(2014/04/14 23:53), Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Etsuro Fujita
fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote:
Attached is an updated version of the patch.
I applied the first two hunks of this, which seem like clear
oversights; and also the bit fixing the constraint_name language.
On 14 April 2014 20:10, Simon Riggs wrote:
Autonomous Transaction Storage:
As for main transaction, structure PGXACT is used to store main transactions,
which are created in shared memory of size:
(Number of process)*sizeof(struct PGXACT)
Similarly a new structure will be defined to
Hello, thank you for the discussion.
At Tue, 1 Apr 2014 11:41:20 -0400, Robert Haas wrote
I don't find that very radical at all. The backup_label file is
*supposed* to be removed on the master if it crashes during the
backup; and it should never be removed from the backup itself. At
least
Thank you for committing.
At Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:50:56 -0400, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote in
21426.1396021...@sss.pgh.pa.us
tgl Kyotaro HORIGUCHI horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp writes:
tgl Hello. Attached is the 2nd version of 'pushdown in UNION ALL on
tgl partitioned tables' patch type
Hi hackers,
I am learning about numeric .
The comment of NumericShort format is:
* In the NumericShort format, the remaining 14 bits of the header word
* (n_short.n_header) are allocated as follows: 1 for sign (positive or
* negative), 6 for dynamic scale, and 7 for weight. In practice, most
On 04/15/2014 03:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
I still wish we could get rid of this problem by fixing the Windows build
recipes so that the PGDLLEXPORT marking wasn't needed. We proved to
ourselves recently that getting rid of PGDLLIMPORT on global variables
wouldn't work, but I'm not sure that the
Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 04/15/2014 03:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
I still wish we could get rid of this problem by fixing the Windows build
recipes so that the PGDLLEXPORT marking wasn't needed. We proved to
ourselves recently that getting rid of PGDLLIMPORT on global
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
[ assorted comments about custom-scan patch, but particularly ]
* The prune hook makes me feel very uneasy. It seems weirdly specific
implementation detail, made stranger by the
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Yeah. After a fast review of the custom-scan and cache-scan patches, it
seems to me that my original fears are largely confirmed: the custom scan
patch is not going to be sufficient
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
A concrete example here is setrefs.c, whose responsibilities tend to
change from release to release. I think if we committed custom-scan
as is, we'd have great difficulty changing setrefs.c's transformations
ever again, at least if we hoped to not break
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Yeah. After a fast review of the custom-scan and cache-scan patches, it
seems to me that my original fears are
Hi,
On 2014-04-15 11:07:11 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
[ discussion ]
What I think this discussion shows that this patch isn't ready for
9.4. The first iteration of the patch came in
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
What I think this discussion shows that this patch isn't ready for
9.4. The first iteration of the patch came in 2013-11-06. Imo that's
pretty damn late for a relatively complex patch. And obviously we don't
have agreement on the course forward.
I
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I am glad you are looking at this. You are right that it requires a
huge amount of testing, but clearly our code needs improvement in this
area.
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 08:05:11PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 07:58:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
It also has changed the OID status to only display if it exists. One
question that came up with Robert is whether OID status
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 2:16 AM, Christian Ullrich ch...@chrullrich.net wrote:
I meant creating a new one, yes. If, say, PGSQL_BACKGROUND_JOB was set,
the postmaster etc. would ignore the events.
Why not just pass a command-line switch?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
There are many reports of improvement from lowering shared_buffers.
The problem is that it tends to show up on complex production
workloads and that there is no clear evidence pointing to problems
with the clock sweep;
* From: Robert Haas
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 2:16 AM, Christian Ullrich
ch...@chrullrich.net wrote:
I meant creating a new one, yes. If, say, PGSQL_BACKGROUND_JOB was
set, the postmaster etc. would ignore the events.
Why not just pass a command-line switch?
Because, as I wrote in the
* From: Bruce Momjian
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:34:14AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
The problem can be solved this way, but the only question here is
whether it is acceptable for users to have a new console window for
server.
Can others also please share their opinion if this fix (start
* From: Amit Kapila
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Christian Ullrich
ch...@chrullrich.net wrote:
* From: Amit Kapila
Do you mean to say use some existing environment variable?
