Re: Misleading comment in prologue of ReorderBufferQueueMessage

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:45 PM Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > > The name of the function suggests that the given message will be queued in > ReorderBuffer. The prologue of the function says so too > 776 /* > 777 * Queue message into a transaction so it can be processed upon commit. > 778 */ > It

Re: Add Information during standby recovery conflicts

On 2020/12/05 12:38, Masahiko Sawada wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 7:22 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: Hi, On 12/4/20 2:21 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: On 2020/12/04 9:28, Masahiko Sawada wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 2:54 AM Fujii Masao wrote: On 2020/12/01 17:29, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:

Re: anonymous block returning like a function

po 14. 12. 2020 v 14:31 odesílatel Heikki Linnakangas napsal: > On 11/12/2020 21:06, PegoraroF10 wrote: > > I would like to have an anonymous block, like DO, but having resuts, > like an > > usual function does. > > > > I know any user can do ... > > > > create function

Re: HASH_BLOBS hazards (was Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions)

On 2020-12-13 17:49, Tom Lane wrote: 2. Don't allow a default: invent a new HASH_STRING flag, and require that hash_create() calls specify exactly one of HASH_BLOBS, HASH_STRING, or HASH_FUNCTION. This doesn't completely fix the hazard of mindless-copy-and-paste, but I think it might make it a

Re: pg_basebackup caused FailedAssertion

On 12/12/2020 00:47, Jeff Davis wrote: On Wed, 2013-02-27 at 19:29 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Right. I fixed that by adding WL_SOCKET_READABLE, and handling any messages that might arrive after the frontend already sent CopyEnd. The frontend shouldn't send any messages after CopyEnd,

Re: Parallel Inserts in CREATE TABLE AS

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 7:20 PM Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 5:19 PM Dilip Kumar wrote: > > > > > + allow = ps && IsA(ps, GatherState) && > > > > > !ps->ps_ProjInfo && > > > > > + plannedstmt->parallelModeNeeded && > > > > > +

Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 8:55 PM Amit Langote wrote: > On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 8:26 PM Amit Langote wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 8:15 PM Tomas Vondra > > wrote > > > I think we need to differentiate between master and backbranches. IMO we > > > should try to make it "just work" in master,

Some error messages are omitted while recovery.

At Mon, 14 Dec 2020 16:48:05 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote in > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:34:51AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > > Apart from this issue, while checking that, I noticed that if server > > starts having WALs from a server of a different systemid, the server > > stops with

Re: Feature Proposal: Add ssltermination parameter for SNI-based LoadBalancing

On 12/12/2020 13:52, Lukas Meisegeier wrote: Thanks for the provided ideas :) I use HaProxy for my load-balancing and unfortunately I can't define that I want to listen on a port for both ssl and non ssl requests. Could you configure HaProxy to listen on separate ports for SSL and non-SSL

Re: [POC] Fast COPY FROM command for the table with foreign partitions

On 12/1/20 2:02 PM, Amit Langote wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 2:40 PM tsunakawa.ta...@fujitsu.com wrote: From: Amit Langote >> The code appears to require both BeginForeignCopy and EndForeignCopy, >> while the following documentation says they are optional. Which is >> correct? (I suppose

Re: Movement of restart_lsn position movement of logical replication slots is very slow

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 9:30 AM Jammie wrote: > > Hello, > > We have two logical replication slots in our postgresql database (version-11) > instance and we are using pgJDBC to stream data from these two slots. > IIUC, you are using some out-of-core outputplugin to stream the data? Are you

Misleading comment in prologue of ReorderBufferQueueMessage

The name of the function suggests that the given message will be queued in ReorderBuffer. The prologue of the function says so too 776 /* 777 * Queue message into a transaction so it can be processed upon commit. 778 */ It led me to think that a non-transactional message is processed along

RE: Parallel Inserts in CREATE TABLE AS

Hi > Attaching v11 patch set. Please review it further. Currently with the patch, we can allow parallel CTAS when topnode is Gather. When top-node is Append and Gather is the sub-node of Append, I think we can still enable Parallel CTAS by pushing Parallel CTAS down to the sub-node Gather,

Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM.

Wondering if we can take this to completion (any idea what more we could do?). On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 14:48, Krunal Bauskar wrote: > > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 14:33, Krunal Bauskar > wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 21:32, Tom Lane wrote: >> >>> Krunal Bauskar writes: >>> > Any updates

Re: HASH_BLOBS hazards (was Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions)

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 1:36 AM Noah Misch wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 11:49:31AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > But what jumps out at me here is that this sort of error seems way > > too easy to make, and evidently way too hard to detect. What can we > > do to make it more obvious if one has

Re: Asynchronous Append on postgres_fdw nodes.

At Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:06:51 +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote in > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 8:16 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi > wrote: > > I looked through the nodeAppend.c and postgres_fdw.c part and those > > are I think the core of this patch. > > Thanks again for the review! > > > -*

Re: Feature improvement for pg_stat_statements

2020-12-09 21:14 に Fujii Masao さんは書きました: On 2020/12/09 20:42, Li Japin wrote: Hi, On Dec 9, 2020, at 6:37 PM, Seino Yuki > wrote: 2020-12-01 01:04 に Fujii Masao さんは書きました: On 2020/11/30 23:05, Seino Yuki wrote: 2020-11-30 15:02 に Fujii Masao さんは書きました: On

Re: pg_shmem_allocations & documentation

Here's a proposal patch. Le ven. 11 déc. 2020 à 09:58, Benoit Lobréau a écrit : > Would "NULL for anonymous allocations, since details related to them are > not known." be ok ? > > > Le ven. 11 déc. 2020 à 09:29, Kyotaro Horiguchi > a écrit : > >> At Fri, 11 Dec 2020 14:42:45 +0900, Michael

Re: anonymous block returning like a function

On 11/12/2020 21:06, PegoraroF10 wrote: I would like to have an anonymous block, like DO, but having resuts, like an usual function does. I know any user can do ... create function pg_temp.run_time_bigger(numeric,numeric) returns numeric language plpgsql as $$ begin if $1 > $2 then return $1;

Re: [PATCH] postgres_fdw connection caching - cause remote sessions linger till the local session exit

On 2020/12/14 14:36, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 9:38 AM Fujii Masao mailto:masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com>> wrote: > On 2020/12/12 15:05, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 12:19 AM Fujii Masao mailto:masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com>

Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:28 AM Amul Sul wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 6:04 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On 2020-12-09 16:13:06 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > > That's not good. On a typical busy system, a system is going to be in > > > the middle of a checkpoint most of the

Re: Add Information during standby recovery conflicts

On 2020/12/15 0:49, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: Hi, On 12/14/20 4:20 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe. On 2020/12/14 21:31, Fujii

Re: Feature Proposal: Add ssltermination parameter for SNI-based LoadBalancing

I liked the idea with separate ports for ssl and non ssl requests and tried it with haproxy. The psql-client connects with haproxy and receives the fixed 'S' byte response. After that he tried to continue on the same connection and doens't open a new one. This crashes the connection because

Re: Add Information during standby recovery conflicts

On 2020/12/14 21:31, Fujii Masao wrote: On 2020/12/05 12:38, Masahiko Sawada wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 7:22 PM Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: Hi, On 12/4/20 2:21 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: On 2020/12/04 9:28, Masahiko Sawada wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 2:54 AM Fujii Masao wrote: On

Re: Insert Documentation - Returning Clause and Order

On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 8:41 PM David G. Johnston wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 7:02 AM James Coleman wrote: >> >> >> Certainly almost every ORM, and maybe even other forms of application >> code, need to be able to associate the serial column value returned >> with what it inserted. > > >

Re: pg_waldump error message fix

On 12/13/20, 7:01 PM, "Michael Paquier" wrote: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:26:01AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: >> Yeah, I had the same feeling. At least, the two LSNs in the message >> under discussion are simply redundant. So +1 to just remove the LSN at >> the caller site. > > That would

Re: Feature improvement for pg_stat_statements

On 2020/12/14 18:17, Seino Yuki wrote: 2020-12-09 21:14 に Fujii Masao さんは書きました: On 2020/12/09 20:42, Li Japin wrote: Hi, On Dec 9, 2020, at 6:37 PM, Seino Yuki mailto:sein...@oss.nttdata.com>> wrote: 2020-12-01 01:04 に Fujii Masao さんは書きました: On 2020/11/30 23:05, Seino Yuki wrote:

Re: Parallel Inserts in CREATE TABLE AS

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 4:06 PM Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 7:20 PM Bharath Rupireddy > wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 5:19 PM Dilip Kumar wrote: > > > > > > + allow = ps && IsA(ps, GatherState) && > > > > > > !ps->ps_ProjInfo && > > > > > > +

Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)

