Re: standby recovery fails (tablespace related) (tentative patch and discussion)

At Thu, 20 Jan 2022 17:19:04 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote in > At Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:07:22 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi > wrote in > CI now likes this version for all platforms. An xlog.c refactoring happend recently hit this. Just rebased on the change. regards. -- Kyotaro

Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats

Hi, On 2022-03-02 12:39:57 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:39 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > > > Working on rebasing shared memory stats over this. Feels *much* better so > > far. > > > > Good to hear that it helps. BTW, there is another patch [1] that > extends this view. I

pg_stop_backup() v2 incorrectly marked as proretset

Hi all, In my hunt looking for incorrect SRFs, I have noticed a new case of a system function marked as proretset while it builds and returns only one record. And this is a popular one: pg_stop_backup(), labelled v2. This leads to a lot of unnecessary work, as the function creates a tuplestore

Re: Add the replication origin name and commit-LSN to logical replication worker errcontext

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 4:14 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 9:33 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 12:21 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 8:25 AM Peter Smith wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:16 PM Masahiko Sawada

Re: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY on partitioned index

Hi. I've added 0005-Mark-intermediate-partitioned-indexes-as-valid.patch which fixed the following issues - when partitioned index is created, indexes on intermediate partitioned tables were preserved in invalid state. Also added some more tests. -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, Postgres

Re: pg_stat_get_replication_slot and pg_stat_get_subscription_worker incorrectly marked as proretset

On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 07:42:50AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > This is done as part of commit: > https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=7a85073290856554416353a89799a4c04d09b74b Thanks for taking care of it! -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Add the replication origin name and commit-LSN to logical replication worker errcontext

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 9:33 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 12:21 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 8:25 AM Peter Smith wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:16 PM Masahiko Sawada > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > The errcontext message would become

Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:39 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > Working on rebasing shared memory stats over this. Feels *much* better so far. > Good to hear that it helps. BTW, there is another patch [1] that extends this view. I think that patch is still not ready but once it is ready (which I expect

Re: [PATCH] Expose port->authn_id to extensions and triggers

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 10:03:20PM +, Jacob Champion wrote: > Added a first draft in v5, alongside the perltidy fixups mentioned by > Michael. +The authenticated identity is an immutable identifier for the user +presented during the connection handshake; the exact format depends on +

Re: Add the replication origin name and commit-LSN to logical replication worker errcontext

At Wed, 2 Mar 2022 14:39:54 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote in > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 11:55 AM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 5:46 PM Masahiko Sawada > > wrote: > > > > > > I've attached two patches: the first one changes > > > apply_error_callback() so that it uses

Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take three - remastered set

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 01:58:10PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > I have been looking at how much simplicity this brings, and I have to > admit that it is tempting to just support the loading of dumps when > setting up the old instance to upgrade from. We'd still need to do an > extra effort in

Re: make tuplestore helper function

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 04:49:41PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > In order to keep things pluggable at will, MakeFuncResultTuplestore() > has been changed to access a set of bits32 flags, able to control the > two options above. With this facility in place, I have been able to > cut much more

Re: more descriptive message for process termination due to max_slot_wal_keep_size

At Tue, 04 Jan 2022 10:29:31 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote in > So what do you say if I propose the following? > > LOG: terminating process %d to release replication slot \"%s\" > because its restart_lsn %X/%X exceeds the limit %X/%X > HINT: You might need to increase

Re: Use "WAL segment" instead of "log segment" consistently in user-facing messages

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 6:50 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > > At Mon, 28 Feb 2022 21:03:07 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy > wrote in > > Hi, > > > > It looks like we use "log segment" in various user-facing messages. > > The term "log" can mean server logs as well. The "WAL segment" suits > > well here

Re: Add the replication origin name and commit-LSN to logical replication worker errcontext

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 11:55 AM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 5:46 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > > > I've attached two patches: the first one changes > > apply_error_callback() so that it uses complete sentences with if-else > > blocks in order to have a translation work, > > >

