On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 5:14 PM Fabien COELHO wrote:
> Works for me: patch applies, global and local check ok. I'm fine with it.
I hoped we were done here but I realised that your check for 1-3 log
lines will not survive the harsh environment of the build farm.
Adding sleep(2) before the final
Hi,
On 2021-07-09 10:17:49 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2021-07-07 20:46:38 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > Currently, the TIDs of dead tuples are stored in an array that is
> > collectively allocated at the start of lazy vacuum and TID lookup uses
> > bsearch(). There are the following
On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 07:43:02PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra writes:
> > The main question I have is whether this should include procedures.
>
> I feel a bit uncomfortable about sticking this sort of limited-purpose
> selectivity mechanism into pg_dump. I'd rather see a general
Tomas Vondra writes:
> The main question I have is whether this should include procedures.
I feel a bit uncomfortable about sticking this sort of limited-purpose
selectivity mechanism into pg_dump. I'd rather see a general filter
method that can select object(s) of any type. Pavel was doing
On Thu, 2021-07-08 at 16:27 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I agree that this looks like an improvement in terms of the
> expectations behind a SASL mechanism, so I have done the attached to
> strengthen a bit all those checks. However, I don't really see a
> point in back-patching any of that,
Hi,
I took a quick look at the patch today. There was some minor bitrot
requiring a rebase, so I attach the rebased patch as v3.
The separate 0002 part contains some minor fixes - a couple
typos/rewording in the docs (would be good if a native speaker looked at
it, thought), and a slightly
On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 10:06:18AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch writes:
> > On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 06:44:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> That'd require buildfarm owner intervention, as well as intervention
> >> by users. Which seems like exporting our problems onto them. I'd
> >>
Hi,
I'd really like to see this enabled by default, say with a default
interval of 10 seconds. If it has to be enabled explicitly, most
people won't, but I think a lot of people would benefit from knowing
why their system is slow to start up when that sort of thing happens.
I don't see much
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 10:43 PM David Steele wrote:
> On 11/30/20 6:38 PM, David Steele wrote:
> > On 11/30/20 9:27 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> * Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 11:15:27AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Magnus Hagander
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 12:12 PM Paul Guo wrote:
> On 2021/3/27, 10:23 PM, "Alvaro Herrera" wrote:
>
> >Hmm, can you post a rebased set, where the points under discussion
> > are marked in XXX comments explaining what the issue is? This thread
> is
> >long and old ago that it's
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 11:35 AM David Rowley wrote:
> I really like that name.
>
> I'll wait to see if anyone else wants to voice their opinion before I
> do any renaming work.
I like it, too.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: not tested
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:not tested
Applied the patch `v2_support_of_tzh_tzm_patterns.patch` to
> 3 июля 2021 г., в 23:44, Jeff Davis написал(а):
>
> On Sat, 2021-07-03 at 14:06 +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>>> But until you've disabled sync rep, the primary will essentially be
>>> down for writes whether using this new feature or not. Even if you
>>> can
>>> terminate some backends to
Hello Michael,
09.07.2021 08:52, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 11:00:00PM +0300, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
>> Beside the aforementioned test I can only propose the extended patch,
>> that incorporates the undo of the changes brought by bed90759f.
>> With this patch that test is
Hi,
I took a quick look on this - I'm no expert in the details of snapshots,
so take my comments with a grain of salt.
AFAICS both Greg Nancarrow and Pavel Borisov are kinda right. I think
Greg is right the v3 patch does not seem like the right (or correct)
solution, for a couple reasons:
1)
Hi,
On 2021-07-07 20:46:38 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Currently, the TIDs of dead tuples are stored in an array that is
> collectively allocated at the start of lazy vacuum and TID lookup uses
> bsearch(). There are the following challenges and limitations:
> So I prototyped a new data
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 8:28 AM David Rowley wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 at 03:15, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> > I was looking at find_hash_columns() in nodeAgg.c
> >
> > It seems the first loop tries to determine the max column number needed,
> along with whether all columns are needed.
> >
> > The
Hi Hackers,
I just noticed there's no tab completion for CREATE SCHEMA
AUTHORIZATION, nor for anything after CREATE SCHEMA .
Please find attached a patch that adds this.
- ilmari
>From db02df7ea8d3a5db41268edd8c311a3631c9e9ad Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From:
Hi,
I've always had a hard time distinguishing various types of
processes/terms used in postgres. I look at the source code every time
to understand them, yet I don't feel satisfied with my understanding.
I request any hacker (having a better idea than me) to help me with
what each different
On Fri, 9 Jul 2021 at 06:00, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Maybe name the plan node type Memoize, and the GUC "enable_memoize"?
I really like that name.
I'll wait to see if anyone else wants to voice their opinion before I
do any renaming work.
David
On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 at 03:15, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> I was looking at find_hash_columns() in nodeAgg.c
>
> It seems the first loop tries to determine the max column number needed,
> along with whether all columns are needed.
>
> The loop can be re-written as shown in the patch.
