On Thu, 5 Jan 2023 at 20:45, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
>
> Patch needed a rebase; no functionality changes.
The patch does not apply on top of HEAD as in [1], please post a rebased patch:
=== Applying patches on top of PostgreSQL commit ID
d952373a987bad331c0e499463159dd142ced1ef ===
=== applying
On Sun, Jan 8, 2023 at 11:55 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-01-07 18:08:11 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 7, 2023 at 12:25 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > On 2023-01-07 11:08:36 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > > > 3. Is it OK to clobber the shared pending flag for SIGQUIT, SIGTERM,
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 9:40 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> The scenario I'm worried about could be closed, mostly, if we were willing
>> to invent an intermediate GUC privilege level "can be set interactively
>> but only by CREATEROLE holders" ("PGC_CRSET"?).
> Of course, if it's
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 12:08 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Actually, FreezeMultiXactId() can fully remove an xmax that has some
> member XIDs >= OldestXmin, provided FRM_NOOP processing isn't
> possible, at least when no individual member is still running. Doesn't
> have to involve transaction
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 at 08:17, Ankit Kumar Pandey wrote:
>
>
> > On 10/01/23 10:53, David Rowley wrote:
>
> > the total cost is the same for both of these, but the execution time
> > seems to vary quite a bit.
>
> This is really weird, I tried it different ways (to rule out any issues
> due to
>
>
On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 at 18:36, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> David Rowley writes:
> > Ideally, our sort costing would just be better, but I think that
> > raises the bar a little too high to start thinking of making
> > improvements to that for this patch.
>
> It's trickier than it looks, cf f4c7c410e.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 05:25:44PM +0100, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> I like the idea of comparing the full page (and not just the LSN) but
> I'm not sure that adding the pageinspect dependency is a good thing.
>
> What about extracting the block directly from the relation file and
> comparing it
I discussed this a bit in a different thread [0], but I thought it deserved
its own thread.
After setting wal_retrieve_retry_interval to 1ms in the tests, I noticed
that the recovery tests consistently take much longer. Upon further
inspection, it looks like a similar race condition to the one
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 09:42:19AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Ok, that sounds reasonable, but the cfbot doesn't like patches that
> depend on other patches in a different email. Maybe you can roll this up
> as an extra patch in your next version? It's pretty small.
This can go two ways if
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 7:13 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Amit Langote writes:
> >> Thanks for the patch. It looks good, though I guess you said that we
> >> should also change the error message that CREATE TABLE ... PARTITION
> >> OF emits to match the other cases while we're here. I've
On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 04:18:59PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 2023-01-02 Mo 10:44, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't think that just concatenating those strings would make for a
>> pleasant API. More sensible, perhaps, to have a separate function
>> that returns a record. Or we could redefine
Hello.
At Sun, 1 Jan 2023 01:13:24 +0530, Ankit Kumar Pandey
wrote in
> This is patch for todo item: Add overlaps geometric operators that
> ignore point overlaps
>
> Issue:
>
> SELECT circle '((0,0), 1)' && circle '((2,0),1) returns True
>
> Expectation: In above case, both figures touch
On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 1:25 AM Ted Yu wrote:
> I was reading src/backend/replication/logical/applyparallelworker.c .
> In `pa_allocate_worker`, when pa_launch_parallel_worker returns NULL, I think
> the `ParallelApplyTxnHash` should be released.
Thanks for reporting.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 8:47 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> [ squint ... ] Are you sure it's not a security *hazard*, though?
I think you have to squint pretty hard to find a security hazard here.
The effect of this GUC is to control the set of privileges that a
CREATEROLE user automatically grants to
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 6:12 PM Dean Rasheed
wrote:
> While doing some random testing, I noticed that the following is broken in
> HEAD:
>
> SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT random()) FROM generate_series(1,10);
>
> ERROR: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist
>
> It appears to have been
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 7:08 PM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
> It looks no problem in terms of vacuum integration, although I've not
> fully tested yet. TID store uses the radix tree as the main storage,
> and with the template radix tree, the data types for shared and
> non-shared will be different.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 7:29 PM Xing Guo wrote:
>
> Thank you John. This is my first patch, I'll keep it in mind that
> adding a version number next time I sending the patch.
Welcome to the community! You may also consider reviewing a patch from the
current commitfest, since we can always use
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 1:59 PM Ankit Kumar Pandey
wrote:
>
>
> On 03/01/23 08:38, David Rowley wrote:
> >
> > Do you actually have a need for this or are you just trying to tick
> > off some TODO items?