Re: Allow root ownership of client certificate key

On 3/1/22 3:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: >> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: >>> I'd be more eager to do that if we had some field complaints >>> about it. Since we don't, my inclination is not to, but I'm >>> only -0.1 or so; anybody else want to vote? > >> This patch

Re: Failed transaction statistics to measure the logical replication progress

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:21 AM osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com wrote: > > > Also, I quickly checked other similar views(pg_stat_slru, > pg_stat_wal_receiver) > commit logs, especially when they introduce columns. > But, I couldn't find column name validations. > So, I feel this is aligned. > I've

Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats

Hi, On 2022-03-02 07:35:46 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > Pushed. Thanks! Working on rebasing shared memory stats over this. Feels *much* better so far. While rebasing, I was wondering why pgstat_reset_subscription_counter() has "all subscription counters" support. We don't have a function to

PG DOCS - logical replication filtering

Hi. PSA a PG docs patch that is associated with the logical replication Row Filters feature which was recently pushed [1]. This patch introduces a new "Filtering" page to give a common place where all kinds of logical replication filtering can be described. (e.g. It is envisaged that a "Column

Re: Allow async standbys wait for sync replication

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 2:57 AM Nathan Bossart wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:09:57PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 10:35 PM Nathan Bossart > > wrote: > >> Yes, perhaps the synchronous replication framework will need to alert WAL > >> senders when the syncrep

Re: Add the replication origin name and commit-LSN to logical replication worker errcontext

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 12:21 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 8:25 AM Peter Smith wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:16 PM Masahiko Sawada > > wrote: > > > > > > The errcontext message would become like follows: > > > > > > *Before > > > ERROR: duplicate key value

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 9:34 AM Peter Smith wrote: > > Please see below my review comments for v24. > > == > > 1. src/backend/replication/logical/worker.c - start_table_sync > > + /* Report the worker failed during table synchronization */ > +

Re: Handle infinite recursion in logical replication setup

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 4:12 PM kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com wrote: > > Hi Vignesh, > > > In logical replication, currently Walsender sends the data that is > > generated locally and the data that are replicated from other > > instances. This results in infinite recursion in circular logical > >

Re: Add the replication origin name and commit-LSN to logical replication worker errcontext

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 8:25 AM Peter Smith wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:16 PM Masahiko Sawada > wrote: > > > > The errcontext message would become like follows: > > > > *Before > > ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique constraint "test_pkey" > > DETAIL: Key (c)=(1) already

RE: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 9:34 AM Peter Smith wrote: > Please see below my review comments for v24. Thank you for checking my patch ! > == > > 1. src/backend/replication/logical/worker.c - start_table_sync > > + /* Report the worker failed during table synchronization */ > +

Re: Condition pushdown: why (=) is pushed down into join, but BETWEEN or >= is not?

> > > I don't think 0001 is right either, although maybe for somewhat > different reasons. First, I think it only considers VAR OP CONST style > clauses, but that is leaving money on the table, because given a.x = > b.x AND mumble(a.x), we can decide to instead test mumble(b.x) if the > equality

Re: Add the replication origin name and commit-LSN to logical replication worker errcontext

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 5:46 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > I've attached two patches: the first one changes > apply_error_callback() so that it uses complete sentences with if-else > blocks in order to have a translation work, > This is an improvement over what we have now but I think this is

Re: Add the replication origin name and commit-LSN to logical replication worker errcontext

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:16 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > Hia, > > We've added some information such as the command and the timestamp to > the error context message by commit abc0910e2. This patch adds further > information to it: replication origin name and commit-LSN. > > This will be helpful

Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables

> 2022年2月27日 12:13，Andres Freund 写道： > > Hi, > > On 2022-02-27 04:17:52 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: >>> You redirect stats from pg_class and pg_statistics to a local hash table. >>> This is pretty hairy :( > > As is I think the patch is architecturally completely unacceptable. Having > code

Re: Condition pushdown: why (=) is pushed down into join, but BETWEEN or >= is not?

