroneous version check made me realise that we haven't > updated our copy of ppport.h since 2009. Attached is a patch that does > that, and applies code changes

Re: parallelizing the archiver

On 10/4/21, 7:21 PM, "Stephen Frost" wrote: > This has something we've contemplated quite a bit and the last thing > that I'd want to have is a requirement to configure a whole bunch of > additional parameters to enable this. Why do we need to have some many > new GUCs? I would have thought

Role Self-Administration

Greetings, There's been various discussions about CREATEROLE, EVENT TRIGGERs, and other things which hinge around the general idea that we can create a 'tree' of roles where there's some root and then from that root there's a set of created roles, or at least roles which have been GRANT'd other

Re: Triage on old commitfest entries

Stephen Frost writes: > Entirely agree with this. Index skip scan is actually *ridiculously* > useful in terms of an improvement, and we need to get the right people > together to work on it and get it implemented. I'd love to see this > done for v15, in particular. Who do we need to

Re: Triage on old commitfest entries

Greetings, * Peter Geoghegan (p...@bowt.ie) wrote: > On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 1:30 PM Tom Lane wrote: > > Fair. My concern here is mostly that we not just keep kicking the > > can down the road. If we see that a patch has been hanging around > > this long without reaching commit, we should

Re: parallelizing the archiver

Greetings, * Bossart, Nathan (bossa...@amazon.com) wrote: > On 10/1/21, 12:08 PM, "Andrey Borodin" wrote: > > 30 сент. 2021 г., в 09:47, Bossart, Nathan написал(а): > >> Of course, there are drawbacks to using an extension. Besides the > >> obvious added complexity of building an extension in

Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles (Was: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers)

Greetings, * Bossart, Nathan (bossa...@amazon.com) wrote: > On 9/27/21, 11:16 AM, "Mark Dilger" wrote: > > On Sep 21, 2021, at 12:58 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >> I do like the basic thrust of reducing the power of CREATEROLE. There's > >> an old legal maxim I learned in my distant youth that

Re: storing an explicit nonce

Greetings, * Ants Aasma (a...@cybertec.at) wrote: > On Mon, 27 Sept 2021 at 23:34, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 10:51:42PM +0800, Sasasu wrote: > > > It looks like we are still considering AES-CBC, AES-XTS, and > > AES-GCM(-SIV). > > > I want to say something that we don't

Re: corruption of WAL page header is never reported

At Tue, 5 Oct 2021 00:59:46 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote in > I think that it's better to comment why "retry" is not necessary > when not in standby mode. > > --- > When not in standby mode, an invalid page header should cause recovery > to end, not retry reading the page, so we

Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2

Hi, On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 9:56 AM k.jami...@fujitsu.com wrote: > > Hi Sawada-san, > > I noticed that this thread and its set of patches have been marked with > "Returned with Feedback" by yourself. > I find the feature (atomic commit for foreign transactions) very useful > and it will pave the

Re: Added schema level support for publication.

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 4:55 AM vignesh C wrote: > > Attached v36 patch has the changes for the same. > I have some comments on the v36-0001 patch: src/backend/commands/publicationcmds.c (1) GetPublicationSchemas() + /* Find all publications associated with the schema */ + pubschsrel =

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 5:32 PM Mark Dilger wrote: > Sorry, I realized after hitting that you might take it that way, but I > mean the logs generally, not just postgres logs. If somebody runs "reindex > concurrently" on all tables at midnight every night, and they see one morning > in the

Re: (LOCK TABLE options) “ONLY” and “NOWAIT” are not yet implemented

On 2021/10/04 14:28, shinya11.k...@nttdata.com wrote: The patch looks good to me, too. I applied cosmetic changes to it. Attached is the updated version of the patch. Barring any objection, I will commit it. Thank you for the patch! It looks good to me. Pushed. Thanks! Regards, -- Fujii

Re: Split xlog.c

On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 12:10:17PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > Hello. > > At Thu, 16 Sep 2021 11:23:46 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas > wrote in > > Here is another rebase. > > I have several comments on this. > Hi Heikki, Are we waiting a rebased version? Currently this does not apply to

