Re: [HACKERS] exposing wait events for non-backends (was: Tracking wait event for latches)

2017-03-20 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Kuntal Ghosh wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> + /* We have userid for client-backends and wal-sender processes */ >> + if (beentry->st_backendType == B_BACKEND || >>

Re: [HACKERS] pageinspect and hash indexes

2017-03-20 Thread Ashutosh Sharma
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:53 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Ashutosh Sharma >> wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Amit Kapila

Re: [HACKERS] ANALYZE command progress checker

2017-03-20 Thread vinayak
Hi Ashutosh, On 2017/03/19 17:56, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: Hi, I didn't find any major issues with the patch. It works as expected. However, I have few minor comments that I would like to share, + + Total number of sample rows. The sample it reads is taken randomly. + Its size

Re: [HACKERS] ANALYZE command progress checker

2017-03-20 Thread vinayak
Hi Ashutosh, Thank you for reviewing the patch. On 2017/03/18 21:00, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: Hi Vinayak, Here are couple of review comments that may need your attention. 1. Firstly, I am seeing some trailing whitespace errors when trying to apply your v3 patch using git apply command.

[HACKERS] comments in hash_alloc_buckets

2017-03-20 Thread Ashutosh Sharma
Hi, While working on - [1], I realised that the following comments in _hash_alloc_buckets() needs to be corrected. /* * Initialize the freed overflow page. Just zeroing the page won't work, * See _hash_freeovflpage for similar usage. */ _hash_pageinit(page, BLCKSZ);

Re: [HACKERS] Allow interrupts on waiting standby

2017-03-20 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 5:14 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Couple of thoughts on this patch --- Thanks! > 1. Shouldn't WaitExceedsMaxStandbyDelay's CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS be moved to > after the WaitLatch call? Not much point in being woken immediately by > an interrupt if you're not

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: GetOldestXminExtend for ignoring arbitrary vacuum flags

2017-03-20 Thread Seki, Eiji
On 2017-02-24 04:17:20 Haribabu Kommi wrote: >On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Seki, Eiji > >wrote: > >> >> Thank you for your comments. >> >> I reflected these comments to the attached patch. And I renamed IGNORE_XXX >> flags to PROCARRAY_XXX flags. > >

Re: [HACKERS] Radix tree for character conversion

2017-03-20 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Hello, At Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:03:35 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote in <01efd334-b839-0450-1b63-f2dea9326...@iki.fi> > On 03/17/2017 07:19 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > I would like to use convert() function. It can be a large > > PL/PgSQL function or a series of "SELECT

[HACKERS] Freeze on Cygwin w/ concurrency

2017-03-20 Thread Noah Misch
"pgbench -i -s 50; pgbench -S -j2 -c16 -T900 -P5" freezes consistently on Cygwin 2.2.1 and Cygwin 2.6.0. (I suspect most other versions are affected.) I've pinged[1] the Cygwin bug thread with some additional detail. If a Cygwin buildfarm member starts using --enable-tap-tests, you may see

Re: [HACKERS] asynchronous execution

2017-03-20 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Hello. This is the final report in this CF period. At Fri, 17 Mar 2017 17:35:05 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote in <20170317.173505.152063931.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> > Async-capable plan is generated in planner. An Append contains

Re: [HACKERS] Our feature change policy

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > We keep re-litigating changes, either with pg_xlog, binaries, or > pg_stat_activity, and at some point we need to settle on a > policy. The usual "change" options are: > > 1. make the change now and mention it in the

Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 7:23 PM, David Steele wrote: > With 16MB WAL segments the filename neatly aligns with the LSN. For > example: > > WAL FILE 0001000100FE = LSN 1/FE00 > > This no longer holds true with this patch. It is already possible to change the

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] A better way to expand hash indexes.

2017-03-20 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 8:16 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:58 PM, Mithun Cy wrote: >> Hi Amit, Thanks for the review, >> >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> idea could be to

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] A better way to expand hash indexes.

