On 18.09.23 18:55, Chapman Flack wrote:
It would make me happy if the message could be changed, and maybe
ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE also changed, perhaps to one of
the JSON-specific ones in the 2203x range.
What is an example of a statement or function call that causes this
error? Then
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023, at 8:39 PM, torikoshia wrote:
> On 2023-09-15 15:21, Lepikhov Andrei wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2023, at 1:09 PM, torikoshia wrote:
>> I have explored this patch and, by and large, agree with the code. But
>> some questions I want to discuss:
>> 1. Maybe add a hook to give a
Dear Amit,
Thank you for reviewing! PSA new version. In this version I ran pgindent again.
> +#include "access/xlogdefs.h"
> #include "common/relpath.h"
> #include "libpq-fe.h"
>
> The above include is not required. I have removed that and made a few
> cosmetic changes in the attached.
Yes,
At Tue, 19 Sep 2023 13:48:55 +, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)"
wrote in
> Dear Horiguchi-san,
>
> > I added the thread to next CF entry, so let's see the how cfbot says.
>
> At least there are several compiler warnings. E.g.,
>
> * pgwin32_find_postmaster_pid() has "return;", but IIUC it
On 2023-09-20 09:32, Michael Paquier wrote:
Actually there was a bit more to it in the presence of \e, that could
also get some unpredictible behaviors if some errors happen while
editing a query, which is something unlikely, still leads to strange
behaviors on failure injections. I was
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:15 PM James Coleman wrote:
> I'll attempt to describe a more real world scenario: suppose we have a
> schema like:
>
> users(id serial primary key)
> orders(id serial primary key, user_id integer, created_at timestamp)
>
> And wanted to find the most recent N orders for
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 09:43:15AM +0900, Shinya Kato wrote:
> Thanks for the patch.
> You're right. It looks good to me.
Right, it feels like there has been a lot of copy-paste in this area
of the docs. Applied down to 16.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 6:06 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> BTW, Google cloud already just instruct their users to ignore the
> xidStopLimit HINT about single user mode:
>
> https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/txid-wraparound
I read this just today, and was reminded of this thread:
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 5:56 PM Jeff Davis wrote:
>...
> On Tue, 2023-09-19 at 11:41 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > That leads to a second idea, which is having it continue
> > to be a GUC but only affect directly-entered SQL, with all
> > indirectly-entered SQL either being stored as a node tree
On Tue, 2023-09-19 at 12:52 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:30 PM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > I was thinking something vaguely like "a table size that's roughly what
> > an optimal autovacuuming schedule would leave the table at" assuming 0.2
> > vacuum_scale_factor. You
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 9:00 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:37 PM jian he wrote:
> > ---
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/extend-type-system.html#EXTEND-TYPES-POLYMORPHIC
> > >> When the return value of a function is declared as a polymorphic
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 11:46:45AM +0900, Kuwamura Masaki wrote:
> I also found a bug (maybe). If we call `CreateRestartPoint()` during
> crash-recovery, the assertion fails at ComputeXidHorizon() in procarray.c.
> It's inherently orthogonal to the problem I already reported. So you can
>
On Tue, 2023-09-19 at 14:50 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> But I know people will try to use it for instant compaction too, and
> there it's worth remembering why we removed old-style VACUUM FULL. The
> main problem is that it was mind-bogglingly slow. The other really bad
> problem is that it caused
>> IMO a test is needed that makes sure no one is going to break this in
>> the future.
>
> You definitely need more complex test scenarios for that. If you can
> come up with new ways to make the TAP tests of pg_rewind mode modular
> in handling more complicated node setups, that would be a nice
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 02:22:32PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> For now, I've committed 0001 and 0002. I intend to commit the others soon.
I've committed the rest of the patches.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Hi Hou-san.
Given there are some issues raised about the 0001 patch [1] I am
skipping that one until I see the replies.