Hi, thanks for looking into this. I haven't yet looked at your patch in detail, yet I think we should address the general issue here. To me this doesn't seem to be a RI-trigger issue, but a more general issue like I mentioned in the pg-bugs thread

Re: [PATCH] postgres_fdw connection caching - cause remote sessions linger till the local session exit

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 8:03 PM Fujii Masao wrote: > > We will not output if the invalidated entry has no active connection[2], so > > if we fix the connection leak issue with the above discussed fix i.e > > closing all the invalidated connections at the end of next xact, there are > > less

Re: Rethinking plpgsql's assignment implementation

Pavel Stehule writes: > I checked a performance and it looks so access to record's field is faster, > but an access to arrays field is significantly slower Hmm, I'd drawn the opposite conclusion in my own testing ... > for i in 1..5000 > loop > if a[i] > a[i+1] then > aux

Re: Parallel Inserts in CREATE TABLE AS

For set_append_rel_size(), it seems this is the difference between query_level != 1 and query_level == 1: + (root->parent_root->parse->CTASParallelInsInfo & CTAS_PARALLEL_INS_IGN_TUP_COST_APPEND) && Maybe extract the common conditions into its own expression / variable so that

Re: [PATCH] postgres_fdw connection caching - cause remote sessions linger till the local session exit

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020, 9:47 PM Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 8:03 PM Fujii Masao > wrote: > > > We will not output if the invalidated entry has no active connection[2], > > > so if we fix the connection leak issue with the above discussed fix i.e > > > closing all the

Re: [PATCH] postgres_fdw connection caching - cause remote sessions linger till the local session exit

On 2020/12/15 1:40, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2020, 9:47 PM Bharath Rupireddy wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 8:03 PM Fujii Masao wrote: We will not output if the invalidated entry has no active connection[2], so if we fix the connection leak issue with the above discussed

Optimizing the documentation

-hackers, The community has spent a lot of time optimizing features over the years. Excellent examples include parallel query and partitioning which have been multi-year efforts to increase the quality, performance, and extend features of the original commit. We should consider the documentation

Re: HASH_BLOBS hazards (was Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions)

Noah Misch writes: > On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 11:49:31AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> A quick count of grep hits suggest that the large majority of >> existing hash_create() calls use HASH_BLOBS, and there might be >> only order-of-ten calls that would need to be touched if we >> required an explicit

Re: Optimizing the documentation

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 1:40 PM Joshua Drake wrote: > For example, what would be exceedly helpful would be a documentation style >>> guide that is canonical and we can review documentation against. >>> >> I do agree with that premise, with the goal of getting more people to contribute to writing

Re: Optimizing the documentation

> > > > In short, the devil's in the details. Maybe there are lots of > places where this type of approach would help, but I think it's > going to be a case-by-case discussion not something where there's > a clear win overall. > Certainly and I didn't want to just start dumping patches. Part of

Re: Rethinking plpgsql's assignment implementation

po 14. 12. 2020 v 17:25 odesílatel Tom Lane napsal: > Pavel Stehule writes: > > I checked a performance and it looks so access to record's field is > faster, > > but an access to arrays field is significantly slower > > Hmm, I'd drawn the opposite conclusion in my own testing ... > > > for

Re: Optimizing the documentation

> > > > > This is the official PostgreSQL documentation. It is written by the > > PostgreSQL community in parallel with the development of the software. > > We have organized it by the type of user and their stages of experience: > > Some thoughts on this example: > > - Changing "has been" to "is"

Re: libpq compression

> On Dec 10, 2020, at 1:39 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > I still think this is excessively baroque and basically useless. > Nobody wants to allow compression levels 1, 3, and 5 but disallow 2 > and 4. At the very most, somebody might want to start a maximum or > minimum level. But even that I think

Re: cutting down the TODO list thread

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 3:29 PM John Naylor wrote: > > *Views and Rules > *SQL Commands Hearing no objections, the items mentioned have been moved over. -- John Naylor EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Optimizing the documentation

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 12:50 PM Joshua Drake wrote: > -hackers, > > The community has spent a lot of time optimizing features over the years. > Excellent examples include parallel query and partitioning which have been > multi-year efforts to increase the quality, performance, and extend >

Re: Optimizing the documentation

On 14/12/2020 21:50, Joshua Drake wrote: The community has spent a lot of time optimizing features over the years. Excellent examples include parallel query and partitioning which have been multi-year efforts to increase the quality,  performance, and extend features of the original commit. We

