On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 10:40 PM Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 12/6/22 05:57, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 9:48 PM Vik Fearing
> wrote:
> >
> >> I can imagine an optimization that would remove an ORDER BY clause
> >> because it
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 6:36 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> I'd like to "fix" this but IIUC there is no consensus yet about what
> order is best for patch 0001, right?
>
>
I'm planning on performing a more thorough review of 0003 and 0004 tomorrow.
As for 0001 - go with Peter E.'s suggested ordering.
On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 7:57 AM Vik Fearing wrote:
> The SQL:2023 Standard defines a new aggregate named ANY_VALUE. It
> returns an implementation-dependent (i.e. non-deterministic) value from
> the rows in its group.
>
> PFA an implementation of this aggregate.
>
>
Can we please add
On Sunday, December 18, 2022, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrey Borodin writes:
> > I saw a thread in a social network[0] about GROUP BY ALL. The idea seems
> useful.
>
> Isn't that just a nonstandard spelling of SELECT DISTINCT?
>
> What would happen if there are aggregate functions in the tlist?
> I'm
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 9:45 AM Ronan Dunklau
wrote:
> Le mardi 13 décembre 2022, 16:13:34 CET Tom Lane a écrit :
> > Accordingly, I find nothing at all attractive in this proposal.
> > I think the main thing it'd accomplish is to drive users back to
> > the bad old days of ordering-by-subquery,
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 8:49 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Masahiko Sawada writes:
> > I don't think we need additional PG_TRY() for that since exec_stmts()
> > is already called in PG_TRY() if there is an exception block. I meant
> > to call stmt_end() in PG_CATCH() in exec_stmt_block() (i.e. only when
On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 8:46 PM Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 12/5/22 18:56, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > Also, maybe we should have any_value do something like compute a 50/50
> > chance that any new value seen replaces the existing chosen value,
> instead
> > of simply retur
On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 9:48 PM Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 12/6/22 05:22, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 8:46 PM Vik Fearing
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/5/22 18:56, David G. Johnston wrote:
> >>> Also, maybe we should have any_value do some
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 8:23 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
> > On 2022-12-07 We 09:20, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Returning to the naming quagmire -- it occurred to me just now that
> >> it might be helpful to call this style of error reporting "soft"
> >> errors rather than "safe"
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 9:06 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > Why not do away with two separate functions and define a composite type
> > (boolean, text) for is_valid to return?
>
> I don't see any advantage to that. It would be harder to use
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:58 AM Pantelis Theodosiou
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 4:57 AM David G. Johnston
> wrote:
> ...
> >
> >
> > I'm referring to the query:
> >
> > select any_value(v order by v) from (values (2),(1),(3)) as vals (v);
> > //
On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 2:53 PM Paul Ramsey
wrote:
>
> random_normal(stddev float8 DEFAULT 1.0, mean float8 DEFAULT 0.0)
>
Any particular justification for placing stddev before mean? A brief
survey seems to indicate other libraries, as well as (at least for me)
learned convention, has the mean
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 7:20 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Returning to the naming quagmire -- it occurred to me just now that
> it might be helpful to call this style of error reporting "soft"
> errors rather than "safe" errors, which'd provide a nice contrast
> with "hard" errors thrown by
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 8:04 AM Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 2022-12-07 We 09:20, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan writes:
> >> Perhaps we should add a type in the regress library that will never have
> >> a safe input function, so we can test that the mechanism works as
> >> expected in that
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 11:47 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Does this come up enough to document it? I assume the error message the
> > user receives is clear.
>
> Looks like you get
>
> if (nParams < 0 || nParams > PQ_QUERY_PARAM_MAX_LIMIT)
> {
>
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 2:18 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 3:59 PM David G. Johnston
> wrote:
> > I haven't yet formed a complete thought here but is there any reason we
> cannot convert the permission-like attributes to predefined roles?
> >
> >
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 1:04 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> I'm not very certain about any of that stuff; I don't have a clear
> mental model of how it should work, or even what exact problem we're
> trying to solve. To me, the patches that I posted make sense as far as
> they go, but I'm not under
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 2:01 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> In the latter case there are two, one with
>
> grantor=bootstrap_supeuser/admin_option=true/set_option=false/inherit_option=false
> and a second with
> grantor=alice/admin_option=false/set_option=true/inherit_option=true.
>
This, IMO, is
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 4:11 AM Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2022-Nov-02, David G. Johnston wrote:
>
> > Version 2 attached, some significant re-working. Starting to think that
> > initdb isn't the place for some of this content - in particular the stuff
> > I'm deciding t
On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 6:24 PM Isaac Morland
wrote:
> What I'm finding is that the UPDATE is taking over an hour for 5000
> records, and tons of WAL is being generated, several files per minute.
> Selecting the non-PDF columns from the entire table takes a few
> milliseconds, and the only thing
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 12:42 PM wrote:
> David G. Johnston:
> > A quick tally of the thread so far:
> >
> > No Defaults needed: David J., Mark?, Tom?
> > Defaults needed - attached to role directly: Robert
> > Defaults needed - defined within Default Privileges
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 2:55 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 4:19 PM David G. Johnston
> wrote:
> > That's fine, but are you saying this patch is incapable (or simply
> undesirable) of having the parts about handling defaults separated out from
> the par
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 11:57 AM wrote:
> Robert Haas:
> > I don't know if changing the syntax from A to B is really getting us
> > anywhere. I generally agree that the ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES syntax
> > looks nicer than the CREATE/ALTER ROLE syntax, but I'm not sure that's
> > a sufficient
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 1:28 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 3:02 PM Mark Dilger
> wrote:
>
> You can argue that a grant with INHERIT FALSE, SET FALSE, ADMIN TRUE
> still grants membership, and I think formally that's true, but I also
> think it's just picking something to
On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 5:09 AM Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 23.11.22 09:36, Peter Smith wrote:
>
> v6-0005-Cleanup-view-name-hyperlinks-for-Tables-28.1-and-.patch
> v6-0006-Remove-all-stats-views-from-the-ToC-of-28.2.patch
>
> I wasn't sure yet whether these
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:32 AM wrote:
>
> Is there any other argument to be made against ADP?
>
These aren't privileges, they are memberships. The pg_default_acl catalog
is also per-data while these settings should be present in a catalog which,
like pg_authid, is catalog-wide. This latter
On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 6:39 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> I was also wondering (but have not yet done) if the content *outside*
> the tables should be reordered to match the table 28.1/28.2 order.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
I would love to do away with the ToC listing of view names in 28.2
altogether.
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 1:36 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 8:46 AM David G. Johnston
> wrote:
>
> > Also, make it so each view ends up being its own separate page.
> >
>
> I did not do this. AFAIK those views of chapter 54 get rendered to
&g
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 6:45 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> David Rowley writes:
>
>
> I'm unsure what the repercussions of the fact that REAL and FLOAT8 are
> > not represented as decimals.
>
> The main thing is that I think the output will still have to be
> NUMERIC, or you're going to get complaints
On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 2:37 PM David Rowley wrote:
>
> The question is, what do you want to make work? If you're not worried
> about supporting DISTINCT when there is an ORDER BY clause and the
> frame options are effectively ROWS BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND
> UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING, then it's
On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 2:21 PM David Rowley wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 at 09:02, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > David Rowley writes:
> > > I don't really agree that it will work fine in all cases though. If
> > > the numeric has more than 1000 digits left of the decimal point then
> > > the method
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 3:35 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> BTW, is "create a schema with the same name" sufficient detail?
> You have to either make it owned by that user, or explicitly
> grant CREATE permission on it. I'm not sure if that detail
> belongs here, but it feels like maybe it does.
>
>
On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 2:20 AM Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 29.11.22 08:29, Peter Smith wrote:
> > PSA v8* patches.