RE: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2

Hi Sawada-san, I noticed that this thread and its set of patches have been marked with "Returned with Feedback" by yourself. I find the feature (atomic commit for foreign transactions) very useful and it will pave the road for having a distributed transaction management in Postgres. Although we

Re: plperl on windows

Hi, On 2021-10-04 14:38:16 -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > 3) When building against strawberry perl 5.32.1.1 I see errors when loading >plperl > > 4) When building against strawberry perl 5.30.3.1 I see a crash during >execution of very simple statements [1] > > 5) Finally when building

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

> On Oct 4, 2021, at 4:45 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > I'm guessing that you meant REINDEX CONCURRENTLY. Yes. > Since you're talking about the case where it has an error Sorry, I realized after hitting that you might take it that way, but I mean the logs generally, not just postgres

Re: Patch: Range Merge Join

> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 04:27:54PM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 07:14:32PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: >> > >> > I'll start with the reason I set the work down before: it did not work >> > well with multiple join keys. That might be fine, but I also started >> > thinking

Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles (Was: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers)

On 9/27/21, 11:16 AM, "Mark Dilger" wrote: > On Sep 21, 2021, at 12:58 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> I do like the basic thrust of reducing the power of CREATEROLE. There's >> an old legal maxim I learned in my distant youth that says "nemo dat >> quod non habet" - Nobody can give something they

Re: [PATCH] Print error when libpq-refs-stamp fails

Thanks to you both! From: Daniel Gustafsson Date: Monday, October 4, 2021 at 11:36 AM To: Jacob Champion Cc: Rachel Heaton , pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org , a.volos...@postgrespro.ru Subject: Re: [PATCH] Print error when libpq-refs-stamp fails > On 4 Oct 2021, at 19:21, Daniel

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 4:28 PM Mark Dilger wrote: > I am concerned about giving the user the false impression that an index (or > table) was checked when it was not. I don't see the logic in > > pg_amcheck -i idx1 -i idx2 -i idx3 > > skipping all three indexes and then reporting success.

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

> On Oct 4, 2021, at 4:28 PM, Mark Dilger wrote: > > pg_amcheck -i idx1 -i idx2 -i idx3 I forgot to mention: There's a continuum between `pg_amcheck -a` which checks everything in all databases of the cluster, and `pg_amcheck -i just_one_index`. There are any number of combinations of

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

> On Oct 4, 2021, at 4:10 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > And I don't understand why you think that clearly-accidental > implementation details (really just bugs) should be treated as > axiomatic truths about how pg_amcheck must work. Should we now "fix" > pg_dump so that it matches

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:36 PM Mark Dilger wrote: > >> I believe this is a bug in amcheck's btree checking functions. Peter, can > >> you take a look? > > > > Why do you say that? > > Because REINDEX CONCURRENTLY and the bt_index_parent_check() function seem to > have lock upgrade hazards that

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

> On Oct 4, 2021, at 10:58 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 8:10 AM Mark Dilger > wrote: >>> There is another issue, that maybe should be discussed separately (or >>> this thread could be renamed to "... on checking specific relations"), >>> but the solution could be

Re: Postgresql Windows build and modern perl (>=5.28)

Victor Wagner writes: > Attached patch makes use of this function if PERL_VERSION >= 28. > It makes plperl compile with ActiveStatePerl 5.28 and StrawberryPerl > 5.30.2.1. I have no opinion on the substantive content of this patch, but please don't just check against just PERL_VERSION. Now

Re: Use simplehash.h instead of dynahash in SMgr

On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 at 20:37, Jaime Casanova wrote: > Based on your comments I will mark this patch as withdrawn at midday of > my monday unless someone objects to that. I really think we need a hash table implementation that's faster than dynahash and supports stable pointers to elements

Re: plperl on windows

Hi, On 2021-10-04 14:38:16 -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > 2) For some reason src/tools/install.pl doesn't install plperl[u].control, >plperl[u]--1.0.sql - But apparently the buildfarm doesn't have that issue, >because drongo successfully ran the plperl tests? Oh, figured that one out:

plperl on windows

Hi, For https://postgr.es/m/20211001222752.wrz7erzh4cajv...@alap3.anarazel.de I was trying to enable plperl on windows. And run into quite a few roadblocks - enough that I gave up. 1) plperl doesn't build against a modern-ish perl. The fix for that seems easy enough:

