Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes

2022-07-05 Thread Peter Geoghegan
inful MultiXact problems) will find the relminmxid thing very compelling. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes

2022-07-02 Thread Peter Geoghegan
> > Okay, thanks Bruce. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: AIX support - alignment issues

2022-07-02 Thread Peter Geoghegan
pporting AIX will happen (say) at some time in the next decade, no matter what happens today. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: AIX support - alignment issues

2022-07-02 Thread Peter Geoghegan
diately. Obviously these users will be able to use a supported version of Postgres for several more years. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes

2022-07-01 Thread Peter Geoghegan
> > I don't think this is an appropriate detail for the release notes. Okay. What about saying something about relminmxid advancement where the database consumes lots of multixacts? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: doc: Clarify what "excluded" represents for INSERT ON CONFLICT

2022-07-01 Thread Peter Geoghegan
en with features that we think of as high impact major features. So evidently users really value these kinds of quality of life improvements. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: doc: Clarify what "excluded" represents for INSERT ON CONFLICT

2022-07-01 Thread Peter Geoghegan
E 1: ...lict (bar) do update set bar = excluded.bar where barr != 5; ^ HINT: Perhaps you meant to reference the column "foo.bar" or the column "excluded.bar". -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: doc: Clarify what "excluded" represents for INSERT ON CONFLICT

2022-06-30 Thread Peter Geoghegan
lved here, since EXCLUDED is the thing that creates the ambiguity, but that seems almost incidental to me. This user would probably not have been confused if they didn't need to use a WHERE clause (very much the common case), even when expression evaluation involving EXCLUDED in the SET was still used (also common). -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: doc: Clarify what "excluded" represents for INSERT ON CONFLICT

2022-06-30 Thread Peter Geoghegan
upsert. MySQL's INSERT ... ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE feature has a magical UPSERT-only expression instead of "excluded". -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: doc: Clarify what "excluded" represents for INSERT ON CONFLICT

2022-06-30 Thread Peter Geoghegan
to an from_item alias used within an UPDATE FROM ... where the target table is also the from_item table (i.e. there is a self-join). There is only one table involved. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: vacuum verbose no longer reveals anything about pins

2022-06-30 Thread Peter Geoghegan
in Postgres 15, for the first time -- even though that's very basic information. The revised definition of scanned_pages enabled that enhancement. We are no longer encumbered by the existence of a no-cleanup-lock-page special case. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: vacuum verbose no longer reveals anything about pins

2022-06-30 Thread Peter Geoghegan
at's the problem with not reporting on that? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes

2022-06-28 Thread Peter Geoghegan
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

Re: Separate the attribute physical order from logical order

2022-06-28 Thread Peter Geoghegan
oints via a PRNG. During CREATE TABLE, for example. This approach could make it easier to reproduce failures on the buildfarm. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: do only critical work during single-user vacuum?

2022-06-27 Thread Peter Geoghegan
today, but you can't expect to avoid freezing altogether (without significant work elsewhere). My general sense is that freezing isn't a particularly good thing to try to do lazily -- even if we ignore the risk of an eventual wraparound failure. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: some aspects of our qsort might not be ideal

2022-06-23 Thread Peter Geoghegan
m tuplesorts for 'SELECT(DISTINCT mycol) ...' style queries on low cardinality columns extremely fast. We're not really sorting so much as bucketing. This is based on Dijkstra's Dutch national flag problem. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Devel docs on website reloading

2022-06-22 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 8:45 AM Bruce Momjian wrote: > That is a big help for committers who want to email a URL of the new > doc commit output. Yes, it's a nice "quality of life" improvement. Thanks for finally getting this done! -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size

2022-06-16 Thread Peter Geoghegan
n working on B-Tree deduplication). It's quite straightforward to set up and run. [1] http://smalldatum.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-insert-benchmark.html -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-15 Thread Peter Geoghegan
oesn't matter much now (since you have all but conceded that using a bit for this makes sense), but FWIW that's the main reason why I almost took it for granted that we'd need to use a status bit (or bits) for this. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 7:21 PM Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 9:56 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > Technically we don't already do that today, with the 16-bit checksums > > that are stored in PageHeaderData.pd_checksum. But we do something > > equivalent: low-

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ch seems absolutely fine. They *definitely* have no value if nobody ever uses them for anything. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:32 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:22 PM Robert Haas wrote: > > I still am not clear on precisely what you are proposing here. I do > > agree that there is significant bit space available in pd_flags and > > that consumin