This runs during
On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 at 17:49, Amit Langote wrote:
> Given that you're proposing more uses for live_parts, maybe he'd be
> open to the idea.
Just to make sure the new field in the 0001 patch gets good enough
use, I've attached the patch which includes more usages of the field.
0002 adds a new
Hi,
I was looking at find_hash_columns() in nodeAgg.c
It seems the first loop tries to determine the max column number needed,
along with whether all columns are needed.
The loop can be re-written as shown in the patch.
In normal cases, we don't need to perform scanDesc->natts iterations.
In
Hello Andres !
Another way that I tested and it's working is to use
https://www.bottlecaps.de/convert/ paste the postgresql grammar there
and press "convert" and after press "view diagram".
Again optionally manually add the Tokens to a better diagram !
// Tokens from
On 5/20/21 8:25 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 12:21:12PM +0530, Nitin Jadhav wrote:
>> Thanks Suraj for reviewing the patch.
>>
>>> 1:
>>> +RESET timezone;
>>> +
>>> +
>>> CREATE TABLE TIMESTAMPTZ_TST (a int , b timestamptz);
>>>
>>> Extra line.
>>>
>>> 2:
>>> +SET timezone
Domingo, Bruce,
sorry for the error. It was caused by my server using Tomcat's default maxPostSize of 2MB, which
is not sufficient for the diagrams generated from the Postgres grammar. I have now extended it
to 10MB.
By the way, I had already created diagrams for PostgreSQL back in
Noah Misch writes:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 06:44:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> That'd require buildfarm owner intervention, as well as intervention
>> by users. Which seems like exporting our problems onto them. I'd
>> really rather not go that way if we can avoid it.
> I like that goal,
On 2021-Jul-09, Amul Sul wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 11:06 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > > The point of the static-inline function idea was to be cheap enough
> > > that it isn't worth worrying about this sort of risky optimization.
> > > Given that an smgr function is sure to involve some
On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 9:44 AM Amul Sul wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 11:06 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Amul Sul writes:
> > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 6:59 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > > wrote:
> > >> I don't mind RelationGetSmgr(index)->smgr_rnode alone or
> > >> >member alone and there's not
Peifeng Qiu writes:
> I'd like to add kerberos authentication support for postgres_fdw by adding two
> options to user mapping: krb_client_keyfile and gssencmode.
As you note, this'd have to be restricted to superusers, which makes it
seem like a pretty bad idea. We really don't want to be in a
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 3:26 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2021/06/30 10:05, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > I've attached the new version patch that incorporates the comments
> > from Fujii-san and Ikeda-san I got so far.
>
> Thanks for updating the patches!
>
> I'm now reading 0001 and 0002
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 3:26 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I don't know what committers will say, but I think that "ALTER TABLE" might be
> the essential thing for this patch to support, not "CREATE". (This is similar
> to ALTER..SET STATISTICS, which is not allowed in CREATE.)
>
> The reason is that
Hi hackers,
I'd like to add kerberos authentication support for postgres_fdw by adding two
options to user mapping: krb_client_keyfile and gssencmode.
In the backend we have krb_server_keyfile option to specify a keytab file to
be used by postgres server, krb_client_keyfile is doing mostly the
Hi hackers,
I'd like to add kerberos authentication support for postgres_fdw by adding two
options to user mapping: krb_client_keyfile and gssencmode.
In the backend we have krb_server_keyfile option to specify a keytab file to
be used by postgres server, krb_client_keyfile is doing mostly the
Em qui., 8 de jul. de 2021 às 23:50, Japin Li
escreveu:
>
> On Thu, 08 Jul 2021 at 18:17, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 3:43 PM Japin Li wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 08 Jul 2021 at 17:51, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 7:25 PM Japin Li wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
At Fri, 9 Jul 2021 11:03:56 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote
in
> On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 10:44:13AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > Sounds reasonable. So the attached are that for PG11-PG14. 11 and 12
> > shares the same patch.
>
> How much do the regression tests published upthread in
>
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 8:43 AM Quan Zongliang wrote:
> Thanks for the comments.
> Done
Thanks for the patch. Few comments:
1) How about just adding a comment /* support for old extension
version */ before INT2OID handling?
+ case INT2OID:
+ values[3] = UInt16GetDatum(page->pd_lower);
+ break;
Sorry for the late reply.
On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 3:15 PM r.takahash...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> I'm interested in this patch and I also run the same test with Ikeda-san's
> fxact_update.pgbench.
Thank you for testing!
> In my environment (poor spec VM), the result is following.
>
> *
Sorry for the late reply.
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 3:29 PM Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2021/06/30 10:05, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 9:53 AM Masahiro Ikeda
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Jamison-san, sawada-san,
> >>
> >> Thanks for testing!
> >>
> >> FWIF, I tested using
Hi,
As suggested on a different thread [1], pg_receivewal can increase it's test
coverage. There exists a non trivial amount of code that handles gzip
compression. The current patch introduces tests that cover creation of gzip
compressed WAL files and the handling of gzip partial segments.