Re: Patch: Range Merge Join

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 07:14:32PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Thu, 2021-06-10 at 15:09 +1200, David Rowley wrote: > > It shouldn't be a blocker for you, but just so you're aware, there > > was > > a previous proposal for this in [1] and a patch in [2]. I've include > > Jeff here just so he's

Re: [PATCH] Add `verify-system` sslmode to use system CA pool for server cert

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 02:54:39AM -0700, tho...@habets.se wrote: > On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 02:09:11 +0100, Bruce Momjian said: > > I don't think public CA's are not a good idea for complex setups since > > they open the ability for an external party to create certificates that > > are trusted by

Re: storing an explicit nonce

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 12:30:02PM +0300, Ants Aasma wrote: > On Mon, 27 Sept 2021 at 23:34, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Sun, Sep  5, 2021 at 10:51:42PM +0800, Sasasu wrote: > > Hi, community, > > > > It looks like we are still considering AES-CBC, AES-XTS, and AES-GCM >

Re: ssl tests fail on windows / slurp_file() offset doesn't work on win

On 2021-10-04 11:07:07 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Looks sane, thanks. Thanks for looking. Pushed to all branches.

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:00 AM Alexander Lakhin wrote: > There is another issue, that maybe should be discussed separately (or > this thread could be renamed to "... on checking specific relations"), > but the solution could be similar to that. Thanks for the report! I wonder if verify_heapam.c

Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments

Daniel Gustafsson writes: >> On 4 Oct 2021, at 15:56, Tom Lane wrote: >> I used to think it was better to go ahead and manually reflow, if you >> use an editor that makes that easy. That way there are fewer commits >> touching any one line of code, which is good when trying to review >> code

Re: Atomic rename feature for Windows.

Thank you Thank you In this version of patch: 1. Made function isWindows1607OrGreater() without manifest 2. To open a directory using CreateFile, have to specify the FILE_FLAG_BACKUP_SEMANTICS flag as part of dwFlagsAndAttributes. Checks that file is a directory by the GetFileAttributes

Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 15:56, Tom Lane wrote: > I used to think it was better to go ahead and manually reflow, if you > use an editor that makes that easy. That way there are fewer commits > touching any one line of code, which is good when trying to review > code history. However, now that we've

RfC entries in CF 2021-09

Hi, Here's the list mentioned in ${SUBJECT}, please can the committers mention what they want to do with those? no committer assigned: - Bug fix for tab completion of ALTER TABLE This seems to have activity, last patch from is from two weeks ago. Any intention of committing this soom? Or

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 18:51, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:05 PM Daniel Gustafsson > wrote: > > On 4 Oct 2021, at 14:56, Magnus Hagander > > wrote: > > > Ugh. i missed one of the two checks. That's what I get for not

Re: [PATCH] Print error when libpq-refs-stamp fails

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 19:21, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > >> On 4 Oct 2021, at 19:02, Jacob Champion wrote: >> >> On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 23:40 +0700, Anton Voloshin wrote: >>> >>> Could you please confirm that the change from -A to -a in nm arguments >>> in this patch is intentional? >> >> That

Re: improvements in Unicode tables generation code

On 28.09.21 10:25, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 20.07.21 13:57, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Perhaps we should change the script or Makefile so that it doesn't create all the maps in one go? I agree, either comment it better or just write one file at a time. I'll take another look at that.

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 8:10 AM Mark Dilger wrote: > > There is another issue, that maybe should be discussed separately (or > > this thread could be renamed to "... on checking specific relations"), > > but the solution could be similar to that. > > pg_amcheck also fails on checking invalid

Re: [PATCH] Print error when libpq-refs-stamp fails

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 19:02, Jacob Champion wrote: > > On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 23:40 +0700, Anton Voloshin wrote: >> >> Could you please confirm that the change from -A to -a in nm arguments >> in this patch is intentional? > > That was not intended by us, thank you for the catch! A stray >

