On 1/29/24 15:15, Ronan Dunklau wrote:
> Le lundi 29 janvier 2024, 13:17:07 CET Tomas Vondra a écrit :
>>> Did you try running an strace on the process ? That may give you some
>>> hindsights into what malloc is doing. A more sophisticated approach would
>>> be using stap and plugging it into
On 27.01.24 20:04, Tom Lane wrote:
Buildfarm member caiman has been failing build for a couple weeks now.
The reason turns out to be that recent libxml2 has decided to throw
a "const" into the signature required for custom error handlers.
(API compatibility? What's that?)
I don't mind adopting
Le lundi 29 janvier 2024, 13:17:07 CET Tomas Vondra a écrit :
> > Did you try running an strace on the process ? That may give you some
> > hindsights into what malloc is doing. A more sophisticated approach would
> > be using stap and plugging it into the malloc probes, for example
> >
> On 29 Jan 2024, at 14:37, Mikhail Gribkov wrote:
> I have tried to analyse Postgres code with Svace static analyzer [1] and
> found something I think is a real bug.
>
> In pgp-decrypt.c, in prefix_init function the following check:
> if (len > sizeof(tmpbuf))
>
> seem to be erroneous and
On 1/28/24 20:09, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 12:08:46PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
Well, I'm OK with this consensus on 1d35f705e if folks think this is
useful enough for all the stable branches.
I have done that down to REL_15_STABLE for now as this is able to
apply
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 7:38 PM Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
>
> tl;dr I believe we should remove the uuidv7(timestamp) function from
> this patchset.
>
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 at 18:04, Sergey Prokhorenko
> wrote:
> > In this case the documentation must state that the functions
> >
On Monday, January 29, 2024 9:17 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> On Monday, January 29, 2024 7:30 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 3:11 PM shveta malik
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > PFA v71 patch set with above changes.
> > >
> >
> > Few comments on 0001
>
> Thanks for the
On 2024-01-26 Fr 15:17, Tom Lane wrote:
Pavel Stehule writes:
I don't know, maybe I have a problem with the described use case. I cannot
imagine holding the body and head of PL routines in different places and I
don't understand the necessity to join it.
It seems a little weird to me too,
Hi hackers,
I have tried to analyse Postgres code with Svace static analyzer [1] and
found something I think is a real bug.
In pgp-decrypt.c, in prefix_init function the following check:
if (len > sizeof(tmpbuf))
seem to be erroneous and should really look this way:
if (len > PGP_MAX_BLOCK)
> plpgsq_check can show dependencies
> https://github.com/okbob/plpgsql_check#dependency-list
That's not exactly what I was looking for, but it's a useful tool that could
help me anyway. Thanks!
On 2024-01-27 Sa 14:04, Tom Lane wrote:
Buildfarm member caiman has been failing build for a couple weeks now.
The reason turns out to be that recent libxml2 has decided to throw
a "const" into the signature required for custom error handlers.
(API compatibility? What's that?)
I don't mind
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 at 11:30, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
>
> Hello hackers,
>
> After determining a possible cause for intermittent failures of the test
> subscription/031_column_list [1], I was wondering what makes another
> subscription test (014_binary) fail on the buildfarm:
>
On Monday, January 29, 2024 7:30 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 3:11 PM shveta malik
> wrote:
> >
> > PFA v71 patch set with above changes.
> >
>
> Few comments on 0001
Thanks for the comments.
> ===
> 1.
> parse_subscription_options()
> {
> ...
> /*
> *
Hello
In Dilip's patch to improve SLRU concurrency, there's a requirement to
prevent predicate.c's SLRU control lock from being used to control
access to another shared memory structure, SerialControlData. This
struct is used to keep track of the areas of the SLRU that are valid.
Dilip just
Hi,
Updated the patch to fix typos and move
ProcessLogQueryPlanInterruptActive from errfinish() to AbortTransaction.
BTW since the thread is getting long, I list the some points of the
discussion so far:
# Safety concern
## Catalog access inside CFI
- it seems safe if the CFI call is
Hi.
I've rebased patch on master and it'seems to me there's one more issue -
when we call DefineIndexConcurrentInternal() in partitioned case, it
waits for transactions, locking tableId, not tabrelid - heaprelid
LockRelId is constructed for parent index relation, not for child index
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 at 20:44, David Zhang wrote:
>
> Thank you for the patch.
>
> I applied this patch manually to the master branch, resolving a conflict
> in `numeric.h`. It successfully passed both `make check` and `make
> check-world`.
>
Thanks for testing.
Interestingly, the cfbot didn't
Hello hackers,
While investigating some query plans, I noticed some code that seems
to be wrong: when create_merge_append_path() estimates the cost of
sorting an input, it calls cost_sort() passing subpath->parent->tuples
as the number of tuples. Shouldn't it use subpath->parent->rows or
even
On Thu, 28 Dec 2023 at 07:34, jian he wrote:
>
> Your patch works.
> performance is the best amount for other options in [0].
> I don't have deep knowledge about which one is more random.
>
Thanks for testing.
> Currently we have to explicitly mention the lower and upper bound.