2017-03-20 Thread Amit Kapila
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:58 PM, Mithun Cy wrote: > Hi Amit, Thanks for the review, > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> idea could be to make hashm_spares a two-dimensional array >> hashm_spares[32][4] where the first

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding on standby

2017-03-20 Thread Craig Ringer
On 20 March 2017 at 17:33, Andres Freund wrote: >> Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Follow timeline switches in logical decoding > > FWIW, the title doesn't really seem accurate to me. Yeah, it's not really at the logical decoding layer at all. "Teach xlogreader to follow timeline

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Make pg_stop_backup() archive wait optional

2017-03-20 Thread Tsunakawa, Takayuki
From: David Steele [mailto:da...@pgmasters.net] > Well, that's embarrassing. When I recreated the function to add defaults > I messed up the AS clause and did not pay attention to the results of the > regression tests, apparently. > > Attached is a new version rebased on 88e66d1. Catalog

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] few fts functions for jsonb

2017-03-20 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 03/10/2017 11:13 AM, Dmitry Dolgov wrote: > > On 28 February 2017 at 19:21, Oleg Bartunov > wrote: > > 1. add json support > > I've added json support for all functions. > > > Its_headline should returns the original json with highlighting

Re: [HACKERS] Create replication slot in pg_basebackup if requested and not yet present

2017-03-20 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Michael Banck wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:42:32PM +0300, Arthur Zakirov wrote: >> Also maybe it would be good if pg_basebackup had a way to drop created slot. >> Although "drop slot" is not related with concept of automatically

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding on standby

2017-03-20 Thread Craig Ringer
.On 20 March 2017 at 17:33, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > Have you checked how high the overhead of XLogReadDetermineTimeline is? > A non-local function call, especially into a different translation-unit > (no partial inlining), for every single page might end up being >

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding on standby

2017-03-20 Thread Craig Ringer
On 19 March 2017 at 22:12, Petr Jelinek wrote: > I am slightly worried about impact of the readTimeLineHistory() call but > I think it should be called so little that it should not matter. Pretty much my thinking too. > That brings us to the big patch 0003. > > I

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Craig Ringer
On 20 March 2017 at 22:39, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Stephen Frost wrote: > >> Is there any hope of getting a "quiet" mode, where all the "ok" lines >> aren't printed when things work..? > > Well, we currently have --verbose in PROVE_FLAGS. Maybe you can take it > out, or

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication apply to run with sync commit off by default

2017-03-20 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 18/03/17 13:31, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 07/03/17 06:23, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> Hi, >> >> there has been discussion at the logical replication initial copy thread >> [1] about making apply work with sync commit off by default for >> performance reasons and adding option to change that per

Re: [HACKERS] extended statistics: n-distinct

2017-03-20 Thread David Rowley
On 21 March 2017 at 08:02, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Here is a closer to final version of the multivariate statistics series, > last posted at > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170316222033.ncdi7nidah2gdzjx%40alvherre.pgsql I've made another pass over the patch.

Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size

2017-03-20 Thread David Steele
Hi Beena, On 3/20/17 2:07 PM, Beena Emerson wrote: Added check for the version, the SHOW command will be run only in v10 and above. Previous versions do not need this. I've just had the chance to have a look at this patch. This is not a complete review, just a test of something I've been

Re: [HACKERS] extended statistics: n-distinct

2017-03-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > * I'm not terribly happy with the header organization. I think > VacAttrStats should be in its own (new) src/include/statistics/analyze.h > for example (which cleans up a bunch of existing stuff a bit) I tried this and it doesn't actually do any good. Patch attached,

Re: [HACKERS] Removing binaries

2017-03-20 Thread David Steele
On 3/20/17 3:40 PM, Jan de Visser wrote: On Monday, March 20, 2017 3:30:49 PM EDT Robert Haas wrote: On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: createdb, dropdb - also not clear they're about postgres, more likely to be used by mistake but not that bad. That

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Andrew, * Andrew Dunstan (andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > On 03/20/2017 10:25 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > > I'd like to enable Carp's features to use confess for traces, and > > switch all use of die to that. We could learn a lot about > > unplanned-for test failures where a test script

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 03/20/2017 10:25 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > > > I'd like to enable Carp's features to use confess for traces, and > switch all use of die to that. We could learn a lot about > unplanned-for test failures where a test script dies rather than > failing a test if we used carp effectively. > > >

Re: [HACKERS] patch proposal

2017-03-20 Thread David Steele
Hi Venkata, On 2/28/17 11:59 PM, Venkata B Nagothi wrote: On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 1:14 AM, Venkata B Nagothi > wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 6:49 AM, David Steele > wrote: Do you know

