Mihail Nikalayeu wrote:
> Antonin Houska :
> > Are you sure the test is complete? I see no occurrence of the REPACK command
> > in it.
> Oops, send invalid file. The correct one in attachment.
Thanks!
The problem was that when removing the original "preserve visibility patch"
v12-0005 [1] from
On 1 Sep 2025, at 4:35 PM, Euler Taveira wrote:
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025, at 7:35 AM, Florents Tselai wrote:
While working on this https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6020/
I discovered that when changing for func/func-aggregate.sgml, the HTML
wasn’t marked for update.
IIUC the doc/Makefile shou
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 1:35 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> Nice investigation and report, that I assume you have just guessed
> from a read of the code and that there could be plenty of errors that
> could happen in this code path. It indeed looks like some weak
> coding assumption introduced in thi
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 1:03 AM Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> So we should zero this page in case of reporting error to "not confuse
> vacuum.
> It is done for all places where this function reports error before
> entering critical section and wal-logging this page.
Right.
> _bp_getbuf just reads
Hello hackers,
Please take a look at the August report on buildfarm failures:
# SELECT br, COUNT(*) FROM failures WHERE dt >= '2025-08-01' AND
dt < '2025-09-01' GROUP BY br;
REL_13_STABLE: 9
REL_14_STABLE: 8
REL_15_STABLE: 6
REL_16_STABLE: 12
REL_17_STABLE: 13
REL_18_STABLE: 16
master: 38
-- Tot
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 3:04 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> There's just no reason to think that we'd ever be able to tie back one
> of these LOG messages from VACUUM to the problem within _bt_split.
> There's too many other forms of corruption that might result in VACUUM
> logging this same error (e.
On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 5:20 PM Andrei Lepikhov wrote:
> On 27/7/2025 00:51, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 2:13 PM Andrei Lepikhov > I've another idea. cost_tuplesort() puts 2.0 under logarithm to prefer
> > tuplesort over heapsort. I think we can adjust cost_gather_merg
On Mon Sep 1, 2025 at 4:44 PM CEST, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
On Mon Aug 11, 2025 at 9:23 PM CEST, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 1:55 PM Robert Haas wrote:
[ some review ]
Attached is a patch that addresses your comments I think.
Attached is a version that doesn't fail the tes
On Mon Aug 11, 2025 at 9:23 PM CEST, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 1:55 PM Robert Haas wrote:
[ some review ]
Attached is a patch that addresses your comments I think. I restructured
the schema creation code, and added more comments to the
AlterExtensionNamespace code (I couldn't
On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 09:04:04PM +0700, Daniil Davydov wrote:
> I don't think that we can just create different enums for each index
> strategies.
> We have (for example) ScanKey functionality, which can work with different
> indexes (and such a functions has a uint16 argument for strategy numbe
On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 12:21:18PM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Sept 2025 at 10:36, Amul Sul wrote:
>> I believe we should update all *_opt_error functions to use the new
>> soft error reporting infrastructure instead of boolean flags -- did
>> the same in the attached patch. I am not su
On Thu, 1 May 2025 22:44:50 -0400
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have committd the first draft of the PG 18 release notes. The item
> count looks strong:
I noticed that the following commit seems to be missing from the release notes:
2024-09-17 [89f908a6d] Add temporal FOREIGN KEY contraints
I bel
On 01.09.25 11:09, Fujii Masao wrote:
> The patch looks good to me. Barring any objections, I'm thinking to
> commit the patch.
LGTM.
The HINT was added to copy2's test output and check-world passes.
Thanks!
Best, Jim
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 09:14:46AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 09:51:38PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > I've also attached a rebased patch that addresses all the latest feedback.
> > A reworked verison of the test patch is also included, but that's mostly
> > inte
On 8/29/25 16:38, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 8/29/25 16:26, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> I've seen these failures after changing checksums in both directions,
>> both after enabling and disabling. But I've only ever saw this after
>> immediate shutdown, never after fast shutdown. (It's interestin
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 5:07 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
>
> I reviewed the patch internally and tweaked a small detail of the apply worker
> to reduce the waiting time in the main loop when max_retention_duration is
> defined (set wait_time = min(wait_time, max_retention_duration)). Also, I
Hi,
> I've also attached a rebased patch that addresses all the latest feedback.
> A reworked verison of the test patch is also included, but that's mostly
> intended for CI purposes and is still not intended for commit (yet).
>
>
Please see below for some comments regarding v20 patch.
1. Follow
On Aug 31, 2025, at 10:17, Mankirat Singh wrote:
> I have updated the module to report a failure status whenever any ABI change
> is detected without specific conditions. For example, the image attached from
> my local server gave a failure status on the ABICompCheck step when comparing
> REL_
Hi John,
On Sep 1, 2025, at 03:21, John Naylor wrote:
> I find the loop over @parse a lot less readable this way.
Yeah, that’s the trade-off. Probably not worth it to reduce legibility.
>> * Use the /r regex return sequence to simplify dquote() (requires Perl 5.14,
>> IIRC)
>
> I think our p
On 2025-06-02 21:56, torikoshia wrote:
On 2025-05-23 17:50, Atsushi Torikoshi wrote:
Thanks for the idea and the sample patch!
Agreed. I’ll go ahead and implement a new patch based on this
approach.
Rebased just because of doc refactoring.
--
Regards,
--
Atsushi Torikoshi
Seconded from NTT
On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 12:18 PM Hannu Krosing wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 6, 2025 at 11:52 PM Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 3, 2024 at 8:54 AM Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > >
> > > My justification for adding pl/pgsql tests as part of the immediately
> > > available tests
> > > is that pl/pgsql its
On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 1:53 PM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Ok, good suggestions. I addressed all those, and did another cleanup
> pass over the script. (The formatting is from pgperltidy.)
I have no further comments on v3.
On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 1:03 AM David E. Wheeler wrote:
> And since I g
Hi,
While reviewing version v6 of the CAST(... ON DEFAULT) patch [1], I
noticed that it attempts to change the type conversion function to use
soft error reporting. However, some of the underlying functions of the
type conversion, such as *_opt_error, still rely on a boolean argument
passed by the
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 8:13 AM Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
> > Branch alignment surely shouldn't matter in a function that is called
> > once per query?
>
> According to my test, it seems using unlikely() makes a small but
> non-negligible performance improvement over the code without
> unlikely() for s
On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 at 12:50, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
>
> Thanks to the Claude Code AI tool I was able to get some boring
> cleanup done on the CF app in not that much time. I'll release all of
> it on August 19th.
>
> List of the changes:
> - Update to Bootstrap 5 for more modern visual look and
On Tue, 12 Aug 2025, 03:24 Robert Haas, wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 1:55 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> > [ some review ]
>
> Another thing that's occurring to me here is that nothing prevents
> other objects from making their way into the owned schema. Sure, if we
> create a new schema with nobod
> On Aug 27, 2025, at 15:26, Chao Li wrote:
>
> diff --git a/src/include/parser/parse_node.h b/src/include/parser/parse_node.h
> index f7d07c84542..58a4b9df157 100644
> --- a/src/include/parser/parse_node.h
> +++ b/src/include/parser/parse_node.h
> @@ -361,7 +361,7 @@ extern SubscriptingRef
>
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 7:58 AM Atsushi Torikoshi
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2025 at 3:14 AM Jim Jones wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > On 19.08.25 03:35, torikoshia wrote:
> > > Considering what the user was trying to do, it might be helpful to
> > > provide a similar hint in this case as well.
> >
Hi Daniil!
Please correct if I'm wrong, but it seems Peter had another approach in
mind -
magic numbers in separate macros could be easily replaced with enums and
validation functions, which would make code more readable and less
'magical'.
Please check the POC patch in attach.
