th Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 3:43 AM David G. Johnston
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 1:55 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>>
>> But what if roleB doesn't want to give roleA access to
>> the certain objects it owns.
>
>
> Not doable - roleA can always pretend they a
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 12:20 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 1:33 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > Actually I have one more question. With this new design, assuming that
> > createrole_self_grant is set to 'set, inherit' in postgresql.conf and
> > if
On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 9:03 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 11:14 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > In PG-16, I see that we have made a lot of changes in the area roles
> > and privileges. I have a question related to this and here is my
> > que
. But, can A administer C although it has not created C?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
omotion".
>
> I have just noticed that we do not have a CF entry for this proposal,
> so I have added one with Laurenz as author:
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/44/4504/
>
> For now the patch is waiting on author. Could you address my
> last review?
Thanks for reviewin
On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 9:55 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2023/06/07 2:00, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > On Tue, 2023-06-06 at 16:35 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >> At present, pg_promote() returns true to the caller on successful
> >> promotion of standby,
scenarios it should just
throw an error (FATAL, ERROR ... depending on the type of failure that
occurred). Please let me know your thoughts on this change. thanks.!
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 11:48 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2023-02-15 18:02:11 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > Thanks Andres. I have one more query (both for you and Bertrand). I
> > don't know if this has already been answered somewhere in this mail
> >
On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 11:46 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2023-01-12 20:08:55 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > I previously participated in the discussion on "Synchronizing the
> > logical replication slots from Primary to Standby" and one o
served |
| f
May I know the reason for creating pg_16399_sync_16392_7187728548042694423?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 3:29 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 4:49 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 8:09 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for the clarification. Attached is the patch
there are tuple-locks on them?
>
As the name suggests and as documented, heap_force_kill will "force
kill" the tuple, regardless of whether it is visible to another
transaction or not. And further it looks like you are doing an
experiment on undamaged relation which is not recommended as
documented. If the relation would have been damaged, you probably may
not be able to access it.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 12:24 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> PFA v2 patch.
>
> Changes in the v2 patch:
>
> - Reuse the existing get_controlfile function in
> src/common/controldata_utils.c instead of adding a new one.
>
> - Set env variable PGDATA with the data dire
PFA v2 patch.
Changes in the v2 patch:
- Reuse the existing get_controlfile function in
src/common/controldata_utils.c instead of adding a new one.
- Set env variable PGDATA with the data directory specified by the user.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 6:05 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 10:25 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> >
> > PFA that enhances pg_waldump to show the latest LSN and the
> > corresponding WAL file when the -l or --lastLSN option is passed an
> &
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 7:41 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 9:53 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, we can either add this functionality to pg_waldump or maybe add
> > a new binary itself that would return this information.
>
> IMV,
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 5:13 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 8:19 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Currently, we have pg_current_wal_insert_lsn and pg_walfile_name sql
> > functions which gives us information ab
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 7:21 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 8:09 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 5:24 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 1:43 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > &
know your thoughts/comments. thank you.!
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 5:24 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 1:43 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 5:36 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 8:32 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > >
On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 5:36 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 8:32 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 6:23 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 4:14 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> > >
On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 6:23 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 4:14 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > The logically decoded data are sent to the logical subscriber at the time
> > of transaction commit, assuming tha
be the one
representing the transaction begin message, not the LSN of the last decoded
data which is yet to be sent. Please let me know if I am missing something
here.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 11:30 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
> At Wed, 3 Aug 2022 18:16:33 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote in
> > Following comment in RemoveNonParentXlogFiles() says that we are trying
> to
> > remove any WAL file whose segment number is >= the segment num
ing to, but with a segment number >= the first segment on
the
* new timeline.
*/
if (strncmp(xlde->d_name, switchseg, 8) < 0 &&
strcmp(xlde->d_name + 8, switchseg + 8) > 0)
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 6:26 PM Ashutosh Sharma
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 5:02 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> +/* --
> + * RelFileNumber zero is InvalidRelFileNumber.
> + *
> + * For the system tables (OID < FirstNormalObjectId) the initial storage
&
relfilenode
value in pg_class which can hold zero value which actually means it's a
mapped relation. I think it would be good to provide some clarity here.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
it would be good to mention
relfilenode instead of relfilenumber. Elsewhere (including the user manual)
we refer to this as a relfilenode.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 10:36 PM Ashutosh Sharma
wrote:
> Thanks Dilip. Here are few comments that could find upon
s, returns false.
