I've looked at patch 0003.
Generally, it does a similar thing as 0001 - it exposes a more generalized
method tuple_insert_with_arbiter that encapsulates
tuple_insert_speculative/tuple_complete_speculative and at the same time
allows extensibility of this i.e. different implementation for custom
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 03:03:01PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 11:49 AM Bertrand Drouvot
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 09:39:31AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > Commit message states: "why we can't just update inactive_since for
> > > synced slots on
On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 12:17 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> eic unpatched patched
> 041729572
> 1 30846 10376
> 2 184355562
> 4 189803503
> 8 189802680
> 16 189763233
... but the patched version gets down to a low number for eic=0 too if
you
OK, so I'm coming back to this thread after giving it a few days to
cool off. My last series of patches proposed to do five things:
1. Merge the four-sentence "Installation from Binaries" chapter back
into "Installation from Source". I thought this was a slam-dunk, but
Peter pointed out that
Alexander Lakhin writes:
> I think that deviation can be explained by the fact that cost_index() takes
> baserel->allvisfrac (derived from pg_class.relallvisible) into account for
> the index-only-scan case, and I see the following difference when a test
> run fails:
> relname |
Hello Tom,
29.03.2024 16:51, Tom Lane wrote:
Alexander Lakhin writes:
I think that deviation can be explained by the fact that cost_index() takes
baserel->allvisfrac (derived from pg_class.relallvisible) into account for
the index-only-scan case, and I see the following difference when a test
Hi Alvaro,
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 2:04 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2024-Mar-28, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > Here's patch 1 for the time being that implements barebones
> > JSON_TABLE(), that is, without NESTED paths/columns and PLAN clause.
> > I've tried to shape the interfaces so that those
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 11:43 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 11:22 PM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>>
>> On 2024-Mar-28, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>>
>> > LGTM.
>> >
>> > The commitfest entry is marked as RFC already.
>> >
>> > Thanks for taking care of the comments.
>>
>> Thanks for
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 2:03 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> [ new patches ]
Tomas, thanks for pointing me to this email; as you speculated, gmail
breaks threading if the subject line changes.
The documentation still needs work here:
- It refers to --link mode, which is not a thing.
- It should talk
101 - 109 of 109 matches
Mail list logo