Hi Hackers,
I just wrote test about pg_rowlocks extension.
I added sql and spec test for locking state.
---
Regards
DongWook Lee
diff --git a/contrib/pgrowlocks/Makefile b/contrib/pgrowlocks/Makefile
index 294c05dd0f..128f345b7e 100644
--- a/contrib/pgrowlocks/Makefile
+++
Hi hackers,
I wrote a test for pg_prewarm extension. and I wrote it with the aim of
improving test coverage, and feedback is always welcome.
---
Regards
DongWook Lee
diff --git a/contrib/pg_prewarm/Makefile b/contrib/pg_prewarm/Makefile
index b13ac3c813..617ac8e09b 100644
---
On Wed, 2022-06-29 at 10:17 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:52:56AM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > Patch attached. Some kinds of emit log hooks might find it useful
> > to
> > also compute the log_line_prefix.
>
> Have you played with anything specific that would require
On Tue, 2022-06-28 at 23:18 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> I was not after *completely* removing it, but just having an option
> which makes the superuser() function always return false.
Did you test that? I'm guessing that would cause lots of problems,
e.g., installing extensions.
Regards,
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:02:25AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Attached patch is tested, documented and imho ready to be committed,
> so I will mark it so in CFapp.
The behavior introduced by this patch should be reflected in
reindexdb. See in particular reindex_one_database(), where a
On Sat, Jun 25, 2022 at 11:04:37AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I expect pg_upgrade to fail if I run it twice in a row.
Yep.
> It would be reasonable if it were to fail during the "--check" phase,
> maybe by failing like this:
> | New cluster database "..." is not empty: found relation "..."
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 6:04 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> My first thought was that the return value of the call to
> dsm_impl_op() at the end of dsm_attach() is not checked and that maybe
> it was returning NULL, but it seems like whoever wrote
> dsm_impl_posix() was pretty careful to ereport(elevel,
Over on [1] I noticed that the user had set force_parallel_mode to
"on" in the hope that would trick the planner into making their query
run more quickly. Of course, that's not what they want since that GUC
is only there to inject some parallel nodes into the plan in order to
verify the tuple
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 5:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> 5.
> +static ObjTree *
> +deparse_CreateStmt(Oid objectId, Node *parsetree)
> {
> ...
> + tmp = new_objtree_VA("TABLESPACE %{tablespace}I", 0);
> + if (node->tablespacename)
> + append_string_object(tmp, "tablespace", node->tablespacename);
>
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 5:50 PM Marcos Pegoraro wrote:
>
> I don´t know how to create a patch, maybe someday, but for now I´m just
> sending this little problem if somebody can solve it.
>
> In a multi schema environment where several tables has same structure is a
> little bit hard to know
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 06:17:40PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Nice catch, but this looks like massive overkill. I think we can very
> simply fix the test in just a few lines of code, instead of a 190 line
> fix and a 130 line TAP test.
>
> It was never intended to be able to compare markers
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:52:56AM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Patch attached. Some kinds of emit log hooks might find it useful to
> also compute the log_line_prefix.
Have you played with anything specific that would require that? I
am fine to expose this routine, being mostly curious about what
Hackers,
I noticed while doing some memory context related work that since we
now use generation.c memory contexts for tuplesorts (40af10b57) that
tuplesort_putindextuplevalues() causes memory "leaks" in the
generation context due to index_form_tuple() being called while we're
switched into the
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 1:35 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Okay, text updated, thanks. Applied patch attached.
I have some notes on these items:
1. "Allow vacuum to be more aggressive in setting the oldest frozenxid
(Peter Geoghegan)"
2. "Add additional information to VACUUM VERBOSE and
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 10:12:18AM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> That makes sense, but I still think the query_log() function definition
> should go at the end (after done_testing()), so the machinery doesn't
> distract from what's actually being tested.
The majority of TAP scripts
Hi,
Attached is a draft of the release announcement for PostgreSQL 15 Beta
2. Please provide feedback on technical accuracy and if there are
glaring omissions.
Please provide any feedback prior to 2022-06-22 0:00 AoE.