Meanwhile, here are some review comments for the patches v1-0002 and v1-0003
v1-0002
==
Commit message
1.
The pgoutput module uses a global
On 2023-09-19 17:59, Ryoga Yoshida wrote:
Hi,
Issue1:
VACUUM and ANALYZE docs explain that the parameter of
BUFFER_USAGE_LIMIT is optional as follows. But this is not true. The
argument, size, is required for BUFFER_USAGE_LIMIT. So the docs should
be fixed this issue.
BUFFER_USAGE_LIMIT [ size
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 07:14:49PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> Here is a patch to set max_logical_replication_workers as 0 while the
> server is started to prevent the launcher from being started. Since
> this configuration is present from v10, no need for any version check.
> I have done upgrade
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 01:23:54PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> You are right, I missed it. Your patch is correct while the original
> one is not quite so.
Actually there was a bit more to it in the presence of \e, that could
also get some unpredictible behaviors if some errors happen
On Tue, 2023-09-19 at 11:41 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I agree this is a mess, and that documenting the mess better would be
> good. But instead of saying not to do something, we need to say what
> will happen if you do the thing. I'm regularly annoyed when somebody
> reports that "I tried to do
Tomas Vondra writes:
> bsd@freebsd:~ $ tclsh8.6
> % clock scan "1/26/2010"
> time value too large/small to represent
In hopes of replicating this, I tried installing FreeBSD 14-BETA2
aarch64 on my Pi 3B. This test case works fine:
$ tclsh8.6
% clock scan "1/26/2010"
1264482000
$ tclsh8.7
%
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 01:35:17PM +0100, Anthony Roberts wrote:
> Was there an explicit request for something there? I was under the
> impression that this was all just suggestion/theory at the moment.
Yes. The addition of a buildfarm member registered into the community
facilities, so as it is
Hi Michael
On 16.09.23 06:18, Michael Paquier wrote:
That was the idea. I forgot about strpos(), but if you do that, do we
actually need a function in core to achieve that?
I guess it depends who you ask :) I personally think it would be a good
addition to the view, as it would provide a more
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 2:20 PM Matthias van de Meent
wrote:
> Mostly agreed, but I think there's a pitfall here. You seem to assume
> we have a perfect oracle that knows the optimal data size, but we
> already know that our estimates can be significantly off. I don't
> quite trust the statistics
Found these warnings while compiling while only 0001 is applied.
[1166/2337] Compiling C object src/backend/postgres_lib.a.p/storage_smgr_md.c.o
../src/backend/storage/smgr/md.c: In function ‘mdexists’:
../src/backend/storage/smgr/md.c:224:28: warning: passing argument 1 of
‘mdopenfork’ from
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 6:28 AM Matthias van de Meent
wrote:
> > To be clear, page deletion does what I described here (it does an
> > in-place update of the downlink to the deleted page, so the same pivot
> > tuple now points to its right sibling, which is our page of concern),
> > in addition
On 9/19/23 18:45, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra writes:
>> I have no experience with tcl, but I tried this in the two tclsh
>> versions installed no the system (8.6 and 8.7):
>
>> bsd@freebsd:~ $ tclsh8.7
>> % clock scan "1/26/2010"
>> time value too large/small to represent
>
>>
Hi,
On 2023-09-19 19:33:22 +0200, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Sept 2023 at 18:56, Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2023-09-19 18:30:44 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > This makes me think that maybe the logic needs to be a little more
> > > complex to avoid the problem
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:56 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Yea, a setting like what's discussed here seems, uh, not particularly useful
> for achieving the goal of compacting tables. I don't think guiding this
> through SQL makes a lot of sense. For decent compaction you'd want to scan the
> table
On Tue, 19 Sept 2023 at 18:52, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:30 PM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > I was thinking something vaguely like "a table size that's roughly what
> > an optimal autovacuuming schedule would leave the table at" assuming 0.2
> > vacuum_scale_factor. You
On 18/09/2023 17:50, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
(initdb takes about 73ms locally with syncing disabled)
That's impressive. It takes about 600 ms on my laptop. Of which about
140 ms goes into processing the BKI file. And that's with "initdb
-no-sync" option.