> >
> > Here, patches 0001 and 0002 are unchanged, but 0003 has many changes
> > per David's suggestion [1] to change all these views to
> >
On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 12:52 AM Peifeng Qiu wrote:
> Hi hackers.
>
> When a star(*) expands into multiple fields, our current
> implementation is to generate multiple copies of the expression
> and do FieldSelects. This is very inefficient because the same
> expression get evaluated multiple
On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 1:12 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2022-11-21 12:52:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 12:35 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> Why in the world is get_raw_page() marked as parallel safe?
> >>> It clearly isn't, given this restriction.
>
On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:59 PM David G. Johnston <
david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:49 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Greg Stark writes:
>> > On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 at 14:10, Tom Lane wrote:
>> >> Under what circumstances would
On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:10 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Fabien COELHO writes:
> > - when the current script is included from something,
> > you quit the current script and proceed after the \i of next -f, BAD
>
> > Question: is there any way to really abort a psql script from an
> included
> >
On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:49 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Stark writes:
> > On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 at 14:10, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Under what circumstances would it be appropriate for a script to take
> >> it on itself to decide that? It has no way of knowing what the next -f
> >> option is or what
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 6:52 AM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 07:33:44AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On 30.11.22 02:51, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Patch applied back to PG 11. Thanks to Simon for getting this
> important
> > > information in our docs, and for the
On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 7:39 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Dean Rasheed writes:
>
> > The fact that passing a negative scale to round() isn't documented
> > does seem like an oversight though...
>
> Agreed, will do something about that.
>
>
Thanks. I'm a bit surprised you left "Rounds v to s decimal
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 4:46 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> I don't really see what that has to do with the topic at hand, unless you
> want
> to suggest removing the entire section about how to write secure security
> definer functions?
>
Not remove, but I'm not seeing why the introduction of
On Monday, January 16, 2023, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>
> I don't really think there's too much wrong with what I wrote in the
> patch as proposed, and I would like to get it committed and move on
> without getting drawn into a wide-ranging discussion of every way in
> which we might be able to
On Sat, Jan 14, 2023 at 5:31 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 8:29 PM David G. Johnston
> wrote:
> >> The point of the security definer section is to explain how to safely
> write
> >> security definer functions that you grant to less privileged users
On Sat, Jan 14, 2023 at 6:12 PM David G. Johnston <
david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
> While the function owner has their own pg_db_role_setting preference for
> this setting,
>
Should we be pointing out that if the role with CREATEROLE isn't also a
LOGIN role then there
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 3:36 AM Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 11.01.23 07:11, Peter Smith wrote:
> > v9-0003 --> v10-0001
> >
> >> I'm not sure if anything is pending for v9-0003, if there is something
> >> pending, please post an updated patch for the same.
>
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 8:38 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > ... I was going for the html effect
> > of having these views chunked into their own pages, any other changes
> being
> > non-detrimental.
>
> But is that a result
On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 9:09 AM Pavel Luzanov
wrote:
> When you include one role in another, you can specify three options:
> ADMIN, INHERIT (added in e3ce2de0) and SET (3d14e171).
>
> For example.
>
> CREATE ROLE alice LOGIN;
>
> GRANT pg_read_all_settings TO alice WITH ADMIN TRUE, INHERIT TRUE,
On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 1:25 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 12:31 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> select ... from t1 left join t2 on (t1.x = t2.y and t1.x = 1);
> >>
> >> If we turn the generic equivclass.c log
On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 12:31 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Hans Buschmann writes:
> >> I just noticed your new efforts in this area.
> >> I wanted to recurr to my old thread [1] considering constant
> propagation of quals.
> >> [1]
>
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 7:35 AM Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> So, how would someone with CREATEROLE permission add people to their own
> role, without superuser permission? Are we adding any security by
> preventing this?