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication existing data copy

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Peter, * Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > The current patch causes a failure in the pg_dump tests, because the > generated CREATE SUBSCRIPTION commands make connection attempts that > don't work. We have the pg_dump option --no-create-subscription-slots > for this,

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication existing data copy

2017-03-20 Thread Peter Eisentraut
The current patch causes a failure in the pg_dump tests, because the generated CREATE SUBSCRIPTION commands make connection attempts that don't work. We have the pg_dump option --no-create-subscription-slots for this, but I suppose we should expand that to --no-subscription-connect and use the

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4

2017-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
... is there a reason why resultnum for EEOP_ASSIGN_* steps is declared size_t and not just int? Since it's an array index, and one that certainly can't be bigger than AttrNumber, that seems rather confusing. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] Microvacuum support for Hash Index

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > This version looks good to me. Committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make

Re: [HACKERS] Removing binaries (was: createlang/droplang deprecated)

2017-03-20 Thread Jan de Visser
On Monday, March 20, 2017 3:30:49 PM EDT Robert Haas wrote: > On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > createdb, dropdb - also not clear they're about postgres, more likely to > > be > > used by mistake but not that bad. That said, do they add any *value*

Re: [HACKERS] Removing binaries (was: createlang/droplang deprecated)

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > createdb, dropdb - also not clear they're about postgres, more likely to be > used by mistake but not that bad. That said, do they add any *value* beyond > what you can do with psql -c "CREATE DATABASE"? I don't really

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication access control patches

2017-03-20 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 20/03/17 13:32, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 3/18/17 09:31, Petr Jelinek wrote: >>> 0003 Add USAGE privilege for publications >>> >>> a way to control who can subscribe to a publication >>> >> Hmm IIUC this removes ability of REPLICATION role to subscribe to >> publications. I am not quite sure

Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size

2017-03-20 Thread Beena Emerson
Hello, PFA the updated patch. On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:40 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 1:44 AM, Beena Emerson > wrote: > > Attached is the updated patch. It fixes the issues and also updates few > code > > comments. > > I

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: >> That seems different than what I suggested and I'm not sure what the >> reason is for the difference? > > The patch adding macros IS_JOIN_REL() and IS_OTHER_REL() and changing > the code to use it will look

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-03-20 Thread Ashutosh Bapat
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Ashutosh Bapat > wrote: >>> Hmm. I would kind of like to move the IS_JOIN_REL() and >>> IS_OTHER_REL() stuff to the front of the series. In other

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Removes uninitialized variable compiler warning

2017-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Todd Sedano writes: > This patch removes a compiler warning. > warning: variable 'lenlemm' is uninitialized when used here > [-Wuninitialized] Hm, on what compiler? AFAICS, that parsetext() function hasn't changed meaningfully since 2007, and nobody complained of

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: >> Hmm. I would kind of like to move the IS_JOIN_REL() and >> IS_OTHER_REL() stuff to the front of the series. In other words, I >> propose that we add those macros first, each testing for only the one >>

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-03-20 Thread Ashutosh Bapat
> > On a further testing of this patch I find another case when it is > showing regression, the time taken with patch is around 160 secs and > without it is 125 secs. > Another minor thing to note that is planning time is almost twice with > this patch, though I understand that this is for

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-03-20 Thread Ashutosh Bapat
> > Hmm. I would kind of like to move the IS_JOIN_REL() and > IS_OTHER_REL() stuff to the front of the series. In other words, I > propose that we add those macros first, each testing for only the one > kind of RelOptInfo that exists today, and change all the code to use > them. Then, when we

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

2017-03-20 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 12:15 AM, Pavan Deolasee wrote: >> It seems like an important invariant for WARM is that any duplicate >> index values ought to have different TIDs (actually, it's a bit >> stricter than that, since btrecheck() cares about simple binary >>

[HACKERS] [PATCH] Removes uninitialized variable compiler warning

2017-03-20 Thread Todd Sedano
This patch removes a compiler warning. warning: variable 'lenlemm' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized] This is my first commit to postgres. I've read through http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Submitting_a_Patch, but I may have missed something. diff --git

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Amit, * Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: > On 2017/02/17 22:32, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: > >> In certain cases, pg_dump's dumpTableSchema() emits a separate ALTER TABLE > >> command for those schema elements of a table that

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Rafia Sabih wrote: > On a further testing of this patch I find another case when it is > showing regression, the time taken with patch is around 160 secs and > without it is 125 secs. This is basically the same problem as before;

Re: [HACKERS] Our feature change policy

2017-03-20 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > . #3 and #4 would need to be weighted depending on > whether choosing them would delay progress, e.g. it did delay progress > on standard-conforming strings, but the delay was determined to be > reasonable. > w.r.t.