Various methods of reducing
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:35 PM Chris Cleveland
> wrote:
>> I'm working on an index access method. I have a function which can appear in
>> a projection list which should be evaluated by the access method itself.
>> Example:
>> ...
>> How do I get the system to pull the
On Tue, 19 Sept 2023 at 18:56, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2023-09-19 18:30:44 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > This makes me think that maybe the logic needs to be a little more
> > complex to avoid the problem you describe: if an UPDATE is prevented
> > from being HOT because of this
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:35 PM Chris Cleveland
wrote:
> I'm working on an index access method. I have a function which can appear in
> a projection list which should be evaluated by the access method itself.
> Example:
>
> SELECT title, my_special_function(body)
> FROM books
> WHERE book_id
Hi,
On 2023-09-19 18:30:44 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> This makes me think that maybe the logic needs to be a little more
> complex to avoid the problem you describe: if an UPDATE is prevented
> from being HOT because of this setting, but then it goes and consults
> FSM and it gives the update
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:30 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I was thinking something vaguely like "a table size that's roughly what
> an optimal autovacuuming schedule would leave the table at" assuming 0.2
> vacuum_scale_factor. You would determine the absolute minimum size for
> the table given
Tomas Vondra writes:
> I have no experience with tcl, but I tried this in the two tclsh
> versions installed no the system (8.6 and 8.7):
> bsd@freebsd:~ $ tclsh8.7
> % clock scan "1/26/2010"
> time value too large/small to represent
> bsd@freebsd:~ $ tclsh8.6
> % clock scan "1/26/2010"
> time
On 2023-Sep-19, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 6:26 AM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > Second, I think we should make it auto-reset. That is, have the user
> > set some value; later, when some condition triggers (say, the table size
> > is 1.2x the limit value you configured), then
On 27/06/2023 02:47, Vik Fearing wrote:
On 6/26/23 22:10, Mikhail Gribkov wrote:
Hi hackers,
As not much preliminary interest seem to be here, I'm sending the patch to
the upcoming commitfest
I have added myself as reviewer. I already had taken a look at it, and
it seemed okay, but I have
On 9/18/23 20:52, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra writes:
>> it seems dikkop is unhappy again, this time because of some OpenSSL
>> stuff. I'm not sure it's our problem - it might be issues with the other
>> packages, or maybe something FreeBSD specific, not sure.
>> ...
>> Both 11 and 12
On 9/19/23 04:25, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 2:04 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 03:11:27PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>> Both 11 and 12 failed with a weird openssl segfaults in plpython tests,
>>> see [2] and [3]. And 13 is stuck in some openssl stuff in
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 6:26 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Second, I think we should make it auto-reset. That is, have the user
> set some value; later, when some condition triggers (say, the table size
> is 1.2x the limit value you configured), then the local_update_limit is
> automatically
On 25/08/2023 00:00, Thomas Munro wrote:
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 3:15 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
In summary, RegisterBackgroundWorker() is doing some questionable and
useless work, when a shared preload library is loaded to a backend
process in EXEC_BACKEND mode.
Yeah. When I was working
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 4:51 PM Jeff Davis wrote:
> I don't want to make an argument of the form "the status quo is really
> bad, and therefore my proposal is good". That line of argument is
> suspect for good reason.
+1.
> But if my proposal isn't good enough, and we don't have a clear
>
Several places bypass the buffer manager and use direct smgrextend()
calls to populate a new relation: Index AM build methods, rewriteheap.c
and RelationCopyStorage(). There's fair amount of duplicated code to
WAL-log the pages, calculate checksums, call smgrextend(), and finally
call
I'm working on an index access method. I have a function which can appear
in a projection list which should be evaluated by the access method itself.