Thanks Tom for joining. > I'm not in favor of complicating the EquivalenceClass > mechanism for this, because (b) what it definitely will do > is make ECs harder to understand and reason about. I'm not willing to show opposition on purpose, and I'm not insist on current strategy, but I

Re: Make mesage at end-of-recovery less scary.

At Sat, 19 Feb 2022 09:31:33 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote in > The changes looks good. thanks.! Thanks! Some recent core change changed WAL insertion speed during the TAP test and revealed one forgotton case of EndOfWAL. When a record header flows into the next page, XLogReadRecord does

Re: pg_stat_get_replication_slot and pg_stat_get_subscription_worker incorrectly marked as proretset

On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 8:57 AM Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 12:03 PM Michael Paquier wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 09:52:02AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > Thanks, so you are okay with me pushing that patch just to HEAD. > > > > Yes, I am fine with that. I am

RE: Logical replication timeout problem

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 6:58 PM Kuroda, Hayato/黒田 隼人 wrote: > Dear Wang, > > > Attached a new patch that addresses following improvements I have got > > so far as > > comments: > > 1. Consider other changes that need to be skipped(truncate, DDL and > > function calls pg_logical_emit_message).

Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 1:15 PM tanghy.f...@fujitsu.com wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 12:32 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > I decided to keep this part of the docs as it is and fixed a few other > > minor comments raised by you and Peter. Additionally, I have bumped > > the

Re: Condition pushdown: why (=) is pushed down into join, but BETWEEN or >= is not?

Robert Haas writes: > I agree. My question is: why shouldn't every case where we can deduce > an implied inequality be reasonably likely to show a benefit? Maybe it will be, if we can deal with the issue you already mentioned about not misestimating the resulting partially-redundant conditions.

RE: logical replication empty transactions

Hi, Here are some comments on the v21 patch. 1. + WalSndKeepalive(false, 0); Maybe we can use InvalidXLogRecPtr here, instead of 0. 2. + pq_sendint64(_message, writePtr ? writePtr : sentPtr); Similarly, should we use XLogRecPtrIsInvalid()? 3. @@ -1183,6 +1269,20

RE: logical replication restrictions

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 8:54 AM Euler Taveira wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, at 3:27 AM, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com > wrote: > > > $ git am v1-0001-Time-delayed-logical-replication-subscriber.patch > > > I generally use -3 to fall back on 3-way

RE: Failed transaction statistics to measure the logical replication progress

On Tuesday, March 1, 2022 4:12 PM Peter Smith wrote: > Please see below my review comments for v25. > > == > > 1. Commit message > > Introduce cumulative columns of transactions of logical replication subscriber > to the pg_stat_subscription_stats view. > > "cumulative columns of

Re: Condition pushdown: why (=) is pushed down into join, but BETWEEN or >= is not?

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 5:53 PM Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > This topic has been discussed a number of times, and Tom has basically > > always said that he thinks this would be expensive to plan (which I > > think is true) and that we wouldn't get much benefit (which I think is > >

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

Here is a new version of the patch with the following changes: 1. Addressed Chap's feedback from upthread. 2. Renamed pg_start/stop_backup() to pg_backup_start/stop() as suggested by David. 3. A couple of other small documentation adjustments. -- Nathan

Re: Separate the result of \watch for each query execution (psql)

Tom Lane : > Noboru Saito writes: > > I have created a patch that allows you to turn it on and off in \pset. > > The attached patch adds the following features. > > Formfeed can be turned on with the command line option or \pset. > > Formfeed (\f\n) is output after the query execution result by

Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

Please see below my review comments for v24. == 1. src/backend/replication/logical/worker.c - start_table_sync + /* Report the worker failed during table synchronization */ + pgstat_report_subscription_error(MySubscription->oid, !am_tablesync_worker()); (This review comment is just FYI in

Re: speed up a logical replica setup

On 2/21/22 13:09, Euler Taveira wrote: DESIGN The conversion requires 8 steps. 1. Check if the target data directory has the same system identifier than the source data directory. 2. Stop the target server if it is running as a standby server. (Modify recovery parameters requires a restart.)