Re: [HACKERS] Create replication slot in pg_basebackup if requested and not yet present

2017-03-20 Thread Michael Banck
Hi, On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:42:32PM +0300, Arthur Zakirov wrote: > Also maybe it would be good if pg_basebackup had a way to drop created slot. > Although "drop slot" is not related with concept of automatically created > slots, it will good if user will have a way to drop slots. If you want

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4

2017-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > Additionally I added a regression test for the nearly entirely untested > nodeTidscan.c, after I'd broken it previously without noticing (thanks > Andreas). I went ahead and pushed this part, since it seemed pretty uncontroversial. I added a bit more

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > Right. If we could use parent Vars to indicate parent Var or child Var > depending upon the context, a lot of memory issues would be solved; we > wouldn't need to translate a single expression. But I think

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: >> I believe it would also be best to include 0011's changes to >> adjust_appendrel_attrs_multilevel in 0001. > > The function needs to repeat the "adjustment" process for every > "other" relation (join or

Re: [HACKERS] Our feature change policy

2017-03-20 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Tom, > > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > > Stephen Frost writes: > > > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > > >> 1. make the change now and mention it in the release notes > > >> 2.

Re: [HACKERS] Our feature change policy

2017-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:57:13AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Tom, > > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > > Stephen Frost writes: > > > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > > >> 1. make the change now and mention it in the release notes > > >> 2. #1, but

Re: [HACKERS] Partitioned tables and relfilenode

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Amit Langote wrote: >> Yes, but on the flip side, you're having to add code in a lot of >> places -- I think I counted 7 -- where you turn around and ignore >> those AppendRelInfos. > > Perhaps you were looking at the previous

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

2017-03-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Pavan Deolasee wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 7:17 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > I didn't like this comment very much. But it's not necessary: you have > > already given relcache responsibility for setting rd_supportswarm. The > > only problem seems to be that you

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-03-20 Thread Rafia Sabih
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 8:10 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> While I was studying what you did with reparameterize_path_by_child(), >> I started to wonder whether reparameterize_path() doesn't need to

Re: [HACKERS] Our feature change policy

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Tom, * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > >> 1. make the change now and mention it in the release notes > >> 2. #1, but also provide backward compatibility for 5+ years > >> 3. mark the feature as

Re: [HACKERS] Our feature change policy

2017-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:40:34AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > >> 1. make the change now and mention it in the release notes > >> 2. #1, but also provide backward compatibility for 5+ years > >> 3. mark the

Re: [HACKERS] Our feature change policy

2017-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost writes: > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: >> 1. make the change now and mention it in the release notes >> 2. #1, but also provide backward compatibility for 5+ years >> 3. mark the feature as deprecated and remove/change it in 5+ years >> 4. #3,

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] A better way to expand hash indexes.

2017-03-20 Thread Mithun Cy
Hi Amit, Thanks for the review, On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > idea could be to make hashm_spares a two-dimensional array > hashm_spares[32][4] where the first dimension will indicate the split > point and second will indicate the sub-split number.

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4

2017-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-03-15 20:09:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I think it would be worth creating a README file giving an overview >> of how all of this patch is supposed to work. You also need to do a >> whole lot more work on the function-level comments. > I

Re: [HACKERS] Our feature change policy

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Bruce, * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 04:15:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Stephen Frost writes: > > > If we take your approach to its logical conclusion then we should be > > > planning to maintain all user-facing deprecated features for

Re: [HACKERS] PinBuffer() no longer makes use of strategy

2017-03-20 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Teodor Sigaev wrote: > if (buf->usage_count < BM_MAX_USAGE_COUNT) >> if (BUF_STATE_GET_USAGECOUNT(buf_state) != BM_MAX_USAGE_COUNT) >> >> being prone to paranoia, I prefer the first, but I've seen both >> styles in >> the