Example:
SELECT title, my_special_function(body)
FROM books
WHERE book_id <===> 42;
"<===>" is the operator that invokes the access method. The
On 13.09.23 16:36, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
All in all the patch looks OK but I have a couple of nitpicks.
```
+ working on a data directory in an unclean shutdown state or with a corrupt
+ control file.
```
```
+ After running this command on a data directory with corrupted WAL or a
+
Just to give a data point for the need of this function:
https://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/231879/how-to-get-the-basetype-of-a-domain-in-pg-type
This is also a common use case for services/extensions that require
postgres metadata for their correct functioning, like postgREST or
On 2023-09-15 19:02, Damir Belyalov wrote:
Since v5 patch failed applying anymore, updated the patch.
Thank you for updating the patch . I made a little review on it where
corrected some formatting.
Thanks for your review and update!
I don't have objections the modification of the codes and
Dear Horiguchi-san,
> I added the thread to next CF entry, so let's see the how cfbot says.
At least there are several compiler warnings. E.g.,
* pgwin32_find_postmaster_pid() has "return;", but IIUC it should be "exit(1)"
* When DWORD is printed, "%lx" should be used.
* The variable "flags"
On Tue, 19 Sept 2023 at 11:49, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 04:51:57PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > Another approach to solve this as suggested by one of my colleague
> > Hou-san would be to set max_logical_replication_workers = 0 while
> > upgrading. I will evaluate this and
On 2023-09-15 15:21, Lepikhov Andrei wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023, at 1:09 PM, torikoshia wrote:
On 2023-09-06 11:17, James Coleman wrote:
It seems that we can know what queries were running from the stack
traces you shared.
As described above, I suspect a lock which was acquired prior to
On Tue, 19 Sept 2023 at 03:56, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 6:29 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> > I also have significant doubts about your scheme for avoiding
> > invalidating the bounds of the page based on its high key matching the
> > parent's separator. The subtle dynamic
On 29.08.23 13:20, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On 2023-Aug-29, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
@@ -3278,13 +3261,16 @@ MergeAttributes(List *schema, List *supers, char
relpersistence,
*
* constraints is a list of CookedConstraint structs for previous constraints.
*
- * Returns true if merged
Hi,
This was covered earlier in the thread - I have taken this on in Niyas'
stead.
Was there an explicit request for something there? I was under the
impression that this was all just suggestion/theory at the moment.
Thanks,
Anthony
On 19/09/2023 09:33, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On
Op 9/19/23 om 13:56 schreef Amit Langote:
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:18 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
0001: I wonder why you used Node for the ErrorSaveContext pointer
instead of the specific struct you want. I propose the attached, for
some extra type-safety. Or did you have a reason to do it
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 11:47 AM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> Dear Amit,
>
> Thank you for reviewing! PSA new version!
>
*
+#include "access/xlogdefs.h"
#include "common/relpath.h"
#include "libpq-fe.h"
The above include is not required. I have removed that and made a few
cosmetic
Hi,
> [...]
> As I was thinking about how to improve things, I realized that this
> information (since it's for monitoring anyway) fits more naturally
> into the stats system. I'd originally thought of exposing it in
> pg_stat_wal, but that's per-cluster rather than per-database (indeed,
> this
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:37 PM jian he wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 7:51 PM Erik Rijkers wrote:
> >
> > and FYI: None of these crashes occur when I leave off the 'WITH WRAPPER'
> > clause.
> >
> > >
> > > Erik
> > >
>
> if specify with wrapper, then default behavior is keep quotes, so
>
Em ter., 19 de set. de 2023 às 05:07, Peter Eisentraut
escreveu:
> On 10.07.23 13:08, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >
> > Em seg., 10 de jul. de 2023 às 03:27, Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > mailto:horikyota@gmail.com>> escreveu:
> >
> > At Fri, 7 Jul 2023 11:29:16 -0700, Gurjeet Singh >
On Sat, 16 Sept 2023 at 01:00, jian he wrote:
>
> I refactor the avg(interval), sum(interval), so moving aggregate,
> plain aggregate both work with +inf/-inf.