Thanks,
Jonathan
The PostgreSQL Global Development Group announces that
On Sat, 18 Jun 2022 at 08:06, Andres Freund wrote:
> I also attached my heavily-WIP patches for the ExprEvalStep issues, I
> accidentally had only included a small part of the contents of the json fix.
I've now looked at the 0003 patch. I like the idea you have about
moving some of the
Hi,
On 2022-06-27 23:36:53 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> My current thinking is (based on more insights from Andres) that we
> should also have a startup flag to disable superuser altogether to
> avoid bypasses via direct manipulation of pg_proc.
To me that makes no sense whatsoever. You're not
Here's a patch to clarify the BRIN indexes documentation, particularly with
regards
to autosummarize, vacuum and autovacuum. It basically breaks down a big
blob of a
paragraph into multiple paragraphs for clarity, plus explicitly tells how
summarization
happens manually or automatically.
I also
On 2022-06-28 Tu 16:53, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I found a comparaison bug when using the PostgreSQL::Version module. See:
>
> $ perl -I. -MPostgreSQL::Version -le '
> my $v = PostgreSQL::Version->new("9.6");
>
> print "not 9.6 > 9.0" unless $v > 9.0;
> print
I was not after *completely* removing it, but just having an option
which makes the superuser() function always return false.
For known cases of needing a superuser there would be a way to enable
it , perhaps via a sentinel file or pg_hba-like configuration file.
And as first cut I would
Hi,
I found a comparaison bug when using the PostgreSQL::Version module. See:
$ perl -I. -MPostgreSQL::Version -le '
my $v = PostgreSQL::Version->new("9.6");
print "not 9.6 > 9.0" unless $v > 9.0;
print "not 9.6 < 9.0" unless $v < 9.0;
print "9.6 <= 9.0"if $v <=
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 11:37:19PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 11:44:15AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I have completed the first draft of the PG 15 release notes
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Remove PUBLIC creation permission on the >
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:47 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> Now you do need something that will make the three meanings different
>> in order to test that step. But I'd suggest some bit of throwaway code
>> that just assigns randomly different logical and physical orders.
>
On Sat, 18 Jun 2022 at 05:21, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2022-06-17 14:14:54 +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> > So, there appears to be no performance regression due to the extra
> > indirection. There's maybe even some gains due to the smaller step
> > size.
>
> "smaller step size"?
I mean smaller
Patch attached.
Helpful for debugging complex extension script problems.
From b278eba9ba35ec1c52a8c1aa5c080a6731f86fbe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jeff Davis
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 12:06:03 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Emit debug message when executing extension script.
Outputting script filenames
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:47 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Now you do need something that will make the three meanings different
> in order to test that step. But I'd suggest some bit of throwaway code
> that just assigns randomly different logical and physical orders.
That seems like a good idea.
Patch attached. Some kinds of emit log hooks might find it useful to
also compute the log_line_prefix.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From c3d4f14602c043918b8b6dab88a976dac1923208 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jeff Davis
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 11:39:33 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Export
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> If you do not provide a column identity number or you use something else
> (e.g. attlognum) to cross-references attributes from other catalogs,
> then you'll have to edit pg_attrdef when a column moves; and any other
> reference to a column number will have to change. Or
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 06:07:08PM +0300, Alexander Pyhalov wrote:
> I've rebased patches and tried to fix issues I've seen. I've fixed reference
> after table_close() in the first patch (can be seen while building with
> CPPFLAGS='-DRELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE').
Thanks for finding that.
The
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 5:37 PM Hannu Krosing wrote:
> My current thinking is (based on more insights from Andres) that we
> should also have a startup flag to disable superuser altogether to
> avoid bypasses via direct manipulation of pg_proc.
>
> Experience shows that 99% of the time one can
On 2022-Jun-28, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 10:53:14AM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > My feeling is that every aspect of user interaction should show
> > columns ordered in logical order.
>
> I'm not entirely sure of what you meant. Assuming tables a(a, z) and b(b, z),
>
On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 13:45, Simon Riggs wrote:
> but since the number of combinations is usually 1, but even then, low,
> it can be cached easily in a smgr array and included in the checkpoint
> record (or nearby) for ease of use.