>
>
As an encouraged design choice you wouldn't. You'd create a new group and
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 8:53 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > The idea is that instead of:
>
> > replace_token(conflines, "#max_connections = 100", repltok);
>
> > You'd write something like:
>
> > replace_guc_value(conflines, "max_connections", repltok);
>
> > Which would look for
On Sunday, January 15, 2023, 金 wrote:
>
> postgres=# \df fun1
>
> List of functions
>
> Schema | Name | Result data type |Argument data types
> | Type
>
> +--+--+-
>
Hey,
GRANT role_name [, ...] TO role_specification [, ...]
[ WITH { ADMIN | INHERIT | SET } { OPTION | TRUE | FALSE } ]
[ GRANTED BY role_specification ]
It would be really nice to complete this new feature of INHERIT/SET
FALSE/TRUE with a multi-specification capability.
GRANT role_name
On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 6:56 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Separately from that, I'm a bit worried about starting to add accumulative
> counters to pg_stat_activity. It's already gotten hard to use interactively
> due to the number of columns - and why stop with the columns you suggest?
> Why
> not
On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 7:37 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-11-08 19:25:27 -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > Actually two, because I also suggest that not only is the duration
> recorded,
> > but a counter be incremented each time a given state becomes the
> curre
On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 10:58 AM Corey Huinker
wrote:
>
>> +if you are reading this prepatorily, please redesign your
>> query to use temporary tables or arrays
>>
>
> I agree with the documentation of this parameter.
> I agree with dissuading anyone from attempting to change it
> The
On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 9:02 PM Pavel Stehule
wrote:
>
>
> út 8. 11. 2022 v 3:47 odesílatel Corey Huinker
> napsal:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 4:12 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> Corey Huinker writes:
>>> > I thought about basically reserving the \$[0-9]+ space as bind
>>> variables,
>>> > but it
On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 6:59 PM David G. Johnston
wrote:
>
> P.S. I'm now looking at the very first paragraph to initdb more closely,
> not liking "single server instance" all that much and wondering how to fit
> in "cluster user" there - possibly by s
On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 5:19 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 5:50 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Peter Smith writes:
> > > Sorry, I forgot the attachments in the previous post. PSA.
> >
> > I spent a bit of time looking at this. I agree that a lot of the
> > current ordering choices
Inspired by a recent posting on Slack...
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/limits.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/limits.sgml
index d5b2b627dd..5d68eef093 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/limits.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/limits.sgml
@@ -97,6 +97,13 @@
32
can be increased by recompiling
PostgreSQL
+
+
+
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 9:04 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 10:57 AM Justin Pryzby
> wrote:
> > > First, we're just talking about an extra couple of columns in
> > > pg_stat_activity here, which does not seem like a heavy price to pay.
> >
> > The most recent patch adds a
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 9:41 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 11:35 AM Amit Singh
> wrote:
> > Making the information available in pg_stat_activity makes it a lot
> easier to identify the pid which has caused the subtran overflow. Debugging
> through the app code can be an
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 11:43 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 12:47 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > I'd go the other way. It's pretty unimportant whether it overflowed, it's
> > important how many subtxns there are. The cases where overflowing causes
> real
> > problems are when
On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 3:38 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan writes:
> > You mentioned "minor releases" here. Who said anything about that?
>
> I did: I'd like to back-patch the fix if possible. I think changing
> the default --load-via-partition-root choice could be back-patchable.
>
> If
I'll give this a go as a learning exercise for myself...
On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 8:47 PM Amin wrote:
>
> - How can I determine which format will be used for a numeric type?
>
https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blob/cf96907aadca454c4094819c2ecddee07eafe203/src/backend/utils/adt/numeric.c#L491
On Tuesday, March 21, 2023, Eske Rahn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have noticed a rather odd behaviour that is not strictly a bug, but is
> unexpected.
>
> It is when a immutable (or stable) PG function is returning results in a
> record structure a select on these calls the function repeatedly for each
>
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 4:46 PM David G. Johnston <
david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 4:32 PM Eske Rahn wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for the quick answer *:-D*
>>
>> That was a nice sideeffect of lateral.