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

2017-03-20 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 7:17 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > @@ -234,6 +236,21 @@ index_beginscan(Relation heapRelation, > > scan->heapRelation = heapRelation; > > scan->xs_snapshot = snapshot; > > > > + /* > > + * If the index supports recheck, make

Re: [HACKERS] PinBuffer() no longer makes use of strategy

2017-03-20 Thread Teodor Sigaev
if (buf->usage_count < BM_MAX_USAGE_COUNT) if (BUF_STATE_GET_USAGECOUNT(buf_state) != BM_MAX_USAGE_COUNT) being prone to paranoia, I prefer the first, but I've seen both styles in the code so I don't know if it's worth futzing with. Ok, let's be paranoic and do this same

Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Make the optimiser aware of partitions ordering

2017-03-20 Thread Ronan Dunklau
On lundi 20 mars 2017 15:52:03 CET Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:31 AM, Ronan Dunklau wrote: > > With range partitioning, we guarantee that each partition contains non- > > overlapping values. Since we know the range allowed for each partition, it > >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

2017-03-20 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:46 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Pavan Deolasee wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 7:17 AM, Alvaro Herrera < > alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> > > wrote: > > > > I have already commented about the executor involvement in btrecheck(); > > > that

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Tom, * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > New tests are not zero-cost; they create a distributed burden on the > buildfarm and, by increasing the buildfarm cycle time, slow down feedback > to authors of subsequent patches. So I'm very much not on board with > any argument that "more tests

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-03-20 10:35:15 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: >> I continue to be of the opinion that this entire discussion is quite >> flipped from how we really should be running things- adding regression >> tests to improve code coverage, particularly when

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

2017-03-20 Thread Pavan Deolasee
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 3:05 AM, Pavan Deolasee > wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Robert Haas > wrote: > > >> > >> /me scratches head. > >> > >> Aren't

Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Make the optimiser aware of partitions ordering

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:31 AM, Ronan Dunklau wrote: > With range partitioning, we guarantee that each partition contains non- > overlapping values. Since we know the range allowed for each partition, it is > possible to sort them according to the partition key (as is

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 3:05 AM, Pavan Deolasee wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Pavan Deolasee >> wrote: >> > I couldn't find a better way without a lot

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Alvaro, * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > Stephen Frost wrote: > > Is there any hope of getting a "quiet" mode, where all the "ok" lines > > aren't printed when things work..? > > Well, we currently have --verbose in PROVE_FLAGS. Maybe you can take it > out, or even add

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > To be clear, I am not asking for any kind of special exception for > myself. > > I continue to be of the opinion that this entire discussion is quite > flipped from how we really should be running things- adding

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-03-20 10:35:15 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Robert, > > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > > I'm glad that you are working on fixing > > pg_dump bugs and improving test coverage, but my gladness about that > > does not extend to thinking that the processes which other people

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Stephen Frost wrote: > Is there any hope of getting a "quiet" mode, where all the "ok" lines > aren't printed when things work..? Well, we currently have --verbose in PROVE_FLAGS. Maybe you can take it out, or even add --quiet or --QUIET (see the prove(1) manpage). -- Álvaro Herrera

[HACKERS] Our feature change policy

2017-03-20 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 04:15:09PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > If we take your approach to its logical conclusion then we should be > > planning to maintain all user-facing deprecated features for as long as > > there is a version where it exists in a

[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Robert, * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > I'm glad that you are working on fixing > pg_dump bugs and improving test coverage, but my gladness about that > does not extend to thinking that the processes which other people > follow for their work should be waived for yours. Sorry. To

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Alvaro, * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Andrew Dunstan (andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > > ISTM that the test setup and breakdown code, both in individual tests > > > and in PostgresNode.pm should be liberally sprinkled with diag() calls

Re: [HACKERS] free space map and visibility map

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 5:42 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > Isn't HEAP2_CLEAN only issued before an intended HOT update? (Which then > can't leave the block as all visible or all frozen). I think the issue is > here is HEAP2_VISIBLE or HEAP2_FREEZE_PAGE. Am I reading this

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 03/20/2017 10:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > I am *absolutely* not in favor of adding anything to the scripts' routine > output, because it will just make this problem worse by bloating the > buildfarm logs even more. What I'd like to see is for the scripts to > always report something along the

