On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 4:34 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 6:19 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:27 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 9:53 PM
Shi, Yu/侍 雨 将撤回邮件“Could you help testing logical replication?”。
Shi, Yu/侍 雨 将撤回邮件“Could you help testing logical replication?”。
On 2021/04/11 19:15, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 9:47 AM Justin Pryzby wrote:
Find attached language fixes.
Thanks for the patches.
Thanks for the patches!
0001 patch basically looks good to me.
+ behavior must be specified as
+ DROP_RESTRICT or
On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 6:51 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
Thanks, 0001 and 0002 look good to me. I have a minor comment for 0002.
+total_bytesbigint
+
+
+Amount of decoded transactions data sent to the decoding output plugin
+while decoding the changes from WAL
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 4:34 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 6:19 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:27 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 9:53 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It seems Vignesh has
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 4:34 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 6:19 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:27 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 9:53 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It seems Vignesh has
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 6:19 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:27 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 9:53 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > It seems Vignesh has changed patches based on the latest set of
> > > comments so you might want to
Sorry for sending a wrong mail. Please ignore it.
> -Original Message-
> From: Shi, Yu/侍 雨
> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 6:51 PM
> To: Tang, Haiying/唐 海英
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: RE: Could you help testing logical replication?
>
> > Then I get timeout error
> Then I get timeout error occurs and the subscriber worker keep re-launching
> over and over (you did not mention see such errors?)
I test again and get errors, too. I didn't check log after timeout in the
previous test.
Regards,
Tang
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 9:26 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 12:22 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > And then more generally about the feature:
> > - If a slot was used to stream out a large amount of changes (say an
> > initial data load), but then replication is interrupted
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:27 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 9:53 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> >
> > It seems Vignesh has changed patches based on the latest set of
> > comments so you might want to rebase.
>
> I've merged my patch into the v6 patch set Vignesh submitted.
>
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 03:26:33PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 09:20:07AM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> >
> > What about log_statement_sample_rate ? Does compute_query_id have the
> > same problem with that?
>
> No, log_statement_sample_rate samples
Hi Postgres Community,
Regarding anti wraparound vacuums (to freeze tuples), I see it has to scan
all the pages which are not frozen-all (looking at visibility map). That
means even if we want to freeze less transactions only (For ex - by
increasing parameter vacuum_freeze_min_age to 1B), still
Re: Michael Paquier
> http://commitfest.cputube.org/michael-paquier.html
>
> So it looks like this could be a different answer.
The mkdir() function looks like a sane and clean approach to me.
Christoph
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 7:59 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 7:41 PM David Rowley wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 at 21:04, Amit Langote
> wrote:
> > > Maybe, we should also updated the description of node struct as
> > > follows to consider that last point:
> >>
> > > *
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 6:20 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Mar-31, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > diff -U3
> > /home/buildfarm/trilobite/buildroot/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/test/isolation/expected/detach-partition-concurrently-4.out
> >
> >
Hi.
I still feel confused about some point, hope to get your answer:
1) You said that "We shouldn't rewind flushedUpto to backward. The
variable notifies how far recovery (or startup process) can read WAL content
safely. "
This fix only rewinds flushedUpto when
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 09:20:07AM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
>
> What about log_statement_sample_rate ? Does compute_query_id have the
> same problem with that?
No, log_statement_sample_rate samples log_min_duration_statements, not
log_statements so it works as expected.
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 02:56:59PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 03:12:40PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Fujii-san has reported on Twitter that enabling the computation of
> > query IDs does not work properly with log_statement as the query ID is
> > calculated
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:03 AM osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> > I checked the PG-DOC, found it says that “Replication of TRUNCATE
> > commands is supported”[1], so maybe TRUNCATE is not supported in
> > synchronous logical replication?
> >
> > If my understanding is right, maybe PG-DOC
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 03:12:40PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Starting a new thread as the one that has introduced compute_query_id
> is already long enough.
>
> Fujii-san has reported on Twitter that enabling the computation of
> query IDs does not work properly with
On Mon, 22 Mar 2021 at 16:38, Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> First, a problem: 0002 doesn't build on macOS, because uint64 has been
> used in the probe definitions. That needs to be handled like the other
> nonnative types in that file.
>
Will fix.
All the
On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 9:39 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
>
> I don't like repeating the same thing for all new messages. So added
> separate para for the same and few other changes. See what do you
> think of the attached?
>
Pushed.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 5:44 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> While discussing freezing tuples during CTAS[1], we found that
> heap_insert() with HEAP_INSERT_FROZEN brings performance degradation.
> For instance, with Paul's patch that sets HEAP_INSERT_FROZEN to CTAS,
> it took 12 sec
Hi all,
Starting a new thread as the one that has introduced compute_query_id
is already long enough.
Fujii-san has reported on Twitter that enabling the computation of
query IDs does not work properly with log_statement as the query ID is
calculated at parse analyze time and the query is logged
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 07:42:20PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>> Em dom., 11 de abr. de 2021 às 16:25, Justin Pryzby
>>> I think it's cleanest to write:
>>> |HeapTupleData tmptup = {0};
> I agree that this would be cleaner.
It would be wrong, though, or at least not
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 11:18 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 04:53:01PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > I feel that we can provide a high timeout value (It can be 1hr on the
> > similar lines of using pg_sleep(3600) for crash tests in
> > 013_crash_restart.pl with the
101 - 128 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