I was reading the thread to keep up with storage-related
On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 8:06 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> I know that on Solaris we use dynamic_shared_memory=posix. The other
> Solaris/Sparc system is wrasse, and it's not doing this. I don't see
> it yet, but figured I'd report this much to the list in case someone
> else does.
My first thought
On Mon, 2022-06-27 at 23:36 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> My current thinking is (based on more insights from Andres) that we
> should also have a startup flag to disable superuser altogether to
> avoid bypasses via direct manipulation of pg_proc.
What do you mean by "disable superuser
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:25 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> But the primary problem we're trying to solve here is that right now
> we sometimes reuse the same filename for a whole new file, and that
> results in bugs that only manifest themselves in obscure
> circumstances, e.g. see
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 5:49 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Monday, June 20, 2022 11:32 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Saturday, June 18, 2022 3:38 AM Zheng Li wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 12:00 AM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2022
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 7:45 AM Simon Riggs
wrote:
> Another approach would be to condense spcOid and dbOid into a single
> 4-byte Oid-like number, since in most cases they are associated with
> each other, and not often many of them anyway. So this new number
> would indicate both the database
On 2022-06-24 Fr 10:13, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> On 22.06.22 15:45, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Doesn't this amount to a fundamental ABI break for extensions?
>>> Yesterday they had to ship foo.so, today they have to ship foo.dylib.
>> Extensions generally only load the module
Simple Rebase
From 8dfed1a64308a84cc15679e09af69ca6989b608b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Greg Stark
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 15:50:02 -0400
Subject: [PATCH v7 3/3] Add test for truncating temp tables advancing
relfrozenxid
This test depends on other transactions not running at the same time
so
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 08:38:56AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 04:32:30PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > psql displays a table columns information using the logical order rather the
> > physical order, and if verbose emits an addition "Physical order" footer if
>
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 04:32:30PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> psql displays a table columns information using the logical order rather the
> physical order, and if verbose emits an addition "Physical order" footer if
> the
> logical layout is different from the physical one.
FYI: the footer
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 09:00:05AM -0400, Isaac Morland wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 05:32, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>
> > I think that supporting at least a way to specify the logical order during
> > the
> > table creation should be easy to implement (there shouldn't be any
> > question on
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 1:24 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> > I
> > suspect other optimizations would be worth a lot more than using AVX2:
> > - collapsing inner nodes
> > - taking care when constructing the key (more on this when we
> > integrate with VACUUM)
> > ...and a couple Andres mentioned:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 00:32, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> As to forcing SQL-complaint queries, that ship sailed a long time ago:
> > Postgres allows but does not enforce the use of SQL-compliant queries,
> and
> > many of its important features are extensions anyway, so forcing SQL
> > compliant
On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 05:32, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> I think that supporting at least a way to specify the logical order during
> the
> table creation should be easy to implement (there shouldn't be any
> question on whether it needs to invalidate any cache or what lock level to
> use), and
Hi Simon,
Many thanks for your feedback!
I'm going to submit an updated version of the patch in a bit. I just
wanted to reply to some of your questions / comments.
> Dictionaries have no versioning. [...]
> Does the order of entries in the dictionary allow us to express a priority?
> i.e. to
I don´t know how to create a patch, maybe someday, but for now I´m just
sending this little problem if somebody can solve it.
In a multi schema environment where several tables has same structure is a
little bit hard to know which one already has that primary key.
On log I see now on replica
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 5:49 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Monday, June 20, 2022 11:32 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
>
> Attach the new version patch set which added support for CREATE/DROP/ATER
> Sequence and CREATE/DROP Schema ddl commands which are provided by Ajin
>
В Вт, 28/06/2022 в 14:26 +0300, Yura Sokolov пишет:
> В Вт, 28/06/2022 в 14:13 +0300, Yura Sokolov пишет:
>
> > Tests:
> > - tests done on 2 socket Xeon 5220 2.20GHz with turbo bust disabled
> > (ie max frequency is 2.20GHz)
>
> Forgot to mention:
> - this time it was Centos7.9.2009 (Core)
On 6/28/22 01:00, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
At Tue, 28 Jun 2022 13:41:58 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote
in
Hi all,
While browsing through the recent changes with the base backup APIs, I
have noticed that a couple of comments did not get the renaming of the
SQL functions to pg_backup_start/stop,
I have been interested in a query that returns a batch of results filtered
by a subset of the first column of an index and ordered by the second.
