Michael Paquier writes:
> And I've learnt today that we enforce a definition of __has_attribute
> at the top of c.h, and that we already rely on that. So I agree that
> what you are doing in 0002 should be enough. Should we wait until 16~
> opens for business though? I don't see a strong
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 10:43:17AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Makes sense. Here's a new patch set. 0001 is the part intended for
> back-patching, and 0002 is the rest (i.e., adding pg_attribute_nonnull()).
> I switched to using __has_attribute to discover whether nonnull was
Okay, I have
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:24 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> Rebased, debugged and fleshed out a tiny bit more, but still with
> plenty of TODO notes and questions. I will talk about this idea at
> PGCon, so I figured it'd help to have a patch that actually applies,
> even if it doesn't work quite
Em sex., 27 de mai. de 2022 às 18:22, Andres Freund
escreveu:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-05-27 10:35:08 -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > Em qui., 26 de mai. de 2022 às 22:30, Tomas Vondra <
> > tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com> escreveu:
> >
> > > On 5/27/22 02:11, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ...
>
Em sex., 27 de mai. de 2022 às 18:08, Andres Freund
escreveu:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-05-27 03:30:46 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > On 5/27/22 02:11, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > > ./pgbench -M prepared -c $conns -j $conns -T 60 -S -n -U postgres
> > >
> > > pgbench (15beta1)
> > > transaction type:
> >
> At PostGIS we've been thinking of ways to have better support, from
> PostgreSQL proper, to our upgrade strategy, which has always consisted in
a
> SINGLE upgrade file good for upgrading from any older version.
>
> The current lack of such support for EXTENSIONs forced us to install a lot
of
>
Hi,
On 2022-05-27 10:35:08 -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Em qui., 26 de mai. de 2022 às 22:30, Tomas Vondra <
> tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com> escreveu:
>
> > On 5/27/22 02:11, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Here the results with -T 60:
> >
> > Might be a good idea to share your
Hi,
While investigating an internal report, I concluded that it is a bug. The
reproducible test case is simple (check 0002) and it consists of a FOR ALL
TABLES publication and a non-empty materialized view on publisher. After the
setup, if you refresh the MV, you got the following message on the
Hi,
On 2022-05-27 03:30:46 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 5/27/22 02:11, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > ./pgbench -M prepared -c $conns -j $conns -T 60 -S -n -U postgres
> >
> > pgbench (15beta1)
> > transaction type:
> > scaling factor: 1
> > query mode: prepared
> > number of clients: 100
> >
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 3:53 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> Windows 8 ends its support
> in 2023, it seems, so that sounds short even for PG16.
I guess you meant 8.1 here, and corresponding server release 2012 R2.
These will come to the end of their "extended" support phase in 2023,
before PG16
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 10:21 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> What I'd suggest is to promote that failure to elog(PANIC), which
>> would at least give us the PID and if we're lucky a stack trace.
> That proposed change is fine with me.
> As to the question of whether it's a real
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 1:10 AM Amit Langote
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 12:53 PM Zhihong Yu wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 8:05 PM Amit Langote
> wrote:
> >> Sending v15 that fixes that to keep the cfbot green for now.
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > + /* RT index of the partitione
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 10:21 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> That's possible, certainly. It's also possible that it's a real bug
> that so far has only manifested there for (say) timing reasons.
> The buildfarm is not so large that we can write off single-machine
> failures as being unlikely to hit in the
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:59 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-05-27 11:48:45 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > I find it hard to believe that there wasn't even a cursory effort at
> > performance validation before this was committed, but that's what it
> > looks like.
>
> Yea. Imo this pretty
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, passed
Documentation:tested, passed
Hello
The patch applies and tests fine and I think this
On 2022-05-27 11:48:45 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 8:55 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > Anyway, how about if we clear this cache for subtrans whenever
> > > TransactionXmin is advanced and cachedFetchSubXid precedes it? The
> > > comments atop
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 8:55 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Anyway, how about if we clear this cache for subtrans whenever
> > TransactionXmin is advanced and cachedFetchSubXid precedes it? The
> > comments atop SubTransGetTopmostTransaction seem to state that we
> > don't care about the exact
On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 11:01:44PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
>> FWIW, I would be fine to backpatch the NULL handling for short_desc,
>> while treating the addition of nonnull as a HEAD-only change.
>
> Yeah, sounds about right to me. My guess is that we will need
> a
Only in an ideal world are all standards observed...
Docker has different standards inside.
$ ls -l /home/neo/
drwxr-xr-x2 pgsql pgsql 8192 May 27 10:37 data
drwxr-sr-x2 pgsql pgsql 4096 May 24 09:35 data2
/home/pgsql/data - mounted volume.
Therefore, the
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 7:19 AM Zheng Li wrote:
>
> Hi Masahiko,
>
> > Thank you for updating the patches!
> >
> > I've not looked at these patches in-depth yet but with this approach,
> > what do you think we can handle the DDL syntax differences between
> > major versions? DDL syntax or
On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 3:10 PM Tom Lane wrote:
Can you do anything useful with attaching selectivity estimates
to the functions it references, instead?