> but can we do
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 at 12:44, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Thanks! I committed 0001 now. I also renamed the new
> pq_parse_int_param to pqParseIntParam, for consistency with other
> routines there. Please rebase the other patches.
Awesome! Rebased, and renamed pq_release_conn_hosts to
On 1/29/24 09:53, Ronan Dunklau wrote:
> Le dimanche 28 janvier 2024, 22:57:02 CET Tomas Vondra a écrit :
>
> Hi Tomas !
>
> I'll comment on glibc-malloc part as I studied that part last year, and
> proposed some things here: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/
>
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 at 13:31, Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
> PFA v14.
+uuidv4 () uuid
+
+ Both functions return a version 4 (random) UUID. This is the most commonly
+ used type of UUID and is appropriate when random distribution of keys does
+ not affect performance of an application.
+
On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 8:37 PM vignesh C wrote:
> I'm seeing that there has been no activity in this thread for nearly 6
> months, I'm planning to close this in the current commitfest unless
> someone is planning to take it forward. It can be opened again when
> there is more interest.
I'm
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 2:29 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > +/*
> > > + * Calculate the slab blocksize so that we can allocate at least 32
> > > chunks
> > > + * from the block.
> > > + */
> > > +#define RT_SLAB_BLOCK_SIZE(size) \
> > > + Max((SLAB_DEFAULT_BLOCK_SIZE / (size)) * (size), (size)
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 12:57 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 10:57 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you. I'm attaching v8 patch-set here which includes use of new
> > insert TAMs for COPY FROM. With this, postgres not only will have the
> > new TAM for
On 2024-Jan-28, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 at 10:51, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> > Both of those are fixed now.
>
> Okay, there turned out to also be an issue on Windows with
> setKeepalivesWin32 not being available in fe-cancel.c. That's fixed
> now too (as well as some
tl;dr I believe we should remove the uuidv7(timestamp) function from
this patchset.
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 at 18:04, Sergey Prokhorenko
wrote:
> In this case the documentation must state that the functions
> uuid_extract_time() and uuidv7(T) are against the RFC requirements, and that
> developers
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 3:11 PM shveta malik wrote:
>
> PFA v71 patch set with above changes.
>
Few comments on 0001
===
1.
parse_subscription_options()
{
...
/*
* We've been explicitly asked to not connect, that requires some
* additional processing.
*/
if (!opts->connect &&
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 10:10 AM vignesh C wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comments, the attached v5 version patch has the changes
> for the same.
Thanks for working on this. Here are some comments on the v5 patch:
1.
+
+ Migration of logical replication clusters is possible only when all the
+
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 at 15:57, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Well, firstly this is clearly a feature we want to have, even though
> it's non-standard, because people use it and other implementations have
> it. (Eh, so maybe somebody should be talking to the SQL standard
> committee about it). As for
Hi,
In
"Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations" on
Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:37:07 +0800,
Junwang Zhao wrote:
>> > > Does it make sense to pass only non-builtin options to the custom
>> > > format callback after parsing and evaluating the builtin options? That
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:55 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> But I did not find a query that makes an incremental sort in this case.
> After trying for a while it seems to me that we do not need to consider
> incremental sort in this case, because for a partial path of a grouped
> or partially grouped
ne 28. 1. 2024 v 22:52 odesílatel Jelte Fennema-Nio
napsal:
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 at 20:01, Pavel Stehule
> wrote:
> > There is another reason - compatibility with other drivers. We maintain
> just libpq, but there are JDBC, Npgsql, and some native Python drivers. I
> didn't checked, but maybe
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 02:35:52PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 2:22 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> wrote:
> > Looking at 0001:
> >
> > + When altering the
> > + > linkend="sql-createsubscription-params-with-slot-name">slot_name,
> > + the failover property
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 2:22 PM Bertrand Drouvot
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 10:24:11AM +0530, shveta malik wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 12:02 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Attach the V70 patch set which addressed above comments and Bertrand's
> > > comments in [1]
Le dimanche 28 janvier 2024, 22:57:02 CET Tomas Vondra a écrit :
Hi Tomas !
I'll comment on glibc-malloc part as I studied that part last year, and
proposed some things here: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/
3424675.QJadu78ljV%40aivenlaptop
> FWIW where does the malloc overhead come
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 10:24:11AM +0530, shveta malik wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 12:02 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
> > Attach the V70 patch set which addressed above comments and Bertrand's
> > comments in [1]
> >
>
> Since v70-0001 is pushed, rebased and attached v70_2
Greetings, everyone!
While analyzing output of Svace static analyzer [1] I've found a bug.
In function intoasc(interval * i, char *str) from file
src/interfaces/ecpg/compatlib/informix.c
we return a non-terminated string since we use memcpy on tmp which is
itself NULL-teminated but
last zero
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 08:08:29 -0700
"David G. Johnston" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The option choice of "ignore" in the COPY ON_ERROR clause seems overly
> generic. There would seem to be two relevant ways to ignore bad column
> input data - drop the entire row or just set the column value to null. I
>
101 - 139 of 139 matches
Mail list logo