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Craig Ringer
On 20 Mar. 2017 22:10, "Tom Lane" wrote: FWIW, the problem I've got with the TAP tests is that when one fails in the buildfarm, you've got to dig through megabytes of all-alike-looking output just to try to determine which one failed; and once you do, you still know nothing

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > While I certainly agree with that when it comes to new features, changes > in work-flow, bug fixes and other things, I'm really not sure that > requiring posting to the list and waiting for responses every time > someone

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort

2017-03-20 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 03/20/2017 11:33 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: Please, find rebased patch in the attachment. I had a quick look at this. * I'd love to have an explanation of what an Incremental Sort is, in the file header comment for nodeIncrementalSort.c. * I didn't understand the maxMem stuff in

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Stephen Frost wrote: > Andrew, > * Andrew Dunstan (andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > ISTM that the test setup and breakdown code, both in individual tests > > and in PostgresNode.pm should be liberally sprinkled with diag() calls > > to make it easier to narrow down errors.. > > While

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add TAP tests for password-based authentication methods.

2017-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas writes: > On 03/20/2017 02:32 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> This is missing an entry for tmp_check/ in .gitignore. But maybe we can >> do that globally instead of repeating it in every directory? > If we could also handle results and log globally, that would

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost writes: > * Andrew Dunstan (andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: >> ISTM that the test setup and breakdown code, both in individual tests >> and in PostgresNode.pm should be liberally sprinkled with diag() calls >> to make it easier to narrow down errors.. >

Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions

2017-03-20 Thread Stas Kelvich
> On 20 Mar 2017, at 16:39, Craig Ringer wrote: > > On 20 March 2017 at 20:57, Stas Kelvich wrote: >> >>> On 20 Mar 2017, at 15:17, Craig Ringer wrote: >>> I thought about having special field (or reusing one of

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

2017-03-20 Thread Ashutosh Bapat
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 5:40 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Ashutosh Bapat > wrote: >> This set of patches fixes both of those things. > > 0001 changes the purpose of a function and then 0007 renames it. It >

Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions

2017-03-20 Thread Craig Ringer
On 20 March 2017 at 20:57, Stas Kelvich wrote: > >> On 20 Mar 2017, at 15:17, Craig Ringer wrote: >> >>> I thought about having special field (or reusing one of the existing fields) >>> in snapshot struct to force filtering xmax > snap->xmax or

[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Robert, * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > >> So was this 3340 line patch posted or discussed anyplace before it got > >> committed? > > > > I've mentioned a

Re: [HACKERS] pageinspect and hash indexes

2017-03-20 Thread Ashutosh Sharma
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Ashutosh Sharma > wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 12:12 AM, Ashutosh Sharma

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Andrew, * Andrew Dunstan (andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > If you look at this failure case > > you see: > > t/002_pg_dump.1..4449 > # Looks like your test died before it could

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Stephen Frost
Peter, * Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > On 3/20/17 08:33, Stephen Frost wrote: > >> So was this 3340 line patch posted or discussed anyplace before it got > >> committed? > > I've mentioned a few times that I'm working on improving pg_dump > > regression tests and

[HACKERS] Inadequate traces in TAP tests

2017-03-20 Thread Andrew Dunstan
If you look at this failure case you see: t/002_pg_dump.1..4449 # Looks like your test died before it could output anything. dubious Test returned status 255 (wstat 65280,

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 3/20/17 08:33, Stephen Frost wrote: >> So was this 3340 line patch posted or discussed anyplace before it got >> committed? > I've mentioned a few times that I'm working on improving pg_dump > regression tests and code coverage, which is what these were. I'm a bit > surprised that it's,

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve pg_dump regression tests and code coverage

2017-03-20 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: >> So was this 3340 line patch posted or discussed anyplace before it got >> committed? > > I've mentioned a few times that I'm working on improving pg_dump > regression tests

Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions

2017-03-20 Thread Stas Kelvich
> On 20 Mar 2017, at 15:17, Craig Ringer wrote: > >> I thought about having special field (or reusing one of the existing fields) >> in snapshot struct to force filtering xmax > snap->xmax or xmin = snap->xmin >> as Petr suggested. Then this logic can reside in

Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions

2017-03-20 Thread Simon Riggs
On 17 March 2017 at 23:59, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: >> On 17 March 2017 at 08:10, Stas Kelvich wrote: >>> While working on this i’ve spotted quite a nasty corner case with

  1   2   >