Re: logical replication restrictions

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, at 3:27 AM, osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com wrote: > $ git am v1-0001-Time-delayed-logical-replication-subscriber.patch I generally use -3 to fall back on 3-way merge. Doesn't it work for you? -- Euler Taveira EDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/

Re: Typo in pgbench messages.

>> So are you fine with Kawamoto-san's patch? > > Yes. > > Patch applies cleanly (hmmm, it would have been better to have it as > an attachement). Make & make check ok. Fine with me. Thank you for the review. Fix pushed to master branch. Best reagards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan

Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 1:46 PM Robert Haas wrote: > I think that this is not really a description of an algorithm -- and I > think that it is far from clear that the third "in-between" category > does not need to exist. But I already described the algorithm. It is very simple mechanistically --

Re: Condition pushdown: why (=) is pushed down into join, but BETWEEN or >= is not?

Robert Haas writes: > This topic has been discussed a number of times, and Tom has basically > always said that he thinks this would be expensive to plan (which I > think is true) and that we wouldn't get much benefit (which I think is > false). I think the trick here, as in so many other

Re: Consider parallel for lateral subqueries with limit

James Coleman writes: > On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 9:59 PM James Coleman wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 5:31 PM Tom Lane wrote: >>> I don't really see why this patch is even a little bit safe. > Suppose lateral is not in play. Then if we have a plan like: > Gather > NestLoop >

Re: [PATCH] Expose port->authn_id to extensions and triggers

On Tue, 2022-03-01 at 19:56 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > This patch contains no documentation. I'm having a hard time > understanding what the name "session_authn_id" is supposed to convey. > The comment for the Port.authn_id field says this is the "system > username", which sounds like a

Re: [PATCH] Expose port->authn_id to extensions and triggers

On Tue, 2022-03-01 at 08:35 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote: > > > > Ayway, this function needs to be documented. I think that you should > > just add that in "Session Information Functions" in func.sgml, same > > area as current_user(). The last time

Re: Checkpointer sync queue fills up / loops around pg_usleep() are bad

Hi, On 2022-03-02 06:46:23 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: > > I do think it's worth giving that sleep a proper wait event though, even in > > the back branches. > > I'm thinking that 0002 should be back-patched all the way, but 0001 > could be limited to 14. No strong opinion on back to where to

Re: Condition pushdown: why (=) is pushed down into join, but BETWEEN or >= is not?

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 2:31 AM Andy Fan wrote: > +1. Just to be more precise, are you also confused about why this > should not be done at all. IIUC, I get 3 reasons from Tom's reply. > a). Planning cost. b). estimation error. c) extra qual execution is bad. This topic has been discussed a

Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations

On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 3:27 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > I think that the idea has potential, but I don't think that I > > understand yet what the *exact* algorithm is. > > The algorithm seems to exploit a natural tendency that Andres once > described in a blog post about his snapshot

Re: SQL/JSON: functions

On 2/1/22 14:11,I wrote: > > 2. The new GUC "sql_json" is a bit of a worry. I understand what it's > trying to do, but I'm trying to convince myself it's not going to be a > fruitful source of error reports, especially if people switch it in the > middle of a session. Maybe it should be an

Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks

Hi, On 2022-02-25 13:40:54 -0500, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > On 2/25/22 12:39 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > My point is that sending cleartext passwords over the wire is an > > insecure-by-definition protocol that we shouldn't be encouraging > > more use of. > > This is my general feeling as well. We

Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks

Hi, On 2022-02-28 11:26:06 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > We already have a variety of authentication mechanisms that support central > management: LDAP, PAM, Kerberos, Radius. LDAP, PAM and Radius all require cleartext passwords, so aren't a great solution based on the concerns voiced in this

Re: range_agg with multirange inputs

On 02/28/22 23:31, Paul Jungwirth wrote: > On 2/26/22 17:13, Chapman Flack wrote: >> (I think generating >> the patch with 4 lines of context would be enough to keep that from being >> a recurring issue.) > > Thank you for the review and the tip re 4 lines of context! Rebase attached. I think

Re: Commitfest 2022-03 Patch Triage Part 1b

Greg Stark writes: >> 2433: Erase the distinctClause if the result is unique by definition >> >> (parts of) The approach taken in this patch has been objected against in >> favor >> of work that Tom has proposed. Until that

Re: Allow async standbys wait for sync replication

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:09:57PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 10:35 PM Nathan Bossart > wrote: >> Yes, perhaps the synchronous replication framework will need to alert WAL >> senders when the syncrep LSN advances so that the WAL is sent to the async >> standbys.

Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks

On 2/28/22 5:26 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 17.02.22 20:25, samay sharma wrote: A use case where this is useful are environments where you want authentication to be centrally managed across different services. This is a common deployment model for cloud providers where customers like to

Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks

On 3/1/22 8:31 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: Greetings, * Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote: On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 04:42:55PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: Keeping it around will just push out the point at which everyone will finally be done with it, as there's really only two groups:

Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 03:46:34PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > md5 should be removed. +1 -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

Commitfest 2022-03 Patch Triage Part 1b

> 2096: psql - add SHOW_ALL_RESULTS option > > Peter posted an updated version of Fabiens patch about a month ago (which at > this point no longer applies) fixing a few issues, but also point at old > review > comments still unaddressed. Since this was

Re: Add id's to various elements in protocol.sgml

On 03/01/22 14:50, Brar Piening wrote: > TBH I don't like the visual representation of the unicode link symbol > (U+1F517) in my browser. It's a bold black fat thing that doesn't > inherit colors. I've tried to soften it by decreasing the size but that > doesn't really solve it for me. Font

Re: Commitfest 2022-03 Patch Triage Part 1a.i

> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:16:36AM -0500, Greg Stark wrote: > Last November Daniel Gustafsson did a patch triage. It took him three > emails to get through the patches in the commitfest back then. Since > then we've had the November and the January commitfests so I was > interested to see how

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

Greetings, * Chapman Flack (c...@anastigmatix.net) wrote: > On 03/01/22 14:14, Stephen Frost wrote: > >> There can't really be many teams out there thinking "we'll just ignore > >> these scripts forever, and nothing bad will happen." They all know they'll > >> have to do stuff sometimes. But it

Re: CREATEROLE and role ownership hierarchies

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 2:09 PM Stephen Frost wrote: > I'm generally in support of changing CREATEROLE to only allow roles that > the role with CREATEROLE is an admin of to be allowed as part of the > command (throwing an error in other cases). That doesn't solve other > use-cases which would

Re: Commitfest 2022-03 Patch Triage Part 1a.i

On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 14:59, Greg Stark wrote: > > As Justin suggested I CC the authors from these patches I'm adding > them here. Some of the patches have multiple "Authors" listed in the > commitfest which may just be people who posted updated patches so I > may have added more people than

Re: Commitfest 2022-03 Patch Triage Part 1a.i

As Justin suggested I CC the authors from these patches I'm adding them here. Some of the patches have multiple "Authors" listed in the commitfest which may just be people who posted updated patches so I may have added more people than necessary. [If you received two copies of this do not reply to

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

On 03/01/22 14:14, Stephen Frost wrote: >> There can't really be many teams out there thinking "we'll just ignore >> these scripts forever, and nothing bad will happen." They all know they'll >> have to do stuff sometimes. But it matters how we allow them to schedule it. > > We only make these

Re: Add id's to various elements in protocol.sgml

On Mar 01, 2022 at 18:27, Brar Piening wrote: On Feb 28, 2022 at 21:06, Chapman Flack wrote: I think that in other recent examples I've seen, there might be (something like a) consensus forming around the Unicode LINK SYMBOL rather than # as the symbol for such things. I intentionally opted

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

Greetings, * Chapman Flack (c...@anastigmatix.net) wrote: > On 03/01/22 13:22, David Steele wrote: > > I think people are going to complain no matter what. If scripts are being > > maintained changing the name is not a big deal (though moving from exclusive > > to non-exclusive may be). If they