Re: pgsql: Document XLOG_INCLUDE_XID a little better

On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 6:46 AM Dilip Kumar wrote: > I have written two patches, Approach1 is as you described using a > static boolean and Approach2 as a local variable to XLogAssembleRecord > as described by Amit, attached both of them for your reference. > IMHO, either of these approaches looks

Bug in DefineRange() with multiranges

Hi, My colleague, Alex Kozhemyakin, stumbled upon a bug in DefineRange(). The problem is here: @@ -1707,7 +1707,6 @@ DefineRange(ParseState *pstate, CreateRangeStmt *stmt) /* Create cast from the range type to its multirange type */ CastCreate(typoid, multirangeOid,

Re: [PATCH] Print error when libpq-refs-stamp fails

On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 23:40 +0700, Anton Voloshin wrote: > > Could you please confirm that the change from -A to -a in nm arguments > in this patch is intentional? That was not intended by us, thank you for the catch! A stray lowercasing in vim, perhaps. --Jacob

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:05 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > On 4 Oct 2021, at 14:56, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > Ugh. i missed one of the two checks. That's what I get for not testing > properly when the change "was so simple"... > > > > Please try again. > > It works now, I was able to move a

Re: preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 12:44 AM Robert Haas wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 3:07 PM Shruthi Gowda wrote: > > > - The comment in binary_upgrade_set_pg_class_oids() is still not > > > accurate. You removed the sentence which says "Indexes cannot have > > > toast tables, so we need not make

Re: [PATCH] Print error when libpq-refs-stamp fails

Hello, On 28/09/2021 05:55, Rachel Heaton wrote: Hello, While developing I got this error and it was difficult to figure out what was going on. Thanks to Jacob, I was able to learn the context of the failure, so we created this small patch. - ! nm -A -u $< 2>/dev/null | grep -v

Re: corruption of WAL page header is never reported

On 2021/09/13 17:21, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: I wrote "while not in standby mode, we don't need to avoid retry the entire record" but that doesn't mean the inversion "while in standby mode, we need to do avoid that". In the first place retry doesn't happen while not in standby mode. I don't

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

> On Oct 4, 2021, at 2:00 AM, Alexander Lakhin wrote: Thank you, Alexander, for these bug reports. > There is another issue, that maybe should be discussed separately (or > this thread could be renamed to "... on checking specific relations"), > but the solution could be similar to that. >

Re: ssl tests fail on windows / slurp_file() offset doesn't work on win

On 10/3/21 1:30 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > >> Why did 3c5b0685b921 choose to use setFilePointer() in the first place? At >> this point it's a perl filehandle, so we should just use perl seek? >> >> >> Leaving the concrete breakage aside, I'm somewhat unhappy that there's not a >> single comment

Re: func.sgml

Andrew Dunstan writes: > At > > Tom noted: > >> You have to be very careful these days when applying stale patches to >> func.sgml --- there's enough duplicate boilerplate that "patch' can easily >> be fooled into dumping

Re: func.sgml

Andrew Dunstan writes: > Tom noted: >> You have to be very careful these days when applying stale patches to >> func.sgml --- there's enough duplicate boilerplate that "patch' can easily >> be fooled into dumping an addition into the wrong place. > This is yet another indication to me that

func.sgml

At Tom noted: > You have to be very careful these days when applying stale patches to > func.sgml --- there's enough duplicate boilerplate that "patch' can easily > be fooled into dumping an addition into the wrong place.

Re: [PATCH] Don't block HOT update by BRIN index

Hi, I took a look at this patch again to see if I can get it polished and fixed. Per the discussion, I've removed the rd_indexattr list and replaced it with a simple flag. While doing so, I noticed a couple of places that should have consider (init or free) rd_hotblockingattr. Patch 0001 is

Re: Triage on old commitfest entries - JSON_PATH

Op 04-10-2021 om 14:19 schreef Andrew Dunstan: On 10/3/21 3:56 PM, Erik Rijkers wrote: Op 03-10-2021 om 21:14 schreef Tom Lane: As I threatened in another thread, I've looked through all of the oldest commitfest entries to see which ones should maybe be tossed, Patch    Age in CFs May

Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments

=?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= writes: > Daniel Gustafsson writes: >> I avoided the reflow of the comments though to make it the minimal >> change. > Fair enough. I wasn't sure myself whether to do it or not. The next pgindent run will do it anyway (except in comment blocks starting