> >
> I would say Iatter but reason I picked it up was more on side of
> learning optimizer
> Sandro Santilli writes:
> > On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 05:51:49PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> ... you still need one script file for each supported upgrade step
>
> > That's exactly the problem we're trying to solve here.
> > The include support is nice on itself, but won't solve our problem.
>
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 at 15:46, Richard Guo wrote:
> However the scan/join plan's
> tlist does not contain random(), which I think we need to fix.
I was wondering if that's true and considered that we don't want to
evaluate random() for the sort then again when doing the aggregate
transitions, but
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 09:29:03AM +0100, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> Thanks for updating the patch!
>
> +-- Compare FPI from WAL record and page from table, they must be same
>
> I think "must be the same" or "must be identical" sounds better (but not 100%
> sure).
>
> Except this nit, V4
Amit Kapila writes:
>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 11:06 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>>> We could just not fix it in the back branches. I'd argue that this is
>>> as much a definition change as a bug fix, so it doesn't really feel
>>> like something to back-patch anyway.
> So, if we don't backpatch then it
I discussed this elsewhere [0], but I thought it deserved its own thread.
After setting wal_retrieve_retry_interval to 1ms in the tests, I noticed
that some of the archiving tests began consistently failing on Windows. I
believe the problem is that WaitForWALToBecomeAvailable() depends on the
On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 6:08 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 at 13:47, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
> >
> > On 08.12.22 03:30, Peter Smith wrote:
> > > PSA patches for v9*
> > >
> > > v9-0001 - Now the table rows are ordered per PeterE's suggestions [1]
> >
> > committed
Thanks for
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 12:00:46PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 9:46 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > Now, there is a fair question whether splitting this code out of
> > postgres.h is worth any trouble at all. TBH my initial reaction
> > had been "no". But once we found that only
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 09:54:31AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> +1
Okay, thanks. Done this part as of c0ee694 and 72b6098, then.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 11:05:04AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> What about a define that forces external toasting very aggressively for
> catalog tables, iff they have a toast table? I suspect doing so for
> non-catalog tables as well would trigger test changes. Running a buildfarm
> animal with
Tags in the patch follow the markup of the XMLTABLE function:
XMLTABLE (
XMLNAMESPACES (
namespace_uri AS
namespace_name , ... ),
row_expression
PASSING BY
{REF|VALUE}
document_expression
BY
{REF|VALUE}
COLUMNS name {
type PATH
column_expression
DEFAULT
On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 10:21 AM Ted Yu wrote:
> /* First time through, initialize parallel apply worker state
> hashtable. */
> if (!ParallelApplyTxnHash)
>
> I think it would be better if `ParallelApplyTxnHash` is created by the first
> successful parallel apply worker.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 7:55 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com <
houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 10:21 AM Ted Yu
> wrote:
> > /* First time through, initialize parallel apply worker state
> hashtable. */
> > if (!ParallelApplyTxnHash)
> >
> > I think it
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 7:48 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 10:26 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, January 9, 2023 4:51 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2023 at 11:32 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 6:32 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 05:25:44PM +0100, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> > I like the idea of comparing the full page (and not just the LSN) but
> > I'm not sure that adding the pageinspect dependency is a good thing.
> >
> > What about
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 2:08 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I discussed this a bit in a different thread [0], but I thought it deserved
> its own thread.
>
> After setting wal_retrieve_retry_interval to 1ms in the tests, I noticed
> that the recovery tests consistently take much longer. Upon further
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 9:34 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 7:48 PM Dilip Kumar
> wrote:
> >
> > I was looking into 0001, IMHO the pid should continue to represent the main
> > apply worker. So the pid will always show the main apply worker which is
> >
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 8:38 AM shiy.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 11:06 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Amit Kapila writes:
> > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 5:29 PM shiy.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> > >> I think one way to fix it is to modify pg_publication_tables query to
> > >>
On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 09:11:05AM +, Jelte Fennema wrote:
> That's totally fair, I attached a new iteration of this patchset where this
> refactoring and the new functionality are split up in two patches.