>>
>>
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 4:32 PM Eske Rahn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the quick answer *:-D*
>
> That was a nice sideeffect of lateral.
>
> In the example, the calling code also gets simplified:
>
> WITH x AS (
> SELECT clock_timestamp() rowstart, *, clock_timestamp() rowend FROM (
>
On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 2:02 PM David G. Johnston
wrote:
>
> I'll be looking over your v3 patch sometime this week, if not today.
>
>
Moving the goal posts for this meta-command to >= 9.5 seems like it should
be done as a separate patch and thread. The documentation pres
On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 12:43 AM Pavel Luzanov
wrote:
> Indeed, adding ADMIN to pg_has_role looks logical. The function will show
> whether one role can manage another directly or indirectly (via SET ROLE).
>
FWIW I've finally gotten to publishing my beta version of the Role Graph
for PostgreSQL
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 8:36 AM jack...@gmail.com wrote:
> > CID means "command ID" i.e. sequential ID assigned to commands in a
> > single session (for visibility checks, so that a query doesn't see data
> > deleted by earlier commands in the same session). See
> >
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 8:11 AM jack...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> *From:* Tomas Vondra
>
> > +++
> > 1 | 8160 | 28 | \x0100
> >
>
>
> Pretty sure this is because we align the
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 9:16 AM jack...@gmail.com wrote:
> use these sqls:
> create table t(a text);
> insert into t values('a');
> select lp,lp_len,t_data from heap_page_items(get_raw_page('t',0));
> lp | lp_len | t_data
> ++
> 1 | 26 | \x0561
> as you can see, the 61
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 8:08 AM Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 11.02.23 20:24, Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > I think on a green field it'd be clearly better to do something like the
> > above. What does give me pause is that it seems quite likely to break
> >
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:14 PM Pavel Luzanov
wrote:
> On 17.02.2023 19:53, David G. Johnston wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 4:02 AM Pavel Luzanov
> wrote:
>
>>List of roles
>> Role name |
On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 4:01 AM Pavel Luzanov
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 22.02.2023 00:34, David G. Johnston wrote:
>
> I didn't even know this function existed. But I see that it was changed in
> 3d14e171 with updated documentation:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/d
On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 5:07 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Davis writes:
> > On Sat, 2023-03-04 at 18:04 -0500, Dave Cramer wrote:
> >> Most of the clients know how to decode the builtin types. I'm not
> >> sure there is a use case for binary encode types that the clients
> >> don't have a priori
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 4:02 AM Pavel Luzanov
wrote:
>List of roles
> Role name | Attributes |
> Member of
>
> ---++---
> admin |
On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 8:10 AM Zhang Mingli wrote:
> When I exec a sql SELECT INTO without columns or * by mistake, it succeeds:
>
>
Yes, a table may have zero columns by design.
David J.
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 11:11 AM Pavel Luzanov
wrote:
> In the previous version, I didn't notice (unlike cfbot) the compiler
> warning. Fixed in version 6.
>
>
I've marked this Ready for Committer.
My opinion is that this is a necessary modification due to the
already-committed changes to the
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 10:37 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 1:12 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I wonder if, while we're here, we should apply the idea of
> >> joining-with-newlines-not-commas to the attributes column too.
>
> > That would make the column
On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 6:58 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Pavel Luzanov writes:
> > What if this long output will be available only for \du+, and for \du
> > just show distinct (without duplicates)
> > roles in the current array format? For those, who don't care about these
> > new membership options,
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 9:13 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > I've marked this Ready for Committer.
>
> Hmm ... not sure I like the proposed output. The 'a', 'i', 's'
> annotations are short but they don't have much else to recommend them.
> On
On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 2:08 PM David Zhang wrote:
>
> I noticed the document psql-ref.sgml has been updated for both `du+` and
> `dg+`, but only `du` and `\du+` are covered in regression test. Is that
> because `dg+` is treated exactly the same as `du+` from testing point of
> view?
>
Yes.