Re: Optimizing the documentation

Heikki Linnakangas writes: > On 14/12/2020 21:50, Joshua Drake wrote: >> Issues that are resolved with the optimized text: >> >> * Succinct text is more likely to be read than skimmed >> >> * Removal of extraneous mentions of PostgreSQL >> >> * Removal of unneeded justifications >> >> *

Re: Proposed patch for key managment

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 10:36:56AM +0800, Neil Chen wrote: > Hi, Bruce   > > I read your question and here are some of my thoughts. > > >         Why is KmgrShmemData a struct, when it only has a single member?  > Are >         all shared memory areas structs? > >   > Yes, all

Re: Proposed patch for key managment

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:19:02PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 10:05:49AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> - The HMAC split is terrible, as mentioned upthread. I think that you >> would need to extract this stuff as a separate patch, and not add more >> mess to the

Re: Movement of restart_lsn position movement of logical replication slots is very slow

Thanks Amit for the response We are using pgJDBC sample program here https://jdbc.postgresql.org/documentation/head/replication.html the setFlushLSN is coming from the pgJDBC only. git hub for APIs of pgJDBC methods available. https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc The second slot refers to

Re: Misleading comment in prologue of ReorderBufferQueueMessage

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 3:14 PM Amit Kapila wrote: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:45 PM Ashutosh Bapat > wrote: > > > > The name of the function suggests that the given message will be queued > in ReorderBuffer. The prologue of the function says so too > > 776 /* > > 777 * Queue message into a

Re: Add Information during standby recovery conflicts

On 2020/12/15 12:04, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: At Tue, 15 Dec 2020 02:00:21 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote in Thanks for the review! I'm thinking to wait half a day before commiting the patch just in the case someone may object the patch. Sorry for coming late. I have looked only the latest

Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 12:43 PM Amit Langote wrote: > Quoting your original example: > > drop table a, b; > create table a (id serial, primary key (id)) partition by range (id); > create table b (id serial, primary key (id)) partition by range (id); > alter table b add constraint a_fk foreign

Re: [PATCH] postgres_fdw connection caching - cause remote sessions linger till the local session exit

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:00 PM Fujii Masao wrote: > > One more point for the above scenario: if the user mapping is dropped > > in another session, then cache lookup for that entry in the > > postgres_fdw_get_connections() returns a null tuple which I plan to > > not throw an error, but just to

Re: Optimizing the documentation

> > >> >> Technical documentation should only be as verbose as needed to illustrate >> the concept or task that we are explaining. It should not be redundant, nor >> should it use .50 cent words when a .10 cent word would suffice. I would >> like to put effort into optimizing the documentation and

Re: pg_shmem_allocations & documentation

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:33:06AM +0100, Benoit Lobréau wrote: > > > The offset at which the allocation starts. NULL for anonymous > - allocations and unused memory. > + allocations, since details related to them are not known. > Both of you seem to

Re: Proposed patch for key managment

Hi, Bruce I read your question and here are some of my thoughts. Why is KmgrShmemData a struct, when it only has a single member? > Are > all shared memory areas structs? > Yes, all areas created by ShmemInitStruct() are structs. I think the significance of using struct is that

Re: Proposed patch for key managment

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 10:05:49AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:06:15PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I am getting close to applying these patches, probably this week. The > > patches are cumulative: > > > >

Re: Proposed patch for key managment

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:06:15PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I am getting close to applying these patches, probably this week. The > patches are cumulative: > > https://github.com/postgres/postgres/compare/master...bmomjian:key.diff > >

postgres_fdw - cached connection leaks if the associated user mapping/foreign server is dropped

Hi, As discussed in [1], in postgres_fdw the cached connections to remote servers can stay until the lifetime of the local session without getting a chance to disconnect (connection leak), if the underlying user mapping or foreign server is dropped in another session. Here are few scenarios how

adding wait_start column to pg_locks

Hi, When examining the duration of locks, we often do join on pg_locks and pg_stat_activity and use columns such as query_start or state_change. However, since these columns are the moment when queries have started or their state has changed, we cannot get the exact lock duration in this way.