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
, as you have suggested. We're still discussing new approaches to checksumming in the scope of this work, which of course includes many individual cases that don't involve any encryption. Plus even with encryption there are things like defensive assertions that can be added by using a flag bit for this. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
for performance reasons (though it's unclear how much it matters). In which case the status bit is technically redundant information as far as the code is concerned. That may well be fine. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
it will in fact affect a lot of callers to the bufpage.h functions. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
in which that assumption no longer holds. Like when you do finally get around to making TDE something that can work at the relation level, for example. Even if there is only a small chance of that ever happening, why wouldn't we be prepared for it, just on general principle? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
pg_upgrade? I would argue that this would be the first, since it is the moral equivalent of extending the size of the generic page header. For all I know the overhead will be perfectly fine, and everybody wins. I just want to be adamant that we're making the right trade-offs, and maximizing the benefit from any new cost imposed on access method code. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ion selectively, perhaps at the relation level? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 8:48 AM Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 6:26 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > Anyway, I can see how it would be useful to be able to know the offset > > of a nonce or of a hash digest on any given page, without access to a > > running serv

Re: Tightening behaviour for non-immutable behaviour in immutable functions

2022-06-13 Thread Peter Geoghegan
gt; I wasn't aware myself of all the gotchas described there. I didn't realize that it was that bad. Even if it's only 10% as bad as you say, it would still be very valuable to do something about it (ideally with an approach that is non-invasive). -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: 2022-06-16 release announcement draft

2022-06-13 Thread Peter Geoghegan
arer in a doc patch that recently became commit 8ac700ac. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-13 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ystem lib C to be authoritative for the OS as a whole, in the way that Postgres supposes. At least in the case of Mac OS, which is after all purely a desktop operating system. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Checking for missing heap/index files

2022-06-13 Thread Peter Geoghegan
make all the difference. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-13 Thread Peter Geoghegan
compose with other things? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-13 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 2:54 PM Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 02:44:41PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > Is that the how block-level encryption feature from EDB Advanced Server > > does it? > > Uh, EDB Advanced Server doesn't have a block-level encryption

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-13 Thread Peter Geoghegan
e checksum that's going to tell you > whether the page contents are messed up. Perhaps this could be worked > around if you tried hard enough, but I don't see what we get out of > it. Is that the how block-level encryption feature from EDB Advanced Server does it? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-10 Thread Peter Geoghegan
n't forced to use the same ancient ICU version. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-10 Thread Peter Geoghegan
surely any related indexes must have been rebuilt too. The interesting part may be what that upgrade looks like in detail. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-10 Thread Peter Geoghegan
k out of it once it begins, but mostly it's an inflexible process that just does what we need it to do. Does something like that seem sensible to you? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-10 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ning the problem as a problem with old indexes/constraints only seems like it might make things a lot easier. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ustly > and simply implementable. Hmm. That may be a decisive reason to go with your proposal. I really don't know. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
r their logical collation). So directly tackling that seems natural to me. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
irection of decoupling the concerns that we have as database people from the concerns of natural language experts. Let's not step on their toes, and let's avoid having our toes trampled on. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ustom collation for "natural sorting", often used for things like alphanumeric invoice numbers. That might break if you downgrade ICU version, and maybe even if you upgrade ICU version. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
tation detail, perhaps only used to unambiguously identify which specific ICU version and locale string relate to which on-disk relfilenode structure currently. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 2:33 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > My preference is for an approach that builds on that, or at least > doesn't significantly complicate it. So a cryptographic hash or nonce > can go in the special area proper (structs like BTPageOpaqueData don't > need

Re: better page-level checksums

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
nges), but at a page offset before the special area proper -- not after. What disadvantages does that approach have, if any, from your point of view? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Tightening behaviour for non-immutable behaviour in immutable functions

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
atively common. That's what the search_path case seems like to me. If somebody else wants to write another patch that adds on that, great. If not, then having this much still seems useful. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Checking for missing heap/index files

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
store the index metapage. (Actually unlogged indexes that run on a standby don't, but that's accounted for directly.) -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
not to do. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
t;compelling feature" in its own right. I believe that EDB adopted ICU many years ago, and stuck with one vendored version for quite a few years. And eventually being on a very old version of ICU became a real problem. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: BTMaxItemSize seems to be subtly incorrect

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 6:40 AM Robert Haas wrote: > Are you going to code up a patch? I can, but feel free to fix it yourself if you prefer. Your analysis seems sound. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 10:39 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > They simply REINDEX, without changing anything. The details are still > fuzzy, but at least that's what I was thinking of. As I said before, BCP47 format tags are incredibly forgiving by design. So it should be reasonable to

