Re: behave of --create-slot option

2018-05-29 6:11 GMT+02:00 Craig Ringer : > On 29 May 2018 at 11:51, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > >> >> I understand so slot should be unique. But same result (unique rep slot) >> can be done, if it does nothing when slot exists already. This behave is >> not idempotent. >> >> Maybe I am search

Re: behave of --create-slot option

On 29 May 2018 at 11:51, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > I understand so slot should be unique. But same result (unique rep slot) > can be done, if it does nothing when slot exists already. This behave is > not idempotent. > > Maybe I am search problem, where it is not. Just, when I see some "create >

Re: behave of --create-slot option

2018-05-29 3:28 GMT+02:00 Craig Ringer : > On 29 May 2018 at 03:41, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> Hi >> >> I am writing a article about PostgreSQL 11 features. Now I am looking on >> new option --create-slot option of pg_basebackup command. >> >> I don't understand to use case for this option,

Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms

First, I apologize if my words hurt someone. I didn't want this. Second, I totally agree with Andrew. > He's also right that the build system is among the > least of our problems in making newcomers feel comfortable. > This what I wanted to say. Not big technical difference between build systems

Re: behave of --create-slot option

On 29 May 2018 at 03:41, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Hi > > I am writing a article about PostgreSQL 11 features. Now I am looking on > new option --create-slot option of pg_basebackup command. > > I don't understand to use case for this option, because It fails when > requested slot already exists. I

Re: behave of --create-slot option

2018-05-28 16:41 GMT-03:00 Pavel Stehule : > I am writing a article about PostgreSQL 11 features. Now I am looking on new > option --create-slot option of pg_basebackup command. > > I don't understand to use case for this option, because It fails when > requested slot already exists. I cannot to

adding tab completions

Find attached tab completion for the following: "... Also, recursively perform VACUUM and ANALYZE on partitions when the command is applied to a partitioned table." 3c3bb99330aa9b4c2f6258bfa0265d806bf365c3 Add parenthesized options syntax for ANALYZE. 854dd8cff523bc17972d34772b0e39ad3d6d46a4

Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 4:23 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 11:16:08AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> I would argue the exact opposite - mail is a lot more flexible than using >> github issues and that's one of the most important reasons I prefer it. >> >> (and there are of

Re: perl checking

On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > On 05/18/2018 02:02 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> >> >> These two small patches allow us to run "perl -cw" cleanly on all our perl >> code. >> >> >> One patch silences a warning from convutils.pl about the unportability of >> the

Re: found xmin from before relfrozenxid on pg_catalog.pg_authid

Hi, On 2018-05-27 13:00:06 -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > I've a patch that seems to work, that mostly needs some comment > polishing. Attached is what I currently have. Still needs some more work, but I think it's more than good enough to review the approach. Basically the approach consists out

behave of --create-slot option

Hi I am writing a article about PostgreSQL 11 features. Now I am looking on new option --create-slot option of pg_basebackup command. I don't understand to use case for this option, because It fails when requested slot already exists. I cannot to imagine use case for this. If I write some

Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 11:16:08AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > I would argue the exact opposite - mail is a lot more flexible than using > github issues and that's one of the most important reasons I prefer it.  > > (and there are of course many ways to tag and categorize your email, many

Re: PGXS fails to byte-compile pgsql-ogr-fdw

Hi, On 2018-05-28 09:44:32 +0200, Christoph Berg wrote: > pgsql-ogr-fdw fails to build against PG 11beta1 with JIT enabled. I > just reported this as https://github.com/pramsey/pgsql-ogr-fdw/issues/153, > but I think the problem might actually be in the PGXS Makefile - it > assumes that all

Re: PGXS fails to byte-compile pgsql-ogr-fdw

Christoph Berg wrote: > pgsql-ogr-fdw fails to build against PG 11beta1 with JIT enabled. I > just reported this as https://github.com/pramsey/pgsql-ogr-fdw/issues/153, > but I think the problem might actually be in the PGXS Makefile - it > assumes that all objects have a .c file to build the .bc

Re: Problem while updating a foreign table pointing to a partitioned table on foreign server

Hello I don't think this thread has reached a consensus on a design for a fix, has it? Does anybody have a clear idea on a path forward? Is anybody working on a patch? Thanks -- Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA,

Re: found xmin from before relfrozenxid on pg_catalog.pg_authid

Hi, We were working on this issue and thinking if we could actually make pg_class(rd_rel) part of recache entry upgradable. To achieve this we can allocate Form_pg_class structures (for shared relations… a small number) on shared memory. We do not need global pg_internal_init file as new backend

Re: [JDBC] [HACKERS] PGSERVICEFILE as a connection string parameter

David>I'm guessing that the Java port wouldn't be too complicated. It's already well defined. Is encoding defined somewhere for the "service file"? I don't like the idea of using "a default" very much. Vladimir

Re: Undo logs

On 24 May 2018 at 23:22, Thomas Munro wrote: > As announced elsewhere[1][2][3], at EnterpriseDB we are working on a > proposal to add in-place updates with undo logs to PostgreSQL. The > goal is to improve performance and resource usage by recycling space >

Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms

> > It is correct that Gmail is incapable of this in the web browser. Many > other email systems can though, and Gmail still speaks imap so you can use > those if you prefer. > Mail programs outside web browser not popular anymore and this standalone programs became very slow to grow (for example

Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms

> > It's more than just a bunch of conservative dinosaurs not wanting to > change how they do anything, > I didn't talk that. It's that a change needs to offer really compelling benefits > Because of this benefits depend on your development style and your habits. For me for example, simple

Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack

On 28/05/18 12:20, Michael Paquier wrote: On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 12:00:33PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: That's not a new problem, but it makes the MITM protection fairly pointless, if a fake server can acquire the user's password by simply asking for it. The client will report a failed

Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 12:00:33PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > That's not a new problem, but it makes the MITM protection fairly pointless, > if a fake server can acquire the user's password by simply asking for it. > The client will report a failed connection, but with the user's password,

Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms

On Mon, May 28, 2018, 10:03 Yuriy Zhuravlev wrote: > пн, 28 мая 2018 г. в 16:42, Pierre Ducroquet : > >> On Monday, May 28, 2018 4:37:06 AM CEST Yuriy Zhuravlev wrote: >> > > Can't see getting rid of those entirely. None of the github style >> > >

Re: pg_replication_slot_advance to return NULL instead of 0/0 if slot not advanced

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 05:57:47PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Found one. All the things I have spotted are in the patch attached. Oops, forgot a ReplicationSlotRelease call. -- Michael diff --git a/src/backend/replication/slot.c b/src/backend/replication/slot.c index 056628fe8e..79d7a57d67

Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack

On 28/05/18 04:23, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 11:42:38PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:08:50AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 08:32:20AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: OK, I can live with that as well. So we'll go in the

Re: pg_replication_slot_advance to return NULL instead of 0/0 if slot not advanced

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 02:12:32PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > I agree that returning 0/0 on this is wrong. > > However, can this actually occour for any case other than exactly the case > of "moving the position to where the position already is"? If I look at the > physical slot path at

Few comments on commit 857f9c36 (skip full index scans )

Hi, Review comments on commit 857f9c36: 1. @@ -2049,6 +2055,10 @@ _bt_newroot(Relation rel, Buffer lbuf, Buffer rbuf) metapg = BufferGetPage(metabuf); metad = BTPageGetMeta(metapg); + /* upgrade metapage if needed */ + if (metad->btm_version < BTREE_VERSION) +

Re: Keeping temporary tables in shared buffers

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 6:33 AM, Asim Praveen wrote: > Hello > > We are evaluating the use of shared buffers for temporary tables. The > advantage being queries involving temporary tables can make use of parallel > workers. > This is one way, but I think there are other

Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms

пн, 28 мая 2018 г. в 16:42, Pierre Ducroquet : > On Monday, May 28, 2018 4:37:06 AM CEST Yuriy Zhuravlev wrote: > > > Can't see getting rid of those entirely. None of the github style > > > platforms copes with reasonable complex discussions. > > > > I disagree. A good

Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms

On Monday, May 28, 2018 4:37:06 AM CEST Yuriy Zhuravlev wrote: > > Can't see getting rid of those entirely. None of the github style > > platforms copes with reasonable complex discussions. > > I disagree. A good example of complex discussions on github is Rust > language tracker for RFCs: >

[PATCH] We install pg_regress and isolationtester but not pg_isolation_regress

Hi Per topic, the Pg makefiles install pg_regress (for use by extensions) and htey install the isolationtester, but they don't install pg_isolation_regress. We should install it too. -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training