Re: postgres_fdw - cached connection leaks if the associated user mapping/foreign server is dropped

Is the following sequence possible ? In pgfdw_inval_callback(): entry->invalidated = true; + have_invalid_connections = true; At which time the loop in pgfdw_xact_callback() is already running (but past the above entry). Then: + /* We are done closing all the invalidated

Re: Autovacuum on partitioned table (autoanalyze)

Hello Alvaro, On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 10:28 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Hello Yuzuko, > > On 2020-Dec-02, yuzuko wrote: > > > The problem Horiguchi-san mentioned is as follows: > > [explanation] > > Hmm, I see. So the problem is that if some ancestor is analyzed first, > then analyze of one of

Re: Add Information during standby recovery conflicts

At Tue, 15 Dec 2020 02:00:21 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote in > Thanks for the review! I'm thinking to wait half a day before > commiting > the patch just in the case someone may object the patch. Sorry for coming late. I have looked only the latest thread so I should be missing many things so

Re: postgres_fdw - cached connection leaks if the associated user mapping/foreign server is dropped

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 8:25 AM Zhihong Yu wrote: > Is the following sequence possible ? > In pgfdw_inval_callback(): > > entry->invalidated = true; > + have_invalid_connections = true; > > At which time the loop in pgfdw_xact_callback() is already running (but past > the

Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)

Hi, On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 12:01 AM Arne Roland wrote: > thanks for looking into this. I haven't yet looked at your patch in detail, > yet I think we should address the general issue here. To me this doesn't seem > to be a RI-trigger issue, but a more general issue like I mentioned in the >

Re: Optimizing the documentation

Joshua Drake writes: > Certainly and I didn't want to just start dumping patches. Part of this is > just style, for example: > Thus far, our queries have only accessed one table at a time. Queries can > access multiple tables at once, or access the same table in such a way that > multiple rows

Re: Proposed patch for key managment

On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 04:38:14PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Attached is a patch for key management, which will eventually be part of > cluster file encryption (CFE), called TDE (Transparent Data Encryption) > by Oracle. It is an update of Masahiko Sawada's patch from July 31: > > >

Re: Allow CLUSTER, VACUUM FULL and REINDEX to change tablespace on the fly

On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 01:45:26PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote: > On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 09:20:35AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 2020-12-11 21:27, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > By the way-- What did you think of the idea of explictly marking the > > > types used for bitmasks using types

Re: HASH_BLOBS hazards (was Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions)

I wrote: > There are a couple of other API oddities that maybe we should think > about while we're here: > * Should we just have a blanket insistence that all callers supply > HASH_ELEM? The default sizes that dynahash.c uses without that are > undocumented and basically useless. We're already

Re: HASH_BLOBS hazards (was Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions)

Here's a rolled-up patch that does some further documentation work and gets rid of the unnecessary memset's as well. regards, tom lane diff --git a/contrib/dblink/dblink.c b/contrib/dblink/dblink.c index 2dc9e44ae6..651227f510 100644 --- a/contrib/dblink/dblink.c +++

Re: A few new options for CHECKPOINT

On 12/5/20, 9:11 AM, "Stephen Frost" wrote: > * Bossart, Nathan (bossa...@amazon.com) wrote: >> On 12/5/20, 6:41 AM, "Stephen Frost" wrote: >> > Assuming we actually want to do this, which I still generally don't >> > agree with since it isn't really clear if it'll actually end up doing >> >

Re: Optimizing the documentation

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 12:50 PM Tom Lane wrote: > Most of the docs contain pretty dense technical > material that's not going to be improved by making it even denser. It's always hard to write dense technical prose, for a variety of reasons. I often struggle with framing. For example I seem to

Re: Optimizing the documentation

> > > > > Queries can also access multiple tables at once, or access the same table > > in a way that multiple rows are processed. A query that accesses multiple > > rows of the same or different tables at one time is a join. For example, > if > > you wish to list all of the weather records with

Re: Add Information during standby recovery conflicts

On 2020/12/15 15:40, Fujii Masao wrote: On 2020/12/15 12:04, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: At Tue, 15 Dec 2020 02:00:21 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote in Thanks for the review! I'm thinking to wait half a day before commiting the patch just in the case someone may object the patch. Sorry for

Re: Rethinking plpgsql's assignment implementation

Hi I checked a performance and it looks so access to record's field is faster, but an access to arrays field is significantly slower do $$ declare a int[]; aux int; rep boolean default true; begin for i in 1..5000 loop a[i]:= 5000 - i; end loop; raise notice '%', a[1:10];

Re: Fail Fast In CTAS/CMV If Relation Already Exists To Avoid Unnecessary Rewrite, Planning Costs

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:52 AM Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 03:15:12PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > Please note that this case fails with your patch, but the presence of > > IF NOT EXISTS should ensure that we don't fail and issue a NOTICE > > instead, no? Thanks for