>
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 2:31 PM David Zhang wrote:
> There is a default built-in role `pg_monitor` and the behavior changed
> after the patch. If `\dg+` and `\du+` is treated as the same, and `make
> check` all pass, then I assume there is no test case to verify the output
> of `duS+`. My point
On Friday, July 7, 2023, Himanshu Upadhyaya
wrote:
> I can think of one scenario, as below
>
> 1) any department should have an employee
> 2)any employee should be assigned to a department
> so, the employee table has a FK to the department table, and another check
> constraint should be added
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 2:59 PM Dave Cramer wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2023 at 17:49, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Dave Cramer writes:
>> > Obviously I am biased by the JDBC API which would like to have
>> > PreparedStatement.execute() return the number of rows inserted
>> > without having to wait to
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 5:57 PM Dave Cramer wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2023 at 20:00, wrote:
>
>> Dave Cramer writes:
>> > Obviously I am biased by the JDBC API which would like to have
>> > PreparedStatement.execute() return the number of rows inserted
>> > without having to wait to read all of
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 1:03 PM Dave Cramer wrote:
>
> INSERT INTO test_table (cnt) VALUES (1), (2) RETURNING id
>
> if a portal is used to get the results then the CommandStatus
>
IIUC the portal is not optional if you including the RETURNING clause.
There is no CommandStatus message in the
On Thursday, July 13, 2023, Dave Cramer wrote:
>
> Any comment on why the CommandComplete is incorrect ?
> It returns INSERT 0 0 if a cursor is used
>
Looking at DECLARE it is surprising that what you describe is even
possible. Can you share a psql reproducer?
David J.
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 8:01 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > I plan to replace it to:
>
> >pg_catalog.concat_ws(', ',
> > CASE WHEN pam.admin_option THEN 'ADMIN' END,
> > CASE WHEN m.rolinherit THEN 'INHERIT' END,
> > 'SET'
> >) AS "Options",
>
> That does not seem right. Is it
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 2:49 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Cramer writes:
> > Obviously I am biased by the JDBC API which would like to have
> > PreparedStatement.execute() return the number of rows inserted
> > without having to wait to read all of the rows returned
>
> Umm ... you do realize that
You are still in the wrong place - this is a developers list, which is only
slightly less bad than sending it to a security list.
We have a "general" list if you really cannot find a better place to send
stuff. But in this case your complaint has to do with the pgAdmin program
so its support
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 6:07 PM Dave Cramer wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 at 10:24, David G. Johnston <
> david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, July 13, 2023, Dave Cramer wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Any comment on why the CommandComplete is incor
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 9:30 AM Dave Cramer wrote:
> David,
>
> I will try to get a tcpdump file. Doing this in libpq seems challenging as
> I'm not aware of how to create a portal in psql.
>
Yeah, apparently psql does something special (like ignoring it...) with its
FETCH_COUNT variable (set
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 9:50 AM David G. Johnston <
david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Fixing that test in some manner and recompiling psql seems like it should
> be the easiest way to produce a core-only test case.
>
>
Apparently not - since it (ExecQueryUsingCu
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 3:12 PM Chapman Flack wrote:
> If someone really does want to do a huge INSERT and get the generated
> values back in increments, it might be clearer to write an explicit
> INSERT RETURNING and issue it with executeQuery, where everything will
> work as expected.
>
>
For
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 11:34 AM wrote:
> On 2023-07-12 21:30, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > Right, and executeUpdate is the wrong API method to use, in the
> > PostgreSQL
> > world, when executing insert/update/delete with the non-SQL-standard
> > returning clause. .
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 12:51 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > I agree that the documented contract of the insert command tag says it
> > reports the size of the entire tuple store maintained by the server
> during
> > the transaction ins
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 10:39 AM wrote:
> On 2023-07-14 12:58, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > See attached pcap file
>
> So if the fetch count is zero and no portal is needed,
> or if the fetch count exceeds the row count and the command
> completion follows directly with no suspension of the portal,
801 - 900 of 1085 matches
Mail list logo
