> On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 at 03:37, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> And I found "Author" column is shown as "+4207-35" which does not seem
>> to be an author name. Likewise followings columns seem to show
>> inappropriate contents.
>
> Thanks for the report. That's fixed now (it was missing a header
> column
On Sat, Jun 21, 2025 at 12:57 AM Anne Struble wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I'm writing in regards to a fix made in the last release of Postgresql
> (specifically, I've looked at versions 15.13 and 16.9). The fix in question
> is:
> Fix data loss in logical replication
> This is the change set:
> https://
Dear Peter,
Thanks for posting the patch. Largely it seems OK.
One comment:
I feel most of the word "remove" can be changed to "dropped", in
pg_createsubscriber.c
and 040_pg_createsubscriber.pl. E.g.,
```
# Confirm the physical replication slot has been removed
$result = $node_p->safe_psql($db1
On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 8:22 AM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> But this is not correct anymore, 1462aad2 allows to alter two_phase option.
> I was an original author, but I did oversight.
>
> I feel it can be fixed by referring the commit message, attached patch fixed
> like
> that. How do yo
Hi,
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 at 10:41, Robins Tharakan wrote:
> The signature seems to match an existing GCC bug and I've updated the
thread in hopes that it gets fixed sooner. Ideally these failures should
auto-fix in the coming days.
>
I don't see much traction upstream. I'll be away for a few
week
Hi hackers~
Recently when I was debugging with pg_waldump, I just want to filter out
all the records about a specific relfilelocator, so I used -R T/D/R.
I do get records like FPI, but not SMGR_CREATE / SMGR_TRUNCATE. Quick
search of code tells me that pg_waldump would only keep records with
block
> Sounds good to me. Unless there are big objections, I'll deploy this
> on the 23rd.
Sorry if this has been already reported or fixed. I tried "Personal
Dashboard".
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/me/
And I found "Author" column is shown as "+4207-35" which does not seem
to be an author name.
On Sun, 22 Jun 2025 at 15:47, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I don't know about this. This could become an ongoing source of
> confusion, without any clear benefit. Either the draft and the "real"
> commitfest are going to be indistinguishable, because they are just two
> places to look for stuff to
On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 02:16:46PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 10:34:19AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> However, Option 1) would be my go-to option for HEAD (as of v19
>> opening for business), but I think that we should harden the code more
>> than suggested and treat
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 at 14:47, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
>
> The new PG19 development cycle is starting soon. So that seemed like a
> good excuse to make some big improvements to the commitfest app.
These changes have now been deployed to production. Please report any
problems, either as a reply or
On 19.06.25 14:24, Andres Freund wrote:
Along the way, I also found that our meson.build always issues a warning
when run on Windows/msvc, which I fixed. (Should probably be backpatched.)
Agreed. Looks like that came in with bc46104fc9aa
I have committed and backpatched this.
I'll park the r
> > > 5.
> > > +
> > > + Alter publication mypublication to add table
> > > + users except column
> > > + security_pin:
> > > +
> > > +ALTER PUBLICATION production_publication ADD TABLE users EXCEPT
> > > (security_pin);
> > >
> > > Those tags don't seem correct. e.g. "users" and "security
On Sunday, June 22, 2025, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 20.06.25 16:41, David G. Johnston wrote:
>
>> I sense there could be some confusion whether such draft patches
>> should go into the regular commit fest or the draft commit fest, and
>> then also when they should move between them
On 22/06/2025 16:21, David G. Johnston wrote:
On Sunday, June 22, 2025, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 20.06.25 16:41, David G. Johnston wrote:
I sense there could be some confusion whether such draft
patches
should go into the regular commit fest or the draft
On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 2:24 PM vignesh C wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 at 05:54, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > Dear Kuroda-san,
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 2:05 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
> > wrote:
> > > > > Regarding assertion failure, I've found that assert in
> > > > > PhysicalConfirmRec
Tried to create a new entry for someone's patch that was already commented
by Peter E as looking good, but:
1) when I went to the "PG19-1" commitfest, I couldn't find a button/link to
open new entries there.
2) at homepage, there is a link in the bottom,
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/open/new
Hi,
I am looking for some guidelines/recommended SGML tags to use when
referring in the PG documentation to any user-defined
schema/table/column names.
This is most commonly seen near a SQL example.
Currently, it seems a bit inconsistent. The rendering also looks quite
different for these diffe
On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 6:15 AM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> This patch looks right to me.
>
Great, thanks!
I would wait for the PG19 branching at this point, unless there is a
> concrete need for backpatching.
This patch fixes just one of the issues I found when trying to have a
reproducible PG
On Sun, 22 Jun 2025 at 23:05, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
>
> Tried to create a new entry for someone's patch that was already commented by
> Peter E as looking good, but:
>
> 1) when I went to the "PG19-1" commitfest, I couldn't find a button/link to
> open new entries there.
Could it be that y
On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 11:43 AM J. Javier Maestro
wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 6:08 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
...
> Do you want to write a patch like that? Otherwise I can.
>>
>
> Sure, I've attached the new patch. Let me know what you think, and if it's
> OK, what are the next steps to ge
On 18.06.25 07:49, Peter Smith wrote:
I'm also suggesting that "clean" or "cleanup" may be even better than
"drop". Because if you look at related tools such as pg_basebackup,
pg_receivewal, etc., the "create" and "drop" actions all happen on the
remote instance, but what we are talking about he
On 20.06.25 16:41, David G. Johnston wrote:
I sense there could be some confusion whether such draft patches
should go into the regular commit fest or the draft commit fest, and
then also when they should move between them.
Draft CF patches with “Needs Review” are looking for feedbac
On 17.06.25 20:19, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
Ideally, we should change both to maintain consistency across various
slot options. OTOH, as we have already described these options as: "
The --two-phase and --failover options can be specified with
--create-slot.", it is clear that these are slot option
Hi Shayon,
On Sat, Jun 21, 2025 at 9:38 PM Shayon Mukherjee wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jun 11, 2025, at 9:00 AM, Sami Imseih wrote:
>
>
>> IMO, having this GUC to force the use of invisible indexes is quite
>> strange. In my view, it detracts from the guarantees that you're meant
>> to get from disabling
24 matches
Mail list logo