>
> > Thank you for your review!
> > I've rebased the patch and made the changes mentioned.
> > PFA v5.
>
> I've set this back to "needs review" in CF.
>
Thanks for the attention! I did the review of this patch, and the changes
I've introduced in v5 are purely cosmetic. So I'd suppose the
On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 04:34:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 11:17 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Fair point. What do you think of the alternative proposals
> >> "debug_flush_caches", "debug_discard_caches", etc?
>
> > I like debug_discard_caches best.
>
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 6:30 AM Pavel Borisov wrote:
> Thank you for your review!
> I've rebased the patch and made the changes mentioned.
> PFA v5.
I've set this back to "needs review" in CF.
--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
> I have reviewed the v4 patch. The patch does not get applied on the latest
> source. Kindly rebase.
> However I have found few comments.
>
> 1.
> > +-- must fail because of wrong configuration
> > +CREATE TABLE tbl_hash_fail (i int) PARTITION BY HASH (i)
> > +CONFIGURATION (values in (1, 2),
On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 06:44:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch writes:
> > On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 10:45:59AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> What I'm now thinking about is restricting the test to only be run on
> >> platforms where use of foo.a libraries is deprecated, so that we can
> >> be
On Friday, July 9, 2021 2:56 PM Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 9:13 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> > I tried the v95-0001 patch.
> >
> > - The patch applied cleanly and all build / testing was OK.
> > - The documentation also builds OK.
> > - I checked all v95-0001 / v93-0001
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 10:40 PM Hannu Krosing wrote:
>
> Very nice results.
>
> I have been working on the same problem but a bit different solution -
> a mix of binary search for (sub)pages and 32-bit bitmaps for
> tid-in-page.
>
> Even with currebnt allocation heuristics (allocate 291 tids per
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 7:51 AM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 1:24 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > I wonder how much it would help to break up that loop into two loops.
> > Make the callback into a batch operation that generates state that
> > describes what to do with each and
Hello Andres !
There is two ways to achieve it:
-1 I just add the bison grammar in CocoR format here
https://github.com/mingodad/CocoR-CPP in the examples folder.
-2 I created an small extension to Bison to do the same and published
the patch here
Thank you for the comments.
At Fri, 9 Jul 2021 10:29:07 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote
in
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 05:30:23PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > [1] is trying to expose pg_strtoint16/32 to frontend, but I don't see
> > much point in doing that in conjunction with [2] or this
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Friday, July 9th, 2021 at 04:49, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 02:18:40PM +, gkokola...@pm.me wrote:
>
> > please find v2 of the patch which tries to address the commends
> >
> > received so far.
>
> Thanks!
>
> > Michael Paquier
I found that the psql tab auto-complete was not working for some cases
of CREATE PUBLICATION [1].
CREATE PUBLICATION name
[ FOR TABLE [ ONLY ] table_name [ * ] [, ...]
| FOR ALL TABLES ]
[ WITH ( publication_parameter [= value] [, ... ] ) ]
~~~
For example, the following scenarios
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 2:37 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-07-08 20:53:32 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2021-07-07 20:46:38 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > 1. Don't allocate more than 1GB. There was a discussion to eliminate
> > > this limitation by using
On Thu, 8 Jul 2021 at 05:44, David Christensen
wrote:
> Enclosed is the patch to change the return type to numeric, as well as one
> for expanding units to
> add PB and EB.
I ended up not changing the return type of pg_size_bytes().
> I figured that PB and EB are probably good enough additions
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 9:13 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> I tried the v95-0001 patch.
>
> - The patch applied cleanly and all build / testing was OK.
> - The documentation also builds OK.
> - I checked all v95-0001 / v93-0001 differences and found no problems.
> - Furthermore, I noted that v95-0001
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 1:28 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> Currently, postgres caches publication actions info in the
> RelationData::rd_pubactions, but after applying the patch, it seems
> rd_pubactions is not initialized when using schema level publication.
>
> It cound result in some
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 12:53 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> On 2021-07-07 20:46:38 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > 1. Don't allocate more than 1GB. There was a discussion to eliminate
> > this limitation by using MemoryContextAllocHuge() but there were
> > concerns about point 2[1].
> >
On 2021/06/30 10:05, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
I've attached the new version patch that incorporates the comments
from Fujii-san and Ikeda-san I got so far.
Thanks for updating the patches!
I'm now reading 0001 and 0002 patches and wondering if we can commit them
at first because they just
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 8:48 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 3 Jun 2021, at 04:07, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > Here's a patch to remove the misleading comments.
>
> While not an expert in the area; reading the referenced commit and the code
> with the now removed comments, I think this is correct.
Few comments for v4 patch:
@@ -7351,6 +7363,8 @@ StartupXLOG(void)
(errmsg("redo starts at %X/%X",
LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(ReadRecPtr;
+ InitStartupProgress();
+
/*
* main redo apply loop
*/
@@ -7358,6
60 matches
Mail list logo
