On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 08:09:56PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Looks reasonable to me.
0001, to move pg_pwritev_with_retry() to a new home, seems fine, so
applied.
Regarding 0002, using pg_pwrite_zeros() as a routine name, as
suggested by Thomas, sounds good to me. However, I am not really a
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 12:08:31PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> Putting things afresh, there are two different things here (sorry I
> need to see that typed ;p):
> 1) How do we want to check reliably the loading of the HBA and ident
> files on errors?
I guess you meant the failure to
As part of the AIO work [1], there are quite a number of dlist_heads
which a counter is used to keep track on how many items are in the
list. We also have a few places in master which do the same thing.
In order to tidy this up and to help ensure that the count variable
does not get out of sync
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 9:11 AM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
>
> True. I'm going to start with 6 bytes and will consider reducing it to
> 5 bytes.
Okay, let's plan on 6 for now, so we have the worst-case sizes up front. As
discussed, I will attempt the size class decoupling after v8 and see how it
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 11:32:14PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> Have you already done a rebase while working on the patch or are you intending
> to take care of it, or should I? Let's no both do the work :)
Spoiler alert: I have not done a rebase yet ;)
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 11:32:14PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> I don't mind taking care of that, but before doing so I'd like to have some
> feedback on whether you're ok with my approach (per my initial email about it
> at [1]) or if you had some different
> ideas on how to do it.
Putting
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 09:49:34PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> In v4, Peter posted a 2-patch series with my patch as 001.
> But I pointed out that it's better to fix the initialization of the
> compile-time GUCs rather than exclude them from the check.
> Then Peter submitted v5 whcih does that,
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 4:25 PM David Rowley wrote:
> One other thought I had about the duplicate "Limit" node in the final
> plan was that we could make the limit clause an Expr like
> LEAST(, 1). That way we could ensure we get at
> most 1 row, but perhaps less if the expression given in the
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 1:33 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 09:14:37PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > It seems like you're reviewing the previous version of the patch, rather
> > than the one attached to the message you responded to (which doesn't
> > have anything to do
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:33:48AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 09:14:37PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > It seems like you're reviewing the previous version of the patch, rather
> > than the one attached to the message you responded to (which doesn't
> > have anything
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 6:29 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 4:36 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 1:20 PM Amit Langote
> > wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 1:27 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > > > 0001 adds es_part_prune_result but does not use it, so maybe
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 7:19 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 8:38 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 6:32 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> >
> > I've started to review this patch. I tested v40-0001 patch and have
> > one question:
> >
> > IIUC even
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 09:14:37PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> It seems like you're reviewing the previous version of the patch, rather
> than the one attached to the message you responded to (which doesn't
> have anything to do with GUC_DEFAULT_COMPILE).
It does not seem so as things stand, I
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:06:56AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 06:31:56PM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> > I re-checked all the GUC C vars which your patch flags as
> > GUC_DEFAULT_COMPILE. For some of them, where it was not any trouble, I
> > made the C var assignment use
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 8:06 PM John Naylor
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 12:54 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>
> > I've attached updated PoC patches for discussion and cfbot. From the
> > previous version, I mainly changed the following things:
> >
Thank you for the comments!
> > *
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 06:31:56PM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> I re-checked all the GUC C vars which your patch flags as
> GUC_DEFAULT_COMPILE. For some of them, where it was not any trouble, I
> made the C var assignment use the same preprocessor rules as used by
> guc_tables. For others (mostly
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 01:41:12PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> We will have bigger problems when a backend corrupts the pg_control
> file, no? The bigger problems could be that the server won't come up
> or it behaves abnormally or some other.
Possibly, yes.
> Can't the CRC check detect
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 2:13 AM jack...@gmail.com wrote:
> typedef struct A_Expr
>
>
>
> {
>
>
>
> pg_node_attr(custom_read_write)
>
>
>
> NodeTag type;
>
>
>
> A_Expr_Kind kind; /* see above */
>
>
>
> List *name; /* possibly-qualified name of
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 7:43 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 11:35:10AM -0700, samay sharma wrote:
> > Creating a new thread focussed on adding docs for building Postgres with
> > meson. This is a spinoff from the original thread [1] and I've attempted
> to
> > address all
Hi,
On 2022-10-24 14:38:52 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > - "repossession" is a very unintuitive name for me. If we want something
> > like
> > it, can't we just name it reuse_failed or such?