I've made this just
clang-21 shows some new warnings:
../src/backend/access/common/toast_internals.c:296:33: error: variable
'chunk_data' is uninitialized when passed as a const pointer argument
here [-Werror,-Wuninitialized-const-pointer]
296 | t_values[2] = PointerGetDatum(&chunk_data);
../src/backen
Hi hacker,
The function _bt_split creates new (right) page to split into.
The comment says:
/*
* Acquire a new right page to split into, now that left page has a new
* high key. From here on, it's not okay to throw an error without
* zeroing rightpage first. This coding rule
Hi,
I will make de modifications based on the remarks you mentioned.
Regards,
Fabrice
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 5:45 AM shveta malik wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 11:43 AM Shlok Kyal
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Fabrice,
> >
> > Thanks for providing the patch. I reviewed your patch and have
> > follow
On Mon, 1 Sept 2025 at 10:36, Amul Sul wrote:
>
> I believe we should update all *_opt_error functions to use the new
> soft error reporting infrastructure instead of boolean flags -- did
> the same in the attached patch. I am not sure if this patch should be
> part of that thread[1]. It's a signi
Hi,
> Some changes in v10:
>
> 1) XidWaitHashLock is used for all operations on XidWaitHash though
> might be unnecessary for some cases.
> 2) Field pg_atomic_uint32 waiter_count was removed from the
> XidWaitEntry. The start process now takes charge of cleaning up the
> XidWaitHash entry after wa
I came across this discussion after we had this problem at least twice
now at work.
I read through the discussion to see if this is the problem we are
experiencing.
At first, I thought this was not exactly our problem, because of the way
it was showed to be reproduced.
With a long running tran
Hi Lukas!
On 01.03.2025 08:45, Lukas Fittl wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 2, 2024 at 1:08 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
>> At some point this patch switched from rdtsc to rdtscp, which imo largely
>> negates the point of it. What lead to that?
>
>
> From what I can gather, it appears this was an oversight
On 4 Aug 2025, at 4:09 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 2025-07-29 Tu 11:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
OK. I'm inclined to do this after the CF finishes, to avoid collisions
with other patches. I assume it's going to make the CFbot fairly unhappy.
+1 for proceeding that way. (I
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 3:27 PM Nikita Malakhov wrote:
>
> Please correct if I'm wrong, but it seems Peter had another approach in mind -
> magic numbers in separate macros could be easily replaced with enums and
> validation functions, which would make code more readable and less 'magical'.
>
On Monday, September 1, 2025, Chao Li wrote:
>
> The last comment is about error message:
>
> ```
> evantest=# select data.a from test_jsonb_types;
> ERROR: missing FROM-clause entry for table "data"
> LINE 1: select data.a from test_jsonb_types;
> ```
>
> “Missing FROM-clause entry” is quite co
On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 03:04:58PM -0400, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> This hazard has existing since commit 8fa30f906b, from 2010. That's
> the commit that introduced the general idea of making _bt_split zero
> its rightpage in order to make it safe to throw an ERROR instead of just
> PANICing.
Thank
On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 10:24 AM shveta malik wrote:
>
> Few trivial comments for doc:
Sorry, the email got sent without comments.
1)
+It is important to note that when
wal_level is set to
+replica the effective WAL level can
automatically change
comma after replica missing.
2)
Hi Alex,
Thank you so much for such a detailed explanation.
> On Aug 30, 2025, at 08:53, Alexandra Wang
> wrote:
>
>
>
> I hope this long explanation helps!
>
> [1]
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/functions-json.html#SQLJSON-QUERY-FUNCTIONS
>
>
I used to only use the “->” and
On Thu, 24 Jul 2025 at 23:03, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Please review my patch at
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ccb273c9-7544-4748-8638-30feba212...@eisentraut.org
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/5934/
Now that we're building with C11, here's a rebased patch with the new
pg_
43 matches
Mail list logo