> no performance degradation, in fact, some performance gains.
>
I haven't reviewed this part in any detail yet, but I can confirm that
On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 08:00, vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Sept 2023 at 15:33, Himanshu Upadhyaya
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 9:57 AM vignesh C wrote:
> >>
> >> postgres=*# SET CONSTRAINTS tbl_chk_1 DEFERRED;
> >> SET CONSTRAINTS
> >> postgres=*# INSERT INTO tbl values (1);
>
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 5:37 PM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 31.08.23 10:32, Richard Guo wrote:
> > While working on a bug in expandRecordVariable() I noticed that in the
> > switch statement for case RTE_SUBQUERY we initialize struct ParseState
> > with {0} while for case RTE_CTE we do that
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 7:51 PM Erik Rijkers wrote:
>
> and FYI: None of these crashes occur when I leave off the 'WITH WRAPPER'
> clause.
>
> >
> > Erik
> >
if specify with wrapper, then default behavior is keep quotes, so
jexpr->omit_quotes will be false, which make val_string NULL.
in
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 10:02 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> This fails since 1349d2790b
>
> commit 1349d2790bf48a4de072931c722f39337e72055e
> Author: David Rowley
> Date: Tue Aug 2 23:11:45 2022 +1200
>
> Improve performance of ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates
>
> ts=# CREATE TABLE t (a int, b
On 2023-Sep-18, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 11:15 PM Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > I don't think that is a good comparison. While most people probably
> > never need to touch "local_update_limit", "work_mem" is something everybody
> > has to consider.
> >
> > And it is not so hard to
Hi Michael,
> The patch looks incorrect to me. In case you've not noticed, we'd
> still have the same problem if do_edit() fails [...]
You are right, I missed it. Your patch is correct while the original
one is not quite so.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
0001: I wonder why you used Node for the ErrorSaveContext pointer
instead of the specific struct you want. I propose the attached, for
some extra type-safety. Or did you have a reason to do it that way?
--
Álvaro HerreraBreisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"How
On 01.09.23 10:01, Krishnakumar R wrote:
This patch moves the pre-processing for tokens in the bki file from
initdb to bootstrap. With these changes the bki file will only be
opened once in bootstrap and parsing will be done by the bootstrap
parser.
I did some rough performance tests on this.
On Monday, September 18, 2023 11:54:42 PM CEST Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 02:52:47PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 10:51:11AM +0200, Pierre Ducroquet wrote:
> >> I ended up writing several patches that shaved some time for pg_restore
> >> -l,
> >>
On 31.08.23 10:32, Richard Guo wrote:
While working on a bug in expandRecordVariable() I noticed that in the
switch statement for case RTE_SUBQUERY we initialize struct ParseState
with {0} while for case RTE_CTE we do that with MemSet. I understand
that there is nothing wrong with this, just
On 2023-09-15 23:38, Nathan Bossart wrote:
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 02:48:55PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
On 15 Sep 2023, at 12:49, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
On 2023-Sep-15, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
-basic_archive_configured(ArchiveModuleState *state)
On 19/09/2023 01:57, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2023-09-18 13:49:24 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
d) Copy fewer rows to the table in the test. If we copy only 6 rows, for
example, the table will have only two pages, regardless of shared_buffers.
I'm leaning towards d). The whole test is a
Hi,
Issue1:
VACUUM and ANALYZE docs explain that the parameter of BUFFER_USAGE_LIMIT
is optional as follows. But this is not true. The argument, size, is
required for BUFFER_USAGE_LIMIT. So the docs should be fixed this issue.
