Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

Hi hackers, > Confirm Here are my two cents. My last email to pgsql-jobs@ was moderated in a similar fashion. To my knowledge that mailing list is not pre-moderated. So it may have the same problem, and not only with patches. (We use regular Google Workspace.) The pgsql-hackers@ thread under

Re: Mingw task for Cirrus CI

On 3/3/22 05:16, Melih Mutlu wrote: > Hi Andres,  >   > > This presumably is due to using mingw's python rather than > python.org 's > python. Seems like a reasonable thing to support for the mingw build. > > Melih, you could try to build against the python.org

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

> On 3 Mar 2022, at 10:11, Yugo NAGATA wrote: > I think this patch set needs more reviews to be commitable in 15, so I > returned the target version to blank. I'll change it to 16 later. I've added 16 as a target version in the CF app now. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 3:31 PM Pavel Borisov wrote: > Hi, hackers! > > Around 2 months ago I've noticed a problem that messages containing > patches in the thread [1] were always processed with manual moderation. > They appear in hackers' thread hours after posting None of them are from > new CF

Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

Hi, hackers! Around 2 months ago I've noticed a problem that messages containing patches in the thread [1] were always processed with manual moderation. They appear in hackers' thread hours after posting None of them are from new CF members and personally, I don't see a reason for such

Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15

BTW messages with patches in this thread are always invoke manual spam moderation and we need to wait for ~3 hours before the message with patch becomes visible in the hackers thread. Now when I've already answered Alexander's letter with v10 patch the very message (and a patch) I've answered is

Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15

> > > The patch doesn't apply - I suppose the patch is relative a forked > postgres > > No, the authors just used a little outdated `master` branch. I > successfully applied it against 31d8d474 and then rebased to the > latest master (62ce0c75). The new version is attached. Not 100% sure if my

Re: row filtering for logical replication

On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 11:18 AM shiy.f...@fujitsu.com wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 10:40 AM Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 5:42 PM Euler Taveira wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022, at 8:45 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > > > > > > While working on the column filtering patch,

Re: Mingw task for Cirrus CI

Hi Andres, > This presumably is due to using mingw's python rather than python.org's > python. Seems like a reasonable thing to support for the mingw build. > > Melih, you could try to build against the python.org python (i installed > in > the CI container). > I tried to use the installed

Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks

On 02.03.22 21:49, samay sharma wrote: I think we are discussing two topics in this thread which in my opinion are orthogonal. (a) Should we make authentication methods pluggable by exposing these hooks? - These will allow users to add plugins of their own to support whatever auth method

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

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 7:47 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > > 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.

Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks

On 02.03.22 15:16, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: What are the reasons they are still purposely using it? The ones I have seen/heard are: - Using an older driver - On a pre-v10 PG - Unaware of SCRAM Another reason is that SCRAM presents subtle operational issues in distributed systems. As someone

Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks

On 02.03.22 16:45, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: By that argument, we should have kept "password" (plain) as an authentication method. For comparison, the time between adding md5 and removing password was 16 years. It has been 5 years since scram was added.

Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks

On 02.03.22 21:26, Stephen Frost wrote: Part of the point, for my part anyway, of dropping support for plaintext transmission would be to remove support for that from libpq, otherwise a compromised server could still potentially convince a client to provide a plaintext password be sent to it.

Re: Support for grabbing multiple consecutive values with nextval()

On 2022-03-03 10:10, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 02.03.22 20:12, Jille Timmermans wrote: On 2022-02-28 11:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 27.02.22 10:42, Jille Timmermans wrote: I wanted to be able to allocate a bunch of numbers from a sequence at once. Multiple people seem to be struggling

RE: Logical replication timeout problem

Dear Wang, > Attach the new patch. [suggestion by Kuroda-San] > 1. Fix the typo. > 2. Improve comment style. > 3. Fix missing consideration. > 4. Add comments to clarifies above functions and function calls. Thank you for updating the patch! I confirmed they were fixed. ```

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

On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 13:39:45 -0500 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: Support for grabbing multiple consecutive values with nextval()

On 02.03.22 20:12, Jille Timmermans wrote: On 2022-02-28 11:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 27.02.22 10:42, Jille Timmermans wrote: I wanted to be able to allocate a bunch of numbers from a sequence at once. Multiple people seem to be struggling with this

Re: libpq compression (part 2)

Ok, thanks > On 3 Mar 2022, at 02:33, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > If there's no objection, I'd like to move this to the next CF for > consideration > in PG16. > > On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 10:39:19PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 02:06:32AM +0500, Daniil Zakhlystov wrote:

Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 8:31 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > I’ve considered a plan for the skipping logical replication > transaction feature toward PG15. Several ideas and patches have been > proposed here and another related thread[1][2] for the skipping > logical replication transaction feature

Re: shared-memory based stats collector

At Wed, 2 Mar 2022 18:16:00 -0800, Andres Freund wrote in > Hi, > > On 2021-07-26 18:27:54 -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > I had intended to post a rebase by now. But while I did mostly finish > > that (see [1]) I unfortunately encountered a new issue around > > partitioned tables, see [2].

<    1   2