On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 5:36 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> Thanks!
>
> At Wed, 16 Jun 2021 16:52:11 +0900, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote in
> > On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 5:35 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > In a very common operation of accidentally specifying a recycled
> > > segment, pg_
Hi all
The return value of function PQsendFlushRequest is 1 or 0.
---
Sends a request for the server to flush its output buffer.
int PQsendFlushRequest(PGconn *conn);
Returns 1 for success. Returns 0 on any failure.
--
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 6:00 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 11:26 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 5:43 PM Ashutosh Bapat
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi
>> > LogicalIncreaseRestartDecodingForSlot() has a debug log to report a
>> > new restart_lsn. But the cor
On 2/7/21 21:23, Tom Lane wrote:
So I'm inclined to propose pushing this and seeing what happens.
+1
But why the Index type still uses for indexing of range table entries?
For example:
- we give int resultRelation value to create_modifytable_path() as Index
nominalRelation value.
- exec_rt_fe
On Wed, 30 Jun 2021 at 05:11, David Christensen
wrote:
> 1) A basic refactor of the existing code to easily handle expanding the
> units we use into a table-based format. This also includes changing the
> return value of `pg_size_bytes()` from an int64 into a numeric, and
> minor test adjustments
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 10:30:12PM +, Jacob Champion wrote:
> Done in v3, with a second patch for the code motion.
I have gone through that, tweaking the documentation you have added as
that's the meat of the patch, reworking a bit the declarations of the
callbacks (no need for several typedef
> 1 июля 2021 г., в 20:59, Mark Dilger
> написал(а):
>
>
>
>> On Jun 29, 2021, at 6:25 PM, Mark Dilger
>> wrote:
>>
>> Please find attached a new set of patches.
>
> And again, this time attaching a fifth patch which includes the work to allow
> users who belong to the right security r
Hello Ishii-san,
On Thu, 01 Jul 2021 09:03:42 +0900 (JST)
Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > v13 patches gave a compiler warning...
> >
> > $ make >/dev/null
> > pgbench.c: In function ‘commandError’:
> > pgbench.c:3071:17: warning: unused variable ‘command’ [-Wunused-variable]
> > const Command *comman
On Fri, 2 Jul 2021 at 19:48, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>
> If you allow me a small suggestion.
> Move the initializations of the variable tmp_var to after check if the
> function can run.
> Saves some cycles, when not running.
>
OK, thanks. I agree, on grounds of neatness and consistency with
nearby
On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 6:31 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 12:56 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> >
> > Don't we want to clear stats at drop subscription as well? We do drop
> > database stats in dropdb via pgstat_drop_database, so I think we need
> > to clear subscription stats
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 2:21 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 3:43 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
>
> I am planning to go through the patch once again and would like to
> commit and backpatch till v10 in a day to two unless someone thinks
> otherwise.
>
Pushed.
--
With Regards,
Ami
On 18/6/21 15:02, Alexander Pyhalov wrote:
Andrey Lepikhov писал 2021-05-27 07:27:
Next version of the patch.
For searching any problems I forced this patch during 'make check'
tests. Some bugs were found and fixed.
Hi.
I've tested this patch and haven't found issues, but I have some comments.
On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 at 09:43, David Rowley wrote:
>
> On Sat, 3 Jul 2021 at 11:04, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> > Thinking about this more, I think it's best not to risk back-patching.
> > It *might* be safe, but it's difficult to really be sure of that. The
> > bug itself is pretty unlikely to ever happ
On 12.06.21 11:41, Fabien COELHO wrote:
The patch includes basic AUTOCOMMIT and ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK tests, which
did not exist before, at all.
I looked at these tests first. The tests are good, they increase
coverage. But they don't actually test the issue that was broken by the
previous patc
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 3:16 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 6:31 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 12:56 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> Instead of using the syntax "ALTER SUBSCRIPTION name SET SKIP
> TRANSACTION Iconst", isn't it better to use it as a subscript
Hi,
Have a few notes about pg_stat_logical_replication_error from the DBA point
of view (which will use this view in the future).
1. As I understand it, this view might contain many errors related to
different subscriptions. It is better to name
"pg_stat_logical_replication_errors" using the plural
Le 01/07/2021 à 18:47, Tom Lane a écrit :
Nicolas CHAHWEKILIAN writes:
As far as I am concerned, I am totally awaiting for this kind of feature
exposed here, for one single reason at this time : the extension
pg_statement_rollback will be much more valuable with the ability of
processing "rollb
Em seg., 5 de jul. de 2021 às 06:44, Dean Rasheed
escreveu:
> On Fri, 2 Jul 2021 at 19:48, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >
> > If you allow me a small suggestion.