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

Greetings, * David Steele (da...@pgmasters.net) wrote: > On 3/1/22 11:32, Nathan Bossart wrote: > >On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:09:13AM -0500, Chapman Flack wrote: > >>On 03/01/22 09:44, David Steele wrote: > >>>Personally, I am in favor of removing it. We change/rename > >>>functions/tables/views

Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance

On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 22:34:18 +0800 huyajun wrote: > Hi, Nagata-san > I am very interested in IMMV and read your patch but have some comments in > v25-0007-Add-Incremental-View-Maintenance-support.patch and want to discuss > with you. Thank you for your review! > > + /* For IMMV,

Re: [PATCH] Expose port->authn_id to extensions and triggers

On 25.02.22 21:19, Jacob Champion wrote: On Fri, 2022-02-25 at 16:28 +, Jacob Champion wrote: Ha, opr_sanity caught my use of cstring. I'll work on a fix later today. Fixed in v3. This patch contains no documentation. I'm having a hard time understanding what the name

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

On 03/01/22 13:22, David Steele wrote: > I think people are going to complain no matter what. If scripts are being > maintained changing the name is not a big deal (though moving from exclusive > to non-exclusive may be). If they aren't being maintained then they'll just > blow up a few versions

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

On 03/01/22 12:32, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:09:13AM -0500, Chapman Flack wrote: >> That way, at least, there would be a period of time where procedures >> that currently work (by passing exclusive => false) would continue to work, >> and could be adapted as time permits

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

On 3/1/22 11:32, Nathan Bossart wrote: On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:09:13AM -0500, Chapman Flack wrote: On 03/01/22 09:44, David Steele wrote: Personally, I am in favor of removing it. We change/rename functions/tables/views when we need to, and this happens in almost every release. For

Re: CREATEROLE and role ownership hierarchies

[ Been away, catching up on email. ] On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 10:54 AM Joshua Brindle wrote: > Yes, absolutely. It is my understanding that generally a community > consensus is attempted, I was throwing my (and Crunchy's) use case out > there as a possible goal, and I have spent time reviewing

Refactor statistics collector, backend status reporting and command progress reporting

Hi, Following are the files related to PostgreSQL statistics collector, backend status reporting and command progress reporting. pgstat.[ch] - Definitions for the PostgreSQL statistics collector daemon. backend_status.[ch] - Definitions related to backend status reporting. backend_progress.[ch]

Re: Checkpointer sync queue fills up / loops around pg_usleep() are bad

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 2:36 PM Andres Freund wrote: > On February 27, 2022 4:19:21 PM PST, Thomas Munro > wrote: > >It seems a little strange to introduce a new wait event that will very > >often appear into a stable branch, but ... it is actually telling the > >truth, so there is that. > > In

Re: Allow async standbys wait for sync replication

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 10:35 PM Nathan Bossart wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 04:34:31PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > > At Mon, 28 Feb 2022 22:05:28 -0800, Nathan Bossart > > wrote in > >> replicated LSN. TBH there are probably other things that need to be > >> considered (e.g., how

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:09:13AM -0500, Chapman Flack wrote: > On 03/01/22 09:44, David Steele wrote: >> Personally, I am in favor of removing it. We change/rename >> functions/tables/views when we need to, and this happens in almost every >> release. > > For clarification, is that a suggestion

Re: Add id's to various elements in protocol.sgml

On Feb 28, 2022 at 21:06, Chapman Flack wrote: I think that in other recent examples I've seen, there might be (something like a) consensus forming around the Unicode LINK SYMBOL rather than # as the symbol for such things. I intentionally opted for an ASCII character as that definitely won't

Re: Allow async standbys wait for sync replication

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 04:34:31PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > At Mon, 28 Feb 2022 22:05:28 -0800, Nathan Bossart > wrote in >> replicated LSN. TBH there are probably other things that need to be >> considered (e.g., how do we ensure that the WAL sender sends the rest once >> it is