I may have been doing down a bad path before. The function I'm
working to improve has five argument, the last being "degrees", which
is the
Hi,
On 2022-05-27 15:44:39 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 12:53 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 04:52:50PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > > 2) xid wraparound. There's nothing forcing
> > > SubTransGetTopmostTransaction() to
> > >be called
Yura Sokolov writes:
> В Вт, 24/05/2022 в 17:39 -0700, Andres Freund пишет:
>> A variation on your patch would be to only store the offset to the block
>> header - that should always fit into 32bit (huge allocations being their own
>> block, which is why this wouldn't work for storing an offset
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 7:55 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
>> Thanks. Hmm. So far it's always a parallel worker. The best idea I
>> have is to include the ID of the mystery PID in the error message and
>> see if that provides a clue next time.
> ... Even if we find a bug in
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 7:55 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> Thanks. Hmm. So far it's always a parallel worker. The best idea I
> have is to include the ID of the mystery PID in the error message and
> see if that provides a clue next time.
What I'm inclined to do is get gharial and anole removed
Em qui., 26 de mai. de 2022 às 22:30, Tomas Vondra <
tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com> escreveu:
> On 5/27/22 02:11, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Here the results with -T 60:
>
> Might be a good idea to share your analysis / interpretation of the
> results, not just the raw data. After
В Вт, 24/05/2022 в 17:39 -0700, Andres Freund пишет:
>
> A variation on your patch would be to only store the offset to the block
> header - that should always fit into 32bit (huge allocations being their own
> block, which is why this wouldn't work for storing an offset to the
> context). With a
On 26.05.22 22:52, Justin Pryzby wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 05:43:04AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 04:36:47PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I chose TESTOUTDIR because it corresponds to the tmp_check directory, so
that the output files of the pg_upgrade run are
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 5:11 PM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 24.05.22 23:23, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > AT_EnableTrig, /* ENABLE TRIGGER name */
> > + AT_EnableTrigRecurse, /* internal to commands/tablecmds.c */
> > AT_EnableAlwaysTrig,/* ENABLE
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 7:15 PM Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 1:58 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > Committed, except I adjusted the v11 version so that the CREATE
> > FOREIGN TABLE documentation would match the CREATE TABLE documentation
> > in that branch.
>
> I think we should fix
On 24.05.22 22:58, Nathan Bossart wrote:
FWIW this was my original thinking. I can choose to build/install
extensions separately, but when it comes to PL/Tcl and PL/Perl, you've
got to build the trusted and untrusted stuff at the same time, and the
untrusted symbols remain even if you remove
On Fri, 2022-05-27 at 15:30 +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> Currently, lo_creat(e), lo_import, lo_unlink, lowrite, lo_put,
> and lo_from_bytea are allowed even in read-only transactions.
> By using them, pg_largeobject and pg_largeobject_metatable can
> be modified in read-only transactions and the
On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 2:35 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Thomas Munro writes:
> > On a more practical note, I don't have access to the BF database right
> > now. Would you mind checking if "latch already owned" has occurred on
> > any other animals?
>
> Looking back 6 months, these are the only
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 1:58 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> Committed, except I adjusted the v11 version so that the CREATE
> FOREIGN TABLE documentation would match the CREATE TABLE documentation
> in that branch.
I think we should fix the syntax synopsis in the Parameters section
of the CREATE
On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 12:53 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 04:52:50PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > 2) xid wraparound. There's nothing forcing SubTransGetTopmostTransaction()
> > to
> >be called regularly, so even if a backend isn't idle, the cache could
> >
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 5:04 PM shiy.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2022 7:55 PM vignesh C wrote:
> >
> > The attached v16 patch has the changes for the same.
> >
>
> Thanks for updating the patch.
>
> Some comments for the document in 0002 patch.
>
> 1.
> +
> +Lock the
Hello,
I found that tests for TRUNCATE on foreign tables are left
in the foreign_data regression test. Now TRUNCATE on foreign
tables are allowed, so I think the tests should be removed.
Currently, the results of the test is
"ERROR: foreign-data wrapper "dummy" has no handler",
but it is just
On 24.05.22 23:23, Zhihong Yu wrote:
Hi,
AT_EnableTrig, /* ENABLE TRIGGER name */
+ AT_EnableTrigRecurse, /* internal to commands/tablecmds.c */
AT_EnableAlwaysTrig, /* ENABLE ALWAYS TRIGGER name */
+ AT_EnableAlwaysTrigRecurse, /* internal to
On Friday, May 27, 2022 1:54 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:17:00AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 11:03 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Friday, May 20, 2022 11:06 AM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for pointing it out.
On Wed, May 25, 2022 7:55 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> The attached v16 patch has the changes for the same.
>
Thanks for updating the patch.
Some comments for the document in 0002 patch.
1.
+
+Lock the required tables in node1 and
+node2 till the setup is completed.
+
+
+
+
At Fri, 27 May 2022 02:01:27 +, "Imseih (AWS), Sami"
wrote in
> After further research, we found the following.
>
> Testing on 13.6 with the attached patch we see
> that the missingContrecPtr is being incorrectly
> set on the standby and the promote in the tap
> test fails.
>
> Per the
Hello,
Currently, lo_creat(e), lo_import, lo_unlink, lowrite, lo_put,
and lo_from_bytea are allowed even in read-only transactions.
By using them, pg_largeobject and pg_largeobject_metatable can
be modified in read-only transactions and the effect remains
after the transaction finished. Is it
On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 1:30 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> - If true, the stats include inheritance child columns, not just the
> + If true, the stats include child tables, not just the
>
> We are replacing columns with tables; is that intentional?
>
> Partitioned tables do not
43 matches
Mail list logo