>
> Repossession could be called eviction_failed or reuse_failed.
> Do we think we will ever want
okay, so I realized v35 had an issue where I wasn't counting strategy
evictions correctly. fixed in attached v36. This made me wonder if there
is actually a way to add a test for evictions (in strategy and shared
contexts) that is not flakey.
On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 6:48 PM Maciek Sakrejda
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 03:56:07PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> So, I have spent a good portion of today looking at what you have
> here, applying 0001 and 0003 while fixing, rebasing and testing the
> whole, discarding 0002 (we could do more for the line number and
> source file in terms of
24.08.2022 20:58, Tom Lane writes:
Nice work! I wonder if you can make the regex crashes reachable by
reducing the value of max_stack_depth enough that it's hit before
reaching the "regular expression is too complex" limit.
regards, tom lane
Hello everyone! It's been a
Richard Guo writes:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 6:09 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> The only thing that I think might be controversial here is that
>> I dropped the check for matching operator OID. To preserve that,
>> we'd have needed to use get_commutator() in the reverse-match cases,
>> which it seemed
On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 8:38 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 6:32 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
>
> I've started to review this patch. I tested v40-0001 patch and have
> one question:
>
> IIUC even when most of the changes in the transaction are filtered out
> in
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 12:54 PM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
> I've attached updated PoC patches for discussion and cfbot. From the
> previous version, I mainly changed the following things:
>
> * Separate treatment of inner and leaf nodes
Overall, this looks much better!
> * Pack both the node
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 6:09 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> While fooling with my longstanding outer-join variables changes
> (I am making progress on that, honest), I happened to notice that
> equivclass.c is leaving some money on the table by generating
> redundant RestrictInfo clauses. It already
On Thu, 29 Sept 2022 at 18:12, David Rowley wrote:
> In the attached patch, I've added a function named
> tuplesort_getdatum_nocopy() which is the same as tuplesort_getdatum()
> only without the datumCopy(). I opted for the new function rather than
> a new parameter in the existing function just
Hello,
Thanks for reviewing. Committed.
Let me return to this topic.
After looking at the changes in this patch, I have a suggestion.
The inheritance option for role memberships is important information to
know if the role privileges will be available automatically or if a
switch with a
On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 9:29 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> Here's a different take. Instead of creating structs and altering function
> signatures, we can just make the wake-up times file-global, and we can skip
> the changes related to reducing the number of calls to
> GetCurrentTimestamp() for
typedef struct A_Expr
{
pg_node_attr(custom_read_write)
NodeTag type;
A_Expr_Kind kind; /* see above */
List *name; /* possibly-qualified name of operator */
Node *lexpr; /* left argument, or NULL if none */
On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 at 15:15, Richard Guo wrote:
> The v3 patch looks good to me.
Thank you for looking at that.
One other thought I had about the duplicate "Limit" node in the final
plan was that we could make the limit clause an Expr like
LEAST(, 1). That way we could ensure we get at
most 1
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 12:48 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 10:13:29AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > +1 for improving the test coverage. Is there a strong reason to
> > validate individual output columns rather than select count(*) > 0
> > from pg_control_();
Thanks for the feedback. PSA the v5 patch.
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 7:04 AM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> +#ifdef USE_ASSERT_CHECKING
> + sanity_check_GUC_C_var(hentry->gucvar);
> +#endif
>
> => You can conditionally define that as an empty function so #ifdefs
> aren't needed in the
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 10:13:29AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> +1 for improving the test coverage. Is there a strong reason to
> validate individual output columns rather than select count(*) > 0
> from pg_control_(); sort of tests? If the intention is to validate
> the pg_controlfile
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 11:19:48AM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> That wouldn't be overdoing anymore if we remove the line number / filename
> from
> the fill_*_line prototypes right?
So, I have spent a good portion of today looking at what you have
here, applying 0001 and 0003 while fixing,
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 1:00 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 09:07:04PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > XLogBackupResetRunning() seemed better. +1 for above function names.
>
> I see what you are doing here. XLogCtl would still live in xlog.c,
> but we want to have
37 matches
Mail list logo