> > Move the initializations of the variable tmp_var to after check if the
> function can run.
> > Saves some cycles, when not running.
> >
On 7/4/21 4:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> As I've been poking around in this area, I find myself growing
> increasingly annoyed at the new GUC name
> "debug_invalidate_system_caches_always". It is too d*mn long.
> It's a serious pain to type in any context where you don't have
> autocomplete to help
On 7/4/21 3:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Over in [1] it is demonstrated that with CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS enabled,
> initdb accounts for a full 50% of the runtime of "make check-world"
> (well, actually of the buildfarm cycle, which is not quite exactly
> that but close). Since initdb certainly doesn't
On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 23:07, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>
> Em seg., 5 de jul. de 2021 às 06:44, Dean Rasheed
> escreveu:
>> Note, however, that it won't make any difference to performance in the
>> way that you're suggesting -- elog() in Postgres is used for "should
>> never happen, unless there's a
> Ok, I reproduced that case, just not using a group by: by adding the group
> by a sort node is added in both cases (master and your patch), except that
> with your patch we sort on both keys and that doesn't really incur a
> performance penalty.
>
> I think the overhead occurs because in the Exe
Em seg., 5 de jul. de 2021 às 09:02, David Rowley
escreveu:
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 23:07, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >
> > Em seg., 5 de jul. de 2021 às 06:44, Dean Rasheed <
> dean.a.rash...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> >> Note, however, that it won't make any difference to performance in the
> >> way t
Hi,
This is not a live bug.
I think this is worth fixing, just for the sake of style and code
correctness.
As a bonus, we have a reduced scope and standardized return.
regards,
Ranier Vilela
fix_possible_decl_var_uninitialized_varlena.patch
Description: Binary data
On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 at 21:28, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
>
> Here is a slightly updated version of the patch
>
Hi,
I have looked at this in some more detail, and it all looks pretty
good, other than some mostly cosmetic stuff.
The new code in statext_is_compatible_clause_internal() is a little
hard to
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:not tested
I looked through the patch. Looks good to me.
CFbot tests are passi
On 2/7/21 01:56, Hywel Carver wrote:
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 12:21 PM Andrey Lepikhov
mailto:a.lepik...@postgrespro.ru>> wrote:
I think, here we could ask more general question: do we want to
remove a
'IS NOT NULL' clause from the clause list if the rest of the list
implicitly im
On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 05:28, Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
> I have rebased all the patches on top of
> 'v2_0001-removed_extra_mem_alloc_from_create_list_bounds.patch'.
> Attaching all the patches here.
I had a look over these and I think what's being done here is fine.
I think this will help speed up bu
Hi
I used the SetFileInformationByHandle function with the
FILE_RENAME_FLAG_POSIX_SEMANTICS flag for the file rename function..
1) The _WIN32_WINNT variable needs to be increased to 0x0A00 (Windows
10). Fixed conflict with #undef CHECKSUM_TYPE_NONE
2) The SetFileInformationByHandle functio
Greetings,
* osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com (osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com) wrote:
> On Monday, July 5, 2021 10:32 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 04, 2021 at 11:02:01AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > Rather than RfC, the appropriate status seems like it should be
> > > Rejected, as otherw
>Please find attached a POC patch to do just that.
>The switch to the single-datum tuplesort is done when there is only one
>attribute, it is byval (to avoid having to deal with copy of the
references
>everywhere) and we are not in bound mode (to also avoid having to move
things
>around).
Hi, nice
Le lundi 5 juillet 2021, 16:51:59 CEST Ranier Vilela a écrit :
> >Please find attached a POC patch to do just that.
> >
> >The switch to the single-datum tuplesort is done when there is only one
> >attribute, it is byval (to avoid having to deal with copy of the
>
> references
>
> >everywhere) an
Em seg., 5 de jul. de 2021 às 12:07, Ronan Dunklau
escreveu:
> Le lundi 5 juillet 2021, 16:51:59 CEST Ranier Vilela a écrit :
> > >Please find attached a POC patch to do just that.