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-08 Thread Peter Geoghegan
(which is likely), you can avoid reindexing, and so reserve the option of backing out of a complex upgrade until very late in the process. You're going to have to do it eventually, but it can probably just be an afterthought. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Convert macros to static inline functions

2022-06-08 Thread Peter Geoghegan
cessitates thinking about multiple evaluation hazards, which is enough to discourage good defensive coding practices. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: BTMaxItemSize seems to be subtly incorrect

2022-06-08 Thread Peter Geoghegan
So the limit on internal pages never changed, even in Postgres 12. There was no separate leaf page limit prior to 12. Only the rules on the leaf level ever really changed. Note also that amcheck has tests for this stuff. Though that probably doesn't matter at all. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: BTMaxItemSize seems to be subtly incorrect

2022-06-08 Thread Peter Geoghegan
s or more to run the test. I think that we should fix this on HEAD, on general principle. There is no reason to believe that this is a live bug, so a backpatch seems unnecessary. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-08 Thread Peter Geoghegan
h to implementing strxfrm() is another example of the same thing. (The Apple strxfrm() produces huge low entropy binary strings, unlike the glibc version, which is pretty well optimized.) -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: An inverted index using roaring bitmaps

2022-06-07 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ance all-rounder that can still be beaten by specialized techniques that come with their own downsides. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-07 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ant to generalize the definition of a collation, so that it's associated with one particular ICU version and collation for the purposes of on-disk compatibility, but isn't necessarily tied to the same ICU version in other contexts, such as on a dump and restore? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-07 Thread Peter Geoghegan
hen I can easily think of far better examples of software bloat. Defining "stable behavior for collations" as "uses exactly the same software artifact over time" is defensive (compared to always linking to one ICU version that does it all), but we have plenty that we need to defend against here. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-07 Thread Peter Geoghegan
throwing a "locale not found" error message usually isn't helpful from the point of view of the end user. Note that this is a broader standard than ICU or CLDR or even Unicode. [1] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6067.txt -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-07 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ect job of versioning, I still think that their priorities are very much unlike our priorities, and that that should be a relevant consideration for us. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-07 Thread Peter Geoghegan
still be something that we could influence. We could have a back and forth conversation about what's not working in the field. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-07 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ng its use in new databases). This isn't the same thing as forking ICU. It's a compromise between that extreme, and the current situation. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Collation version tracking for macOS

2022-06-07 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ever get to hear about already. That's rather beside the point. The index must be assumed to be corrupt. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: An inverted index using roaring bitmaps

2022-06-07 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ex-only scans that scan a significant fraction of the entire index, or even the entire index. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: some aspects of our qsort might not be ideal

2022-06-02 Thread Peter Geoghegan
es of scalar types. The abbreviated keys optimization is very much something that comes from the world of databases, not the world of sorting. It's pretty much a domain-specific technique. That seems relevant to me. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: some aspects of our qsort might not be ideal

2022-06-02 Thread Peter Geoghegan
otQuicksort.pdf At one point quite a few years back I planned on investigating it myself, but never followed through. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: PG15 beta1 sort performance regression due to Generation context change

2022-05-30 Thread Peter Geoghegan
hat's pretty standard practice when summarizing a set of benchmark results that are expressed as ratios to some baseline. If I tweak your spreadsheet to use the geometric mean, the patch looks slightly better -- 89%. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: suboverflowed subtransactions concurrency performance optimize

2022-05-27 Thread Peter Geoghegan
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. >

Re: suboverflowed subtransactions concurrency performance optimize

2022-05-27 Thread Peter Geoghegan
nything useful! There's not a > single benchmark for the patch. 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. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: A qsort template

2022-05-19 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 1:12 PM Justin Pryzby wrote: > Should these debug lines be removed ? > > elog(DEBUG1, "qsort_tuple"); I agree -- DEBUG1 seems too chatty for something like this. DEBUG2 would be more appropriate IMV. Though I don't feel very strongly about it. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Zstandard support for toast compression

2022-05-18 Thread Peter Geoghegan
st obviously false. +1 -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Atomic GetFreeIndexPage()?

2022-05-04 Thread Peter Geoghegan
which boil down to "the current FSM design cannot be totally trusted, so we verify redundantly". -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: DBT-5 Stored Procedure Development (2022)

2022-04-26 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ks, where Postgres does entirely the wrong thing. It's especially interesting to me as somebody that focuses on B-Tree indexing. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Use generation context to speed up tuplesorts

2022-04-23 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ible to overlook), then I would object -- why even take a small chance? Fortunately I don't believe that we're even taking a small chance here, all things considered. And so I agree; this issue isn't a concern. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: More problems with VacuumPageHit style global variables

2022-04-21 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 4:28 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > I don't think that there is any risk of one user of either variable > "clobbering" some other user -- the current values of the variables > are not actually meaningful at all. They're only useful as a way that > an a

Re: More problems with VacuumPageHit style global variables

2022-04-21 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 8:00 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > I knew about pgBufferUsage, and I knew about > VacuumPage{Hit,Miss,Dirty} for a long time. But somehow I didn't make > the very obvious connection between the two until today. I am probably > not the only one.