The confusion that 0001 is addressing is fair (cough, fc579e1, cough),
still I am
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 9:34 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> > I was looking into 0001, IMHO the pid should continue to represent the main
> > apply worker. So the pid will always show the main apply worker which is
> > actually receiving all the changes for the subscription (in short
On 11/01/23 06:18, David Rowley wrote:
Not sure if we should be trying to improve that in this patch. I just
wanted to identify it as something else that perhaps could be done.
This could be within reach but still original problem of having hashagg
removing
any gains from this remains.
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 12:10:33PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> It suggests the *kinds* of objects that are part of the extension, but
> lists the objects of that kind regardless of dependency. I read
> Michael suggested (and I agree) to restrict the objects (not kinds) to
> actually be a
So, I had intended to spend some time on this at least three times a year.
I've clearly failed at that, but now is as good a time as any to pick it
back up again.
Over in [1], Tom opined:
> John Naylor writes:
>
> > "WARNING for Developers: Unfortunately this list does not contain all
the
> >
Jacob Champion writes:
> We'd like to be allowed to change the schema for a table that's been
> marked in the past with pg_extension_config_dump().
> Unless I'm missing something obvious (please, let it be that) there's no
> way to do this safely. Once you've marked an internal table as
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 5:20 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> (I don't know why you didn't make it 0)
(Oh, I see why it had to be non-zero to avoiding burning CPU, ignore that part.)
John Naylor writes:
> Note that the TODO list has accumulated some cruft over the years. Some
> time ago I started an effort to remove outdated/undesirable entries, and I
> should get back to that, but for the present, please take the warning at
> the top to heart:
> "WARNING for Developers:
David Rowley writes:
> I think whatever the fix is here, we should likely ensure that the
> results are consistent regardless of which Aggrefs are the presorted
> ones. Perhaps the easiest way to do that, and to ensure we call the
> volatile functions are called the same number of times would
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 at 17:32, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> David Rowley writes:
> > I think whatever the fix is here, we should likely ensure that the
> > results are consistent regardless of which Aggrefs are the presorted
> > ones. Perhaps the easiest way to do that, and to ensure we call the
> >
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 11:07:05AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I think we should acquire the spinlock when updating fields of the
> replication slot even by its owner. Otherwise readers could see
> inconsistent results. Looking at another place where we update
> two_phase_at, we acquire the
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 05:20:38PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Is the problem here that SIGCHLD is processed ...
>
> PG_SETMASK(); <--- here?
>
> selres = select(nSockets, , NULL, NULL, );
>
> Meanwhile the SIGCHLD handler code says:
>
> * Was it the wal
On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 9:49 AM Andrey Borodin wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 5:02 AM vignesh C wrote:
> > does not apply on top of HEAD as in [1], please post a rebased patch:
> >
> Thanks! Here's the rebase.
I was looking into this patch, it seems like three different
optimizations are
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 01:55:56PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> I have not yet started, so please go ahead.
Okay, I have looked at that and fixed the whole new things, including
the typo you have introduced. 0001~0004 have been left out, as of the
same reasons as upthread.
--
Michael
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 10:07 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Amit Kapila writes:
> >> On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 11:06 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> We could just not fix it in the back branches. I'd argue that this is
> >>> as much a definition change as a bug fix, so it doesn't really feel
> >>> like something
On 11/01/23 09:57, Tom Lane wrote:
IME it's typically a lot more productive to approach things via
"scratch your own itch". If a problem is biting you directly, then
at least you have some clear idea of what it is that needs to be fixed.
You might have to work up to an understanding of how to
Dear Ted,
Thank you for reviewing! PSA new version.
> + /* quick exit if connection cache has been not initialized yet. */
>
> been not initialized -> not been initialized
Fixed.
> +
> (errcode(ERRCODE_CONNECTION_FAILURE),
> +
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 2:02 PM Elena Indrupskaya <
e.indrupsk...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>
> Sorry for upsetting your bot. :(
What I do in these cases is save the incremental patch as a .txt file --
that way people can read it, but the cf bot doesn't try to launch a CI run.
And if I forget that
On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 2:03 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
>
> Please find attached, V37 taking care of:
Thanks. I started to digest the design specified in the commit message
and these patches. Here are some quick comments:
1. Does logical decoding on standby work without any issues if the
On Tue, Jan 03, 2023 at 11:05:38AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I noticed that cfbot's Windows tests are failing because the backslashes in
> the archive directory path are causing escaping problems. Here is an
> attempt to fix that by converting all backslashes to forward slashes, which
> is
101 - 155 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