I created a simple (hopefully) reproducible example of the issue, the two
queries describe the same data but have very different costs (explain
output
On Sat, 25 Jun 2022 at 02:30, Andres Freund wrote:
> > And then like this in 0003:
> >
> > typedef struct buftag
> > {
> > Oid spcOid;
> > Oid dbOid;
> > RelFileNumber fileNumber:56;
> > ForkNumber forkNum:8;
> > } BufferTag;
>
> Probably worth checking the generated
В Вт, 28/06/2022 в 14:13 +0300, Yura Sokolov пишет:
> Tests:
> - tests done on 2 socket Xeon 5220 2.20GHz with turbo bust disabled
> (ie max frequency is 2.20GHz)
Forgot to mention:
- this time it was Centos7.9.2009 (Core) with Linux mn10 3.10.0-1160.el7.x86_64
Perhaps older kernel describes
On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 08:29, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 at 01:02, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 02:30:32PM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > I was thinking the opposite: REINDEX DATABASE with or without a database
> > > name should always process the
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 10:53:14AM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2022-Jun-28, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>
> > So, assuming that the current JOIN expansion order shouldn't be
> > changed, I implemented the last approach I mentioned.
>
> Yeah, I'm not sure that this is a good assumption. I
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 12:27:57PM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> I forgot to mention, I also changed the order of the query and
>> parameters, so that they can more naturally be left out when no changes
>> are needed.
>
> I can see that, and I have added
On 2022-Jun-28, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> So, assuming that the current JOIN expansion order shouldn't be
> changed, I implemented the last approach I mentioned.
Yeah, I'm not sure that this is a good assumption. I mean, if logical
order is the order in which users see the table columns, then why
--- Original Message ---
On Sunday, June 26th, 2022 at 5:55 PM, Justin Pryzby
wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Will you be able to send a rebased patch for the next CF ?
Thank you for taking an interest in the PR. The plan is indeed to sent
a new version.
> If you update for the review
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 12:27:57PM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> I forgot to mention, I also changed the order of the query and
> parameters, so that they can more naturally be left out when no changes
> are needed.
I can see that, and I have added $node as an extra parameter of the
On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 at 01:02, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 02:30:32PM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I was thinking the opposite: REINDEX DATABASE with or without a database
> > name should always process the user relations and skip system catalogs.
> > If the user wants to
Am 28.06.2022 um 08:27 schrieb Thomas Munro:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 12:05 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
BF animal margay (a newly started Solaris 11.4/Sparc/GCC 11.2 box) is
sometimes failing with:
TRAP: FailedAssertion("seg->mapped_address != NULL", File: "dsm.c",
Line: 1069, PID: 9038)
I spent
On Tues, Jun 28, 2022 at 12:15 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 8:51 AM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 16:44 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 12:51 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jun 20, 2022
I'd like to look into the WAL segments related to the failure.
Mmm... With the patch, xlogreader->abortedRecPtr is valid only and
always when the last read failed record was an aborted contrec. If
recovery ends here the first insereted record is an "aborted contrec"
record. I still see it as the
On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 11:44:15AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have completed the first draft of the PG 15 release notes
>
>
>
>
> Remove PUBLIC creation permission on thelinkend="ddl-schemas-public">public schema
> (Noah Misch)
>
>
>
> This
On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 12:05 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> BF animal margay (a newly started Solaris 11.4/Sparc/GCC 11.2 box) is
> sometimes failing with:
>
> TRAP: FailedAssertion("seg->mapped_address != NULL", File: "dsm.c",
> Line: 1069, PID: 9038)
I spent some time on the GCC farm machine gcc211
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 8:12 PM John Naylor
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 7:57 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> [v3 patch]
>
> Hi Masahiko,
>
> Since there are new files, and they are pretty large, I've attached
> most specific review comments and questions as a diff rather than in
> the
67 matches
Mail list logo