Re: More problems with VacuumPageHit style global variables

2022-04-20 Thread Peter Geoghegan
added the others too? I knew about pgBufferUsage, and I knew about VacuumPage{Hit,Miss,Dirty} for a long time. But somehow I didn't make the very obvious connection between the two until today. I am probably not the only one. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: CLUSTER sort on abbreviated expressions is broken

2022-04-20 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 11:01 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > Attached patch fixes the issue, and includes the test case that you posted. Pushed a similar patch just now. Backpatched to all supported branches. -- Peter Geoghegan

More problems with VacuumPageHit style global variables

2022-04-20 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ields like pgBufferUsage.shared_blks_hit (i.e. those that don't have a time/duration component) officially okay to rely on across the board? It looks like they are okay to rely on (even when track_io_timing is off), but it would be nice to put that on a formal footing, if it isn't already. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: DBT-5 Stored Procedure Development (2022)

2022-04-19 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ith using DBT5 on a modern Linux distribution. Perhaps I gave up too easily at the time, but I'm definitely still interested. Has there been work on that since? Thanks -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: DBT-5 Stored Procedure Development (2022)

2022-04-19 Thread Peter Geoghegan
e spec. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Why does pg_class.reltuples count only live tuples in indexes (after VACUUM runs)?

2022-04-18 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 1:12 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > I would argue that it would be correct for the first time -- at least > if we take the behavior within heapam_index_build_range_scan (and > everywhere else) as authoritative. That's a feature, not a bug. Attached draft patch sho

Re: Why does pg_class.reltuples count only live tuples in indexes (after VACUUM runs)?

2022-04-18 Thread Peter Geoghegan
would argue that it would be correct for the first time -- at least if we take the behavior within heapam_index_build_range_scan (and everywhere else) as authoritative. That's a feature, not a bug. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Why does pg_class.reltuples count only live tuples in indexes (after VACUUM runs)?

2022-04-18 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ue in the amvacuumcleanup path (instead of new_rel_tuples). That way the rule about IndexVacuumInfo.num_heap_tuples is simple: it's always taken from pg_class.reltuples (for the heap rel). Either the existing value, or the new value. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Why does pg_class.reltuples count only live tuples in indexes (after VACUUM runs)?

2022-04-18 Thread Peter Geoghegan
es, which is related. Granted, that won't be used to update pg_class for the index in the case where it's just an estimate anyway. -- Peter Geoghegan

Why does pg_class.reltuples count only live tuples in indexes (after VACUUM runs)?

2022-04-18 Thread Peter Geoghegan
.reltuples is -1 even after a VACUUM" case is completely impossible following the Postgres 15 work on VACUUM, but we should still clamp for safety in update_relstats_all_indexes (though not in the amvacuumcleanup path). -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-17 Thread Peter Geoghegan
oesn't affect "dead but not yet removable". But OldestXmin affects FreezeLimit. Anyway, I'm not opposed to showing the age at the start as well. But from the point of view of issues like this tenk1 issue, it would be more useful to just report on new_rel_allvisible. It would also be more useful to users. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-15 Thread Peter Geoghegan
FreezeLimit makes little sense. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-15 Thread Peter Geoghegan
ly in the kinds of extreme cases I'm thinking about. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-15 Thread Peter Geoghegan
currently running. As well as the age of OldestXmin at the start of VACUUM. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-15 Thread Peter Geoghegan
though. Your new wording is fine. I'll update the log output some time today. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-15 Thread Peter Geoghegan
les of both. This could easily be changed to "XIDs". -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
nd did so in the script as well. That seems like it definitely could matter. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
nner on here). Just a wild guess at this point. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
yncronous_commit thing was new information that made that worth revisiting. -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
that effect, whose commit fits with our timeline for the problems seen on wrasse? -- Peter Geoghegan

Re: Intermittent buildfarm failures on wrasse

2022-04-14 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 3:28 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote: > A bunch of autovacuums that ran between "2022-04-14 22:49:16.274" and > "2022-04-14 22:49:19.088" all have the same "removable cutoff". Are you aware of Andres' commit 02fea8fd? That work preven

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >