Re: master make check fails on Solaris 10

On 18-01-2018 20:49, Marina Polyakova wrote: On 18-01-2018 20:34, Tom Lane wrote: ... What you could do in the meantime is work on finding a variation of Victor's test that will detect the bug regardless of -O level. If we do have hope that future gcc versions will handle this correctly,

Re: [PATCH] Atomic pgrename on Windows

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:47 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > Attached patch atomic-pgrename-windows-1.patch fixes this problem. It > > appears to be possible to atomically

Re: WIP Patch: Precalculate stable functions, infrastructure v1

On 17-01-2018 1:05, Tom Lane wrote: [ I'm sending this comment separately because I think it's an issue Andres might take an interest in. ] Marina Polyakova writes: [ v7-0001-Precalculate-stable-and-immutable-functions.patch ] Another thing that's bothering me is

Re: WIP Patch: Precalculate stable functions, infrastructure v1

As I said, thank you so much for your comments!! On 17-01-2018 0:30, Tom Lane wrote: ... This is indeed quite a large patch, but it seems to me it could become smaller. After a bit of review: 1. I do not like what you've done with ParamListInfo. The changes around that are invasive,

Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 4) and patch for hash index

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 4:07 AM, Thomas Munro > wrote: >> >> Hi Shubham, >> >> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Shubham Barai >> wrote: >> > If these

Re: [HACKERS] log_destination=file

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 5:29 AM, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > average latency: > > > > clients patch master > > 10 0.321 0.286 > > 20 0.669 0.602 > > 30

Re: improve type conversion of SPI_processed in Python

On 1/12/18 11:06, Tom Lane wrote: >> Would that even be necessary? Why not use the LongLong variant all the >> time then? > > I've not looked at the Python internals to see if one is noticeably faster > than the other, but if it isn't, yeah we could simplify that. In any case > my main point is

Re: [HACKERS] Supporting huge pages on Windows

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki > wrote: > > From: Thomas Munro [mailto:thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com] > >> I hope Tsunakawa-san doesn't mind me posting

Re: Use of term hostaddrs for multiple hostaddr values

On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:34 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hi all, > > While looking at the documentation of libpq, I have noticed that the > term hostaddrs is used to qualify multiple values of hostaddr. This > looks incorrect to me, as this is not the name of a

Re: PATCH: Configurable file mode mask

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 06:54:23PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > If the only problem is that buildfarm would run tests twice, then I > think we should just press forward with this regardless of that: it > seems a chicken-and-egg problem, because buildfarm cannot be

Re: Use of term hostaddrs for multiple hostaddr values

On 1/20/18 17:39, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:30:43PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:34 AM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >> These are both clear bugs, and the docs one should definitely be both >> applied and backpatched.

Re: Use of term hostaddrs for multiple hostaddr values

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:30:43PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:34 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: > These are both clear bugs, and the docs one should definitely be both > applied and backpatched. > > How much do we care about the error

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 1:39 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:29 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > Actually, though it doesn't really look like it from the way things > are structured within nbtsort.c, I don't need to wait for workers to >

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:29 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > I think I can see why this patch needs that. Is it mainly for the > work you are doing in _bt_leader_heapscan where you are waiting for > all the workers to be finished? Yes, though it's also needed for the leader

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:36:31AM -0800, Noah Misch wrote: > For me, verifiability is the crucial benefit of inline asm. Anyone with an > architecture manual can thoroughly review an inline asm implementation. Given > intrinsics and __xlc_ver__ conditionals, the same level of review requires >

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:45 AM, Andrey Borodin wrote: > Unfortunately, amcheck_next does not work currently on HEAD (there are > problems with AllocSetContextCreate() signature), but I've tested > bt_index_check() before, during and after pgbench, on primary and on

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

Robert Haas writes: > Committed with a bunch of mostly-cosmetic revisions. Buildfarm member skink has been unhappy since this patch went in. Running the regression tests under valgrind easily reproduces the failure. Now, I might be wrong about which of the patches

Re: MCV lists for highly skewed distributions

I wrote: >> I have a slight reservaton about whether 1.25x is still a sensible >> heuristic. > > This was also discussed in [1], but no patch came out of it. I was > just now turning the formulas discussed there into code, but I'll > defer to someone with more expertise. FWIW, I suspect that a

Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: pg_(total_)relation_size and partitioned tables

On 20 January 2018 at 23:14, Michael Paquier wrote: > If pg_partition_tree_tables() uses the top of the partition as input, > all the tree should show up. If you use a leaf, anything under the leaf > should show up. If a leaf is defined and it has no underlying leaves,

Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: pg_(total_)relation_size and partitioned tables

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 06:28:41PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > Do you mean pg_partition_tree(regclass), that returns all partitions in > the partition tree whose root is passed as the parameter? > > Perhaps, like the following (roughly implemented in the attached)? > > select

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

Hi Stephen and Thomas, Thanks your review comments. Enclosed please find the latest patch. >/src/backend/parser/gram.y: In function ‘base_yyparse’: >/src/backend/parser/gram.y:1160:19: warning: assignment from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types] >| IN_P DATABASE db_spec_name