Re: Triage on old commitfest entries

On 10/3/21 16:18, Peter Geoghegan wrote: Index Skip Scan 16 Last substantive discussion 2021-05, currently passing cfbot Seems possibly useful, but we're not making progress. This feature is definitely useful. My pet theory is that it hasn't made more progress because it

Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments

Daniel Gustafsson writes: >> On 4 Oct 2021, at 14:56, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: > >> I noticed a duplicate-word typo in a comments recently, and cooked up >> the following ripgrep command to find some more. > > Pushed to master, thanks! Thanks! > I avoided the reflow of the comments

Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 14:56, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: > I noticed a duplicate-word typo in a comments recently, and cooked up > the following ripgrep command to find some more. Pushed to master, thanks! I avoided the reflow of the comments though to make it the minimal change. -- Daniel

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 14:56, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Ugh. i missed one of the two checks. That's what I get for not testing > properly when the change "was so simple"... > > Please try again. It works now, I was able to move a patch (3128) over to the 2021-11 CF. It does bring up the below

Duplicat-word typos in code comments

Hi hackers, I noticed a duplicate-word typo in a comments recently, and cooked up the following ripgrep command to find some more. rg --multiline --pcre2 --type=c '(?>From 7ed1ce16a37e7a63e7015cc4ef5b2b70ba915498 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Dagfinn=20Ilmari=20Manns=C3=A5ker?=

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:41 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > On 4 Oct 2021, at 12:06, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 3:48 PM Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote: > > Magnus Hagander mailto:mag...@hagander.net>> > writes: > > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 7:31 AM Michael

Re: proposal: possibility to read dumped table's name from file

> On 2 Oct 2021, at 08:18, Erik Rijkers wrote: > So the issue is not as serious as it seemed. This is also not related to this patch in any way, or am I missing a point here? This can just as well be achieved without this patch. > The complaint remaining is only that this could somehow be

RE: Allow escape in application_name

Dear Horiguchi-san, Thank you for giving many comments! I attached new patches. I'm sorry for the late reply. > I think we don't have a predecessor of the case like this where a > behavior is decided from object option and GUC. > > I'm a bit uncomfortable with .conf configuration overrides

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 12:06, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 3:48 PM Tom Lane > wrote: > Magnus Hagander mailto:mag...@hagander.net>> writes: > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 7:31 AM Michael Paquier > > wrote: > >> That's the

Re: Triage on old commitfest entries

Hi, On 10/3/21 16:18, Peter Geoghegan wrote: Index Skip Scan 16 Last substantive discussion 2021-05, currently passing cfbot Seems possibly useful, but we're not making progress. This feature is definitely useful. My pet theory is that it hasn't made more progress because it

Re: [PATCH] Print error when libpq-refs-stamp fails

> On 28 Sep 2021, at 17:52, Rachel Heaton wrote: > Patch attached. I tweaked the error message a little bit and pushed to master. Thanks! -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/

Re: VS2022: Support Visual Studio 2022 on Windows

On 10/4/21 6:13 AM, Laurenz Albe wrote: > On Fri, 2021-10-01 at 15:15 +, Hans Buschmann wrote: >> During testing of the new Visual Studio 2022 Preview Version 4.1 from >> Microsoft I also tried PG14.0 on it. >> The x64 version built without error!. >> >> Even when this is only a preview

Re: Triage on old commitfest entries - JSON_PATH

On 10/3/21 3:56 PM, Erik Rijkers wrote: > Op 03-10-2021 om 21:14 schreef Tom Lane: >> As I threatened in another thread, I've looked through all of the >> oldest commitfest entries to see which ones should maybe be tossed, >> on the grounds that they're unlikely to ever get committed so we >>

Re: Added schema level support for publication.

On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 11:25 PM vignesh C wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 1:13 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > 2. In GetSchemaPublicationRelations(), I think we need to perform a > > second scan using RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE only if we > > publish_via_root (aka pub_partopt is

ALTER INDEX .. RENAME allows to rename tables/views as well

Hi hackers, I realized a subtle behavior with ALTER INDEX .. RENAME. It seems like a bug to me, please see the steps below. Test 1: Rename table via RENAME .. INDEX CREATE TABLE test_table (a int); SELECT 'test_table'::regclass::oid; oid --- 34470 (1 row) -- rename table using ALTER

Re: VS2022: Support Visual Studio 2022 on Windows

On Fri, 2021-10-01 at 15:15 +, Hans Buschmann wrote: > During testing of the new Visual Studio 2022 Preview Version 4.1 from > Microsoft I also tried PG14.0 on it. > The x64 version built without error!. > > Even when this is only a preview version (the real thing is to expected soon) > it

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 3:48 PM Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander writes: > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 7:31 AM Michael Paquier > wrote: > >> That's the tricky part. It does not really make sense either to keep > >> moving patches that are waiting on author for months. > > > I'm pretty sure this

Re: Better context for "TAP tests not enabled" error message

> On 3 Oct 2021, at 01:27, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > >> On 3 Oct 2021, at 00:39, Kevin Burke wrote: > >> Updated patch that removes the "Maybe" > > Thanks, I’ll take care of this tomorrow along with Rachels patch. I was off-by-one on date, but it's been pushed to master now. Thanks! --

Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 12:23 PM Dilip Kumar wrote: > > > Open question: > - Scan pg_class vs scan directories > - Whether to retain the old created database mechanism as option or not. I have done some code improvement in 0001 and 0002. -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB:

Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations

Hello Mark, 04.10.2021 01:20, Mark Dilger wrote: > The attached patch includes a test case for this, which shows the problems > against the current pg_amcheck.c, and a new version of pg_amcheck.c which > fixes the bug. Could you review it? > > Thanks for bringing this to my attention. There is

Re: replace InvalidXid(a macro that doesn't exist) with InvalidTransactionId(a macro that exists) in code comments

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 10:19, Bharath Rupireddy > wrote: > It seems like we have macro InvalidTransactionId but InvalidXid is > used in some of the code comments.Here's a small patch that does > $subject? While I doubt anyone would be confused by these, I do agree it's worth being consistent and

Re: Remove an obsolete comment in snapbuild.c

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 1:24 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > Hi all, > > While reading the code I realized that the following comment of > SnapBuildOnDick is obsolete: > > /* > * We store current state of struct SnapBuild on disk in the following manner: > * > * struct SnapBuildOnDisk; > *

Re: Incorrect snapshots while promoting hot standby node when 2PC is used

On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 02:11:15PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > A couple of months later, I have looked back at this thread and this > report. I have rechecked all the standby handling and snapshot builds > involving KnownAssignedXids and looked at all the phases that are > getting called

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 2:29 AM Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 7:59 AM Amul Sul wrote: > > To find the value of InRecovery after we clear it, patch still uses > > ControlFile's DBState, but now the check condition changed to a more > > specific one which is less confusing. > > > >

replace InvalidXid(a macro that doesn't exist) with InvalidTransactionId(a macro that exists) in code comments

Hi, It seems like we have macro InvalidTransactionId but InvalidXid is used in some of the code comments.Here's a small patch that does $subject? Regards, Bharath Rupireddy. v1-0001-replace-InvalidXid-with-InvalidTransactionId-in-c.patch Description: Binary data

Remove an obsolete comment in snapbuild.c

Hi all, While reading the code I realized that the following comment of SnapBuildOnDick is obsolete: /* * We store current state of struct SnapBuild on disk in the following manner: * * struct SnapBuildOnDisk; * TransactionId * running.xcnt_space; * TransactionId * committed.xcnt; (*not

Re: Function scan FDW pushdown

Ashutosh Bapat писал 2021-06-15 16:15: Hi Alexander, Hi. The current version of the patch is based on asymetric partition-wise join. Currently it is applied after v19-0001-Asymmetric-partitionwise-join.patch from on

Re: Use simplehash.h instead of dynahash in SMgr

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:30:25PM +1300, David Rowley wrote: > On Fri, 24 Sept 2021 at 20:26, Jaime Casanova > wrote: > > Are you planning to work on this in this CF? > > This is marked as "Ready for committer" but it doesn't apply anymore. > > I've attached an updated patch. Since this patch

  1   2   >