> > >
> > >The switch to the single-datum tuplesort is done when there is only one
> > >attribute, it is byval (to a
Greetings,
* Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 12:03:07PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > My bad. I was talking about the cases when do_pg_stop_backup is called
> > while the server is in recovery mode i.e. backup_started_in_recovery =
> > RecoveryInProgres
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 7:33 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 12:03:07PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > My bad. I was talking about the cases when do_pg_stop_backup is called
> > while the server is in recovery mode i.e. backup_started_in_recovery =
> > RecoveryInProgress(
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 9:25 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
> In general, I agree with Tom's up-thread comment about children hanging
> around after postmaster death making things more difficult for debugging
> and just in general, so I'm in favor of trying to eliminate as many
> cases where that's happen
On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 01:48:52AM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 05:28, Nitin Jadhav
> wrote:
> > I have rebased all the patches on top of
> > 'v2_0001-removed_extra_mem_alloc_from_create_list_bounds.patch'.
> > Attaching all the patches here.
>
> I had a look over these an
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 7/4/21 3:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm now a little dubious about my claim that this would have helped find
>> any bugs. Invalidating a finished OpClassCache entry does not model any
>> real-world scenario, because as noted elsewhere in LookupOpclassInfo,
>> once such
On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:32 PM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2021-Jun-20, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Actually ... isn't there a second race, in the opposite direction?
> > IIUC, the point of this is that once we force some WAL to be sent
> > to the frozen sender/receiver, they'll be killed for failure
On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 8:48 PM Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>
> On 12/25/20, 12:09 PM, "Andres Freund" wrote:
> > When running write heavy transactional workloads I've many times
> > observed that one needs to run the benchmarks for quite a while till
> > they get to their steady state performance. The
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 1:51 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 11:55 PM Zhihong Yu wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > + skip = !ExecLockTableTuple(erm->relation, &tid, markSlot,
> > + estate->es_snapshot,
> > estate->es_output_cid,
> > +
On 2021-Jul-05, vignesh C wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:32 PM Álvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2021-Jun-20, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > > Actually ... isn't there a second race, in the opposite direction?
> > > IIUC, the point of this is that once we force some WAL to be sent
> > > to the fro
Also, if you're going to remove the initializations here, maybe you'd also
change i and j to C99 "for" declarations like "for (int i=0, j=0; ...)"
- PartitionListValue **all_values = NULL;
- ListCell *cell;
- int i = 0;
- int ndatum
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 10:30 PM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2021-Jul-05, vignesh C wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 7:32 PM Álvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2021-Jun-20, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >
> > > > Actually ... isn't there a second race, in the opposite direction?
> > > > IIUC, th
While re-reading this code I found a small typo and fixed it (making
the comment more explicit at the same time).
Thanks,
James
v1-0001-Fix-typo-in-comment.patch
Description: Binary data
On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 11:07 AM David Rowley wrote:
>
> A few years ago I wrote a patch to implement the missing aggregate
> combine functions for array_agg and string_agg [1]. In the end, the
> patch was rejected due to some concern [2] that if we allow these
> aggregates to run in parallel the
Noah Misch writes:
> On Sun, Jul 04, 2021 at 04:27:13PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> However, I think we should also give serious consideration to
>> "debug_clobber_cache" or "debug_clobber_cache_always" for continuity
>> with past practice (though it still feels like "always" is a good
>> word to lo
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 8:08 AM Ronan Dunklau wrote:
>
> > Ok, I reproduced that case, just not using a group by: by adding the group
> > by a sort node is added in both cases (master and your patch), except that
> > with your patch we sort on both keys and that doesn't really incur a
> > performan
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 2:57 AM Andrey Lepikhov
wrote:
> On 18/6/21 15:02, Alexander Pyhalov wrote:
> > Andrey Lepikhov писал 2021-05-27 07:27:
> >> Next version of the patch.
> >> For searching any problems I forced this patch during 'make check'
> >> tests. Some bugs were found and fixed.
> >
>
On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 at 04:45, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> If you wanted to further squish the patches together, I don't mind being a
> co-author.
Thanks for looking at the patches.
I fixed the couple of things that you mentioned and pushed all 4
patches as a single commit (53d86957e)
David
On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 at 05:03, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> Also, if you're going to remove the initializations here, maybe you'd also
> change i and j to C99 "for" declarations like "for (int i=0, j=0; ...)"
>
> - PartitionListValue **all_values = NULL;
> - ListCell *cell;
> - int
On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 at 06:55, James Coleman wrote:
> While re-reading this code I found a small typo and fixed it (making
> the comment more explicit at the same time).
Thanks. Pushed (9ee91cc58).
David
On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 09:42:29PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> I agree. I'm attaching the patch that replaces pg_usleep with
> WaitLatch for {pre, post}_auth_delay. I'm also attaching Michael's
> latest patch stop-backup-latch-v2.patch, just for the sake of cfbot.
I don't object to the argum
On Tue, 8 Sept 2020 at 13:46, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I've been doing some handwaving about changing the representation
> of Vars, with an eye to making it clear by inspection whether a
> given Var is nullable by some lower outer join [2]. If that work
> ever comes to fruition then the need for "chec
On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 05:13, Ibrar Ahmed wrote:
> It was a minor change therefore I rebased the patch, please take a look.
I only had a quick look at the v3 patch.
+ rel = table_open(rte->relid, NoLock);
+ att = TupleDescAttr(rel->rd_att, var->varattno - 1);
+ if (att->attnotnull && !check_null
On Sunday, July 4, 2021 1:44 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 8:16 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 11:46 PM Greg Nancarrow
> wrote:
> > > I personally think "(b) provide an option to the user to specify
> > > whether inserts can be parallelized on a relation"
On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 04:53:06PM +0300, Victor Spirin wrote:
> This patch related to this post:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAEepm%3D0FV-k%2B%3Dd9z08cW%3DZXoR1%3Dkw9wdpkP6WAuOrKJdz-8ujg%40mail.gmail.com
How does that cope with durable_rename_excl() where rename() is used
on Windows?
On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 1:56 AM vignesh C wrote:
> The 2nd patch does not apply on Head, please post a rebased version:
> error: patch failed: src/backend/utils/adt/ri_triggers.c:337
> error: src/backend/utils/adt/ri_triggers.c: patch does not apply
Thanks for the heads up.
Rebased patches attach
On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 06:45:25PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Separating "CREATE TABLE AS EXECUTE" from ExecuteStmt would be cleaner
> but I avoided to change the syntax tree. Instead the attched make
> distinction of $$.type of ExecuteStmt between NULL and "" to use to
> notify the returned
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 22:33, bu...@sohu.com wrote:
> I have written a plan with similar functions, It is known that the following
> two situations do not work well.
I read through this thread and also wondered about a Parallel
Partition type operator. It also seems to me that if it could be do
On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 8:29 PM Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 5:34 AM Craig Ringer
> wrote:
> >
>
> > If you don't think the sorts of use cases I presented are worth the trouble
> > that's fair enough. I'm not against adding it on the commit record. It's
> > just that with logica
On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 12:43 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Noah Misch writes:
> > On Sun, Jul 04, 2021 at 04:27:13PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> However, I think we should also give serious consideration to
> >> "debug_clobber_cache" or "debug_clobber_cache_always" for continuity
> >> with past practice
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Ah, yes it does. I can reproduce this now. I thought PQconsumeInput
> was sufficient, but it's not: you have to have the PQgetResult in there
> too. Looking ...
Any progress on fixing this?
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 7:33 PM Alexey Lesovsky wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Have a few notes about pg_stat_logical_replication_error from the DBA point
> of view (which will use this view in the future).
Thank you for the comments!
> 1. As I understand it, this view might contain many errors related to
>
Hi,
We have addressed the O(n^2) problem which involves directory scan for
archiving individual WAL files by maintaining a WAL counter to identify
the next WAL file in a sequence.
WAL archiver scans the status directory to identify the next WAL file
which needs to be archived. This directory scan
Hello Yura,
I believe most "range" values are small, much smaller than UINT32_MAX.
In this case, according to [1] fastest method is Lemire's one (I'd take
original version from [2]) [...]
Yep.
I share your point that the range is more often 32 bits.
However, I'm not enthousiastic at combin
Hello,
While testing the patch "Add proper planner support for ORDER BY / DISTINCT
aggregates" [0] I discovered the performance penalty from adding a sort node
essentially came from not using the single-datum tuplesort optimization in
ExecSort (contrary to the sorting done in ExecAgg).
I origi
Hi,
I'm interested in this patch and I also run the same test with Ikeda-san's
fxact_update.pgbench.
In my environment (poor spec VM), the result is following.
* foreign_twophase_commit = disabled
363tps
* foreign_twophase_commit = required (It is necessary to set -R ${RATE} as
Ikeda-san said
> If you make a separate thread and CF entry, please CC me and add me as
> a reviewer on the CF entry.
Ok, I started a new thread and added it to the next CF: https://
commitfest.postgresql.org/34/3237/
--
Ronan Dunklau
69 matches
Mail list logo