+ */
If parsing is successful, returns true;
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 7:33 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 6:06 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Note: please avoid top posting.
>
> > /*
> &
define FirstNormalRelFileNumber ((RelFileNumber) 10)
==
When WAL logging the next object id we have the chosen the xlog threshold
value as 8192 whereas for relfilenode it is 512. Any reason for choosing
this low arbitrary value in case of relfilenumber?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Tue, Jul 26
that I am trying to put here is even though we will be
able to find the new relfile number by increasing the relfilenumber size
but still the commands like above will not execute if the oid value (of 32
bits) has reached the threshold limit.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Wed, Jul 20
On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 6:46 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 6:16 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Currently, in postgres we have two different functions that are
> > specially used to open the WAL files for reading and
anywhere in the function, so can we remove it?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
Sure, I'll do that.
Thanks,
Ashutosh
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 5:51 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > On 26 Apr 2022, at 14:19, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> > The below files in orafce contrib module are generated at build time.
> > However, these are checked into t
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 5:55 PM John Naylor
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 7:16 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I see that we have included '-p' flex flag twice in the commands used
> > to generate the scanner files. See below:
&g
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
be removed?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
is the lsn pointer where you need to stop reading the
WAL data. If that is true, then there exists no valid WAL record
between the start and end lsn in this particular case.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 7:56 PM Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> * Bhara
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 10:17 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 12:30 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> >
> > Few comments on the latest patch:
> >
> > - /* We need to construct the pathname for this database */
> > -
rctbid, Oid srcdbid, char
*srcpath);
I think we can shorten these function names to probably
ScanSourceDBPgClassRel(), ScanSourceDBPgClassTuple() and likewise?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 3:24 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 10:04 PM Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 8:21 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 12:15 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> > Looks better, but why do you want to pass elevel to the
> > load_relmap_file()? Are we calling this function from somewhere other
> > than read_relmap
e output columns. Also
you may shorten the gap between start and end lsn to reduce the output
size.
==
Any reason for not specifying author name in the .sgml file. Do you
want me to add my name to the author? :)
Ashutosh Sharma ashu.coe...@gmail.com
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On
and other cosmetic stuff.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 3:51 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 11:52 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 10:18 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 6
ow a record when there' no record in the
> specfied LSN range. But I don't think there's no usefulness of the
> behavior.
>
So, do you want the pg_get_wal_record_info function to be removed as
we can use pg_get_wal_records_info() to achieve what it does?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
00', '0/100');
> > ERROR: WAL start LSN must be less than end LSN
>
I think this behaviour is fine. We cannot have the same start and end
lsn pointers.
> And the following shows no records.
> pg_get_wal_records_info('0/100', '0/101');
> pg_get_wal_records_info('0/100', '0/128');
>
I think we should be erroring out here saying - couldn't find any
valid WAL record between given start and end lsn because there exists
no valid wal records between the specified start and end lsn pointers.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
o we have any plans to call this
function directly bypassing read_relmap_file for any upcoming patch?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
Thanks Dilip for working on the review comments. I'll take a look at
the new version of patch and let you know my comments, if any.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 8:38 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 7:22 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> &
ck. Otherwise, if FILE_COPY
I think we need to mention the default strategy in the documentation page.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 4:32 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 6:44 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > > Right, infact now als
tching data but the way
it is shown doesn't need to be the same. In fact it is not in most of
the cases.
> I have taken care of the rest of the comments in v5 patch for which
> there was clarity.
>
Thank you very much. Will take a look at it later.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
down, the logical subscribers will
stop receiving new changes from the primary as per the design of this
patch OR if standby lags behind the primary for whatever reason, it
will have a direct impact on logical subscribers as well.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 3:53 AM
,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 3:54 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 10:05 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 6:03 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> > wrote:
> > > Added a new function that returns the first and last valid WAL rec
comments.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 4:59 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
>
> Thanks for reviewing.
>
> > 6) How about shutdown and end-of-recovery checkpoint? Are you planning
> > to have an ereport_startup_progress mechanism as 0002?
>
> I thought of
I think we should also see if we can allow end users to input timeline
information with the pg_walinspect functions. This will help the end
users to get information about WAL records from previous timeline
which can be helpful in case of restored servers.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Thu
e would find it useful to know how much time is being taken by
the checkpoint in I/O operation phase. thoughts?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 4:45 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
>
> Thanks for reviewing.
>
> > > > I suggested upthread to store the st
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 7:47 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Sat, 19 Feb 2022 09:31:33 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote in
> > The changes looks good. thanks.!
>
> Thanks!
>
> Some recent core change changed WAL insertion speed during the TAP
> test and revealed
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:37 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 8:12 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Some review comments on v5 patch (v5-0001-pg_walinspect.patch)
>
> Thanks for reviewing.
>
> > +--
> > +-- pg_get_wal_reco
of an existing WAL
reader function - read_local_xlog_page()?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 4:33 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 9:04 AM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > I don't think that's the use case of this patch. Unless the
}
Any specific reason for recording the timelineID in checkpoint stats
table? Will this ever change in our case?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 6:59 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
>
> > I will make use of pgstat_progress_update_multi_param() in the next
> >
I'm not sure about the current status, but found it while playing
around with the latest changes a bit, so thought of sharing it here.
+
+ strategy
+
+
+ This is used for copying the database directory. Currently, we have
+ two strategies the
POINT_KIND_FORCE);
+ else
+ checkpoint_progress_update_param(flags,
PROGRESS_CHECKPOINT_KIND,
+
PROGRESS_CHECKPOINT_KIND_UNKNOWN);
+ }
+}
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 12:23 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
>
>
On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 2:24 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 10:48:10PM +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > Some review comments on the latest version:
>
> Thanks for the feedback! Before I start spending more time on this one, I
> should probably ask i
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:20 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Tue, 15 Feb 2022 20:17:20 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote in
> > OK. The v13 patch looks good. I have marked it as ready to commit.
> > Thank you for working on all my review comments.
>
> Thaks! But th
ackup_label");
+
Why do we need this additional change? Earlier this was not required.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 6:41 AM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> Here is a rebased patch.
>
> --
> Nathan Bossart
> Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:20 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Tue, 15 Feb 2022 20:17:20 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote in
> > OK. The v13 patch looks good. I have marked it as ready to commit.
> > Thank you for working on all my review comments.
>
> Thaks! But th
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 1:01 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 8:32 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > Here are few comments:
>
> Thanks for reviewing the patches.
>
> > +/*
> > + * Verify the authenticity of the gi
Thanks for working on the review comments. The changes in the new
patch look good to me. I am marking it as ready to commit.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 7:34 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 7:14 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
>
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 7:52 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:14:11 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote in
> > No, I haven't tried to compare archive recovery to PITR or vice versa,
> > instead I was trying to compare crash recovery with PITR. The messag
ese two statements:
UPDATE 70% of the tuple in the base table (dirty 70% of the shared
buffers) && CREATE database using template DB (Actual test target).
Just wanted to know if it can exceed the max_wal_size of 64GB. Also,
is it possible to try with minimal wal_level? Sorry for asking you
this, I could try it myself but I don't have any high level system to
try it.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
with
pg_waldump as possible so that if any changes happens in the
pg_waldump in future it gets applied here as well and additionally it
will also reduce the code duplication.
I haven't yet looked into the code in detail. I will have a look at it
asap. thanks.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Sat, Feb 12
.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 7:34 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 7:14 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > I have spent little time looking at the latest patch. The patch looks
> > to be in good shape as it has already been
On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 7:32 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:15 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 11:53 PM Euler Taveira wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 9, 2022, at 12:06 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > >
> &
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 11:47 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Wed, 9 Feb 2022 17:31:02 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote in
> > On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 1:14 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > wrote:
> > > This means archive-recovery is requested but not started
any
of the publication doesn't exist)
This applies for both CREATE and ALTER subscription commands.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:50 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote:
> >
> > On T
On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 11:53 PM Euler Taveira wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 9, 2022, at 12:06 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Just wondering if we should also be detecting the incorrect conninfo
> set with ALTER SUBSCRIPTION command as well. See below:
>
> -- try creating a subscr
tion we do connect to the publisher node hence
the incorrect connection info gets detected. But that's not the case
with alter subscription.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 6:27 PM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:50 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 1:14 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> Hi, Ashutosh.
>
> At Tue, 8 Feb 2022 18:35:34 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote in
> > Here are some of my review comments on the v11 patch:
>
> Thank you for taking a look on this.
>
> > -
On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 2:02 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-02-07 13:38:38 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> > Are you talking about this scenario - what if the logical replication
> > slot on the publisher is dropped, but is being referenced by the
&g
lt.Write;
+ (errmsg("replication terminated by
primary server on timeline %u at %X/%X.",
+ startpointTLI,
+
LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(LogstreamResult.Write;
Is this change really required? I don't see any issue with the
existing error m
subscribers (if any) as well?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Sun, Feb 6, 2022 at 1:29 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-01-03 14:46:52 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > From ec00dc6ab8bafefc00e9b1c78ac9348b643b8a87 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Peter Eise
ge? I'm trying to think why users
> would want to sync logical slots to a reader but not have that be dropped
> as well if it's no longer present.
>
AFAIU this should be taken care of by the background worker used to
synchronize the replication slot.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 5:06 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 4:26 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> >> Basically, ALTER TABLE SET TABLESPACE, will register the
> >> SYNC_UNLINK_REQUEST for the table files w.r.t the old tablespace, but
> >> tho
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 2:44 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:10 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> >
> > I am getting the below error when running the same test-case that Neha
> shared in her previous email.
> >
> > ERROR: 55000: some relation
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 7:20 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 at 12:28 AM, Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Is it okay to share the same tablespace (infact relfile) between the
>> primary and standby server? Perhaps NO.
>>
>
>>
Hi Dilip,
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:10 AM Ashutosh Sharma
wrote:
> I am getting the below error when running the same test-case that Neha
> shared in her previous email.
>
> ERROR: 55000: some relations of database "test1" are already in
> tablespace "tab1&quo
*/
register_unlink_segment(rnode, forkNum, 0 /* first seg */ );
}
==
Is it okay to share the same tablespace (infact relfile) between the
primary and standby server? Perhaps NO.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 4:47 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> While testi
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 7:04 PM Amit Langote
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 11:37 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is this okay?
> >
> > postgres=# CREATE TABLE t1 (a int, b int) PARTITION BY LIST ( a, a, a );
>
ust move them back to the database's
default tablespace before using this command.")));
}
Also, if I run the checkpoint explicitly before executing the above alter
database statement, this error doesn't appear which means it only happens
with the new changes because earlier we were doing th
s inside this LocalPgBackendStatus structure are prefixed
with "backend" word. Can we do the same for the newly added variables as
well?
--
+ * Get the xid and xmin, nsubxid and overflow status of the backend.
The
Should this be put as - "xid, xmin, nsubxid and overflow" i
the source. please check.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 7:27 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
> Thank you for reviewing the patch.
>
> > partbounds.c: In function ‘get_qual_for_list.isra.18’:
> > partbounds.c:4284:29: warning: ‘boundinfo’ may be used uninit
de.spcNode = srcrnode.spcNode;;
There is an extra semicolon here.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 1:39 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 7:39 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Logfile Snippet:
> >> 2021-12-09 17:49:18.110 +04 [
Hi Thomas,
I am unable to apply these new set of patches on HEAD. Can you please share
the rebased patch or if you have any work branch can you please point it
out, I will refer to it for the changes.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh sharma.
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 3:44 PM Thomas Munro wrote
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 7:23 PM Neha Sharma
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 11:12 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The issue here is that we are trying to create a table that exists inside
>> a non-default tablespace when doing ALTER DATABASE.
ch and let me know if it
looks fine or not?
Neha, can you please re-run the test-cases with the attached patch.
Thanks,
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 8:43 AM Neha Sharma
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 4:26 AM Greg Nancarrow wrote:
>
>> On T
Thanks Robert for sharing your thoughts.
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 11:16 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 9:23 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> > One last point - If we try to clone a huge database, as expected CREATE
> DATABASE emits a lot of WALs, causing a lot
.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 9:59 AM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 9:17 AM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> >
> > Here are few more review comments:
>
> Thanks for reviewing it.
>
> > 1) It seems that we are not freeing
sistence == RELPERSISTENCE_PERMANENT || copying_initfork);
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 9:12 AM Ashutosh Sharma
wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 8:28 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 7:38 PM Ashutosh Sharma
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I see that
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 8:28 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 7:38 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> >
> > I see that this patch is reducing the database creation time by almost
> 3-4 times provided that the template database has some user data in it.
> H
you intentionally skipped pg_internal.init file from being copied to
the target database?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 7:20 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 6:04 PM Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> > Thanks a lot for testing this. From the err
nning server, but they would not be written to the
> server log.
>
That's a good idea. How about also adding some GUC(s) to the log archive,
recovery related log messages just like we have for checkpoints, autovacuum
etc? Maybe something like log_archive, log_recovery etc.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
1 - 100 of 255 matches
Mail list logo