BUFFER_USAGE_LIMIT [ size ]
On 18/09/2023 14:53, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
On 18 Sep 2023, at 13:09, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I propose the attached patch to reword the sentence a little more.
LGTM, +1
Committed, thanks!
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)
On 14.09.23 11:39, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
On 13 Sep 2023, at 21:12, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 31.08.23 06:44, Tom Lane wrote:
I agree. I'm really uncomfortable with claiming support for
Windows-on-ARM if we don't have a buildfarm member testing it.
For other platforms that have a track
On Wed, 6 Sep 2023 20:13:34 +0900
Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> I attached the updated patch v3. The changes since the previous
> patch includes the following;
>
> I removed the unnecessary condition (&& false) that you
> pointed out in [1].
>
> The test was rewritten by using IPC::Run signal() and
On Monday, September 18, 2023 11:54:42 PM CEST Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 02:52:47PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 10:51:11AM +0200, Pierre Ducroquet wrote:
> >> I ended up writing several patches that shaved some time for pg_restore
> >> -l,
> >>
On 25/8/2023 14:39, Yuya Watari wrote:
Hello,
On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 8:54 PM David Rowley wrote:
I think the best way to move this forward is to explore not putting
partitioned table partitions in EMs and instead see if we can
translate to top-level parent before lookups. This might just be
On 10.07.23 13:08, Ranier Vilela wrote:
Em seg., 10 de jul. de 2023 às 03:27, Kyotaro Horiguchi
mailto:horikyota@gmail.com>> escreveu:
At Fri, 7 Jul 2023 11:29:16 -0700, Gurjeet Singh mailto:gurj...@singh.im>> wrote in
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 6:12 AM Ranier Vilela
On 19.09.2023 03:54, Michael Paquier wrote:
One doubt that I have is if we shouldn't let X509_NAME_print_ex() be
as it is now, and not force a failure on the bio if this calls fails.
If malloc fails inside X509_NAME_print_ex, then we will be left with
empty port->peer_dn. Here is a gdb
Hi,
Thanks for raising this issue in a more public way:)
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:55 AM Chapman Flack
wrote:
>
> It would make me happy if the message could be changed, and maybe
> ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE also changed, perhaps to one of
> the JSON-specific ones in the 2203x range.
>
On 2023-09-19 15:29, Ryoga Yoshida wrote:
You can see attached file.
I didn't notice that Michael attached the patch file. Just ignore my
file. I apologize for the inconvenience.
Ryoga Yoshida
On 12.07.23 15:41, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On 2023-Jul-12, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
The init-steps are severely under-documented in pgbench --help output.
I think at least a pointer to the the pgbench docs should be mentioned
in the pgbench --help output; an average user may not rush to read the
On 14.09.23 10:20, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 06.09.23 19:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
+ SELECT current_database()::information_schema.sql_identifier AS
constraint_catalog,
+ rs.nspname::information_schema.sql_identifier AS
constraint_schema,
+
On 2023-09-19 12:53, Michael Paquier wrote:
Adding a comment looks important to me once we consider the edit as a
path that can fail and the edited query is only executed then reset
when we have PSQL_CMD_NEWEDIT as status. I would suggest the patch
attached instead, taking care of the error
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 04:51:57PM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> Another approach to solve this as suggested by one of my colleague
> Hou-san would be to set max_logical_replication_workers = 0 while
> upgrading. I will evaluate this and update the next version of patch
> accordingly.
In the context
Dear Amit,
Thank you for reviewing! PSA new version!
> > Sorry, wrong patch attached. PSA the correct ones.
> > There is a possibility that XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE may be generated,
> when GUC
> > parameters are changed just before doing the upgrade. Added to list.
> >
>
> You forgot to update
Thank you for response.
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 2:52 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 05:49:51PM +0300, Sergey Sergey wrote:
> > Hope this patch will be usefull/
>
> -uint64 fpLockBits;/* lock modes held for each fast-path
> slot */
> +uint8
89 matches
Mail list logo