Re: [PATCH] Add reloption for views to enable RLS

Thanks for reviewing! On 2/25/22 19:22, Dean Rasheed wrote: Re-reading this thread, I think I preferred the name "security_invoker". The main objection seemed to come from the potential confusion with SECURITY INVOKER/DEFINER functions, but I think that's really a different thing. As long as

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

Greetings, * Nathan Bossart (nathandboss...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 08:44:51AM -0600, David Steele wrote: > > Personally, I am in favor of removing it. We change/rename > > functions/tables/views when we need to, and this happens in almost every > > release. > > > > What we

Re: Commitfest 2022-03 Patch Triage Part 1a.i

Can I suggest to copy the patch authors on bulk emails like these ? (Obviously, an extended discussion about a particular patch should happen on its original thread, but that's not what this is about). -- Justin

Re: Commitfest 2022-03 Patch Triage Part 1a.i

Hi, On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:16:36AM -0500, Greg Stark wrote: > > > 1608: schema variables, LET command > > === > > After 18 CF's and two very long threads it seems to be nearing completion > > judging by Tomas' review. There is an ask in that review for a

Commitfest 2022-03 Starts Now

The final commitfest of this release begins now. Whereas most commitfests are about getting feedback to authors so they can advance the patch -- this one is about actually committing patches to wrap up the release. Please when reviewing patches try to push yourself to make the difficult call

Commitfest 2022-03 Patch Triage Part 1a.i

Last November Daniel Gustafsson did a patch triage. It took him three emails to get through the patches in the commitfest back then. Since then we've had the November and the January commitfests so I was interested to see how many of these patches had advanced I'm only part way through the

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

On 03/01/22 09:44, David Steele wrote: > Personally, I am in favor of removing it. We change/rename > functions/tables/views when we need to, and this happens in almost every > release. For clarification, is that a suggestion to remove the 'exclusive' parameter in some later release, after using

Re: convert libpq uri-regress tests to tap test

Hi, On March 1, 2022 7:44:27 AM PST, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >On 2/24/22 07:19, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> On 2/23/22 20:52, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Peter Eisentraut writes: On 23.02.22 23:58, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut writes: >> libpq TAP tests should be in

Re: convert libpq uri-regress tests to tap test

On 2/24/22 07:19, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 2/23/22 20:52, Tom Lane wrote: >> Peter Eisentraut writes: >>> On 23.02.22 23:58, Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut writes: > libpq TAP tests should be in src/interfaces/libpq/t/. That's failing to account for the fact that a libpq test

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 08:44:51AM -0600, David Steele wrote: > Personally, I am in favor of removing it. We change/rename > functions/tables/views when we need to, and this happens in almost every > release. > > What we need to do is make sure that an older installation won't silently > work in

Re: Pre-allocating WAL files

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 08:40:44AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote: > FYI: this is currently failing in cfbot on linux. > > https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4934371210690560 > https://api.cirrus-ci.com/v1/artifact/task/4934371210690560/log/src/test/regress/regression.diffs > > DROP TABLESPACE

Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side

On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 7:35 PM Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 14.02.22 10:16, Amit Kapila wrote: > > I think exposing LSN is a better approach as it doesn't have the > > dangers of wraparound. And, I think users can use it with the existing > > function pg_replication_origin_advance() which will

Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file

On 2/28/22 23:51, Nathan Bossart wrote: On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 02:06:14PM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote: On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 04:48:52PM +, Chapman Flack wrote: Assuming the value is false, so no error is thrown, is it practical to determine from flinfo->fn_expr whether the value was

Re: Pre-allocating WAL files

On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 02:51:10PM +0300, Maxim Orlov wrote: > I did check the patch too and found it to be ok. Check and check-world are > passed. FYI: this is currently failing in cfbot on linux. https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4934371210690560

Re: Temporary file access API

Greetings, * Antonin Houska (a...@cybertec.at) wrote: > Here I'm starting a new thread to discuss a topic that's related to the > Transparent Data Encryption (TDE), but could be useful even without that. The > problem has been addressed somehow in the Cybertec TDE fork, and I can post > the code

  1   2   >