Introducing an environment variable to solve this issue or infact
using some existing environ variable
On 2014-03-28 21:36:11 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2014-03-27 08:02:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Buildfarm member prairiedog thinks there's something unreliable about
commit f01d1ae3a104019d6d68aeff85c4816a275130b3:
***
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2014-03-27 08:02:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Buildfarm member prairiedog thinks there's something unreliable about
commit f01d1ae3a104019d6d68aeff85c4816a275130b3:
So I had made a notice to recheck on
this.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 02:46:34PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 02:32:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
psql: conditionally display oids and replication identity
Buildfarm isn't terribly pleased with this --- looks like you missed
On 2014-04-15 12:32:36 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 02:46:34PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 02:32:53PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
psql: conditionally display oids and replication identity
Buildfarm
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 02:46:34PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Fixed. I added a personal script option that allows me to test contrib,
but forgot to run it.
Is that script of general utility for committers? If so, it might be
good to include it in the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/14/2014 04:34 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
On 04/14/2014 04:25 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-04-14 16:22:48 -0700, Joe Conway wrote:
That'll help performance, but lets say I generally keep WAL
files for PITR and don't turn that off before
Joe Conway m...@joeconway.com writes:
In other words, based on my inserted logic, it appears that there are
5 and 6 backup blocks on a fairly regular basis.
However in xlog.h it says:
8--
* If we backed up any disk blocks with the XLOG record, we use flag
* bits in
On 04/15/2014 11:53 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
One more question before I get to that. I had applied the following
patch to XLogInsert
8--
diff --git a/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
b/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
index 2f71590..e39cd37 100644
- ---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/15/2014 02:15 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
You're counting XLogRecData structs, not backup blocks. Each
backup block typically consists of three XLogRecData structs, one
to record a BkpBlock struct, one to record the data before the
unused
Hackers,
We need documentation on how users should intelligently set the
multixact freeze settings. I'm happy to write the actual text, but I
definitely don't have any idea how to set these myself. Under what
circumstances should they be different from freeze_max_age? How?
--
Josh Berkus
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 12:33 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
I have checked that other place in code also check handle to
Hackers,
I think 9.3 has given us evidence that our users aren't giving new
versions of PostgreSQL substantial beta testing, or if they are, they
aren't sharing the results with us.
How can we make beta testing better and more effective? How can we get
more users to actually throw serious
Hi
I am playing around with postgres_fdw and found that the following code ...
--
CREATE EXTENSION postgres_fdw;
CREATE SERVER loop foreign data wrapper postgres_fdw
OPTIONS (port '5432', dbname 'testdb');
CREATE USER MAPPING FOR PUBLIC SERVER loop;
create
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp writes:
[ pathkey_and_uniqueindx_v10_20130411.patch ]
I thought some more about this patch, and realized that it's more or less
morally equivalent to allowing references to ungrouped variables when the
query has a GROUP BY clause listing all the
On 15 April 2014 23:19, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum adsm...@wars-nicht.de wrote:
Hi,
stumbled over a number of iff in the source where if is meant - not sure
what the real story behind this is, but attached is a patch to fix the about
80 occurrences.
This only appears in comments, not in any
On 04/15/2014 02:25 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Hackers,
We need documentation on how users should intelligently set the
multixact freeze settings. I'm happy to write the actual text, but I
definitely don't have any idea how to set these myself. Under what
circumstances should they be
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
PostgreSQL implements a clock sweep algorithm, which gets us something
approaching an LRU for the buffer manager in trade-off for less
contention on core structures. Buffers have a usage_count/popularity
that currently
Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Is there a way to force it to prefer a plan where the results of (select
id from onemillion where data '0.9' limit 100)
are passed to FDW as a single IN ( = ANY(...)) query and are retrieved
all at once ?
You could write the query like that:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Ants Aasma a...@cybertec.at wrote:
PostgreSQL replacement algorithm is more similar to Generalized CLOCK
or GCLOCK, as described in [1]. CLOCK-Pro [2] is a different algorithm
that approximates LIRS[3]. LIRS is what MySQL implements[4] and
CLOCK-Pro is
On 04/15/2014 06:26 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
On 15 April 2014 23:19, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum adsm...@wars-nicht.de wrote:
Hi,
stumbled over a number of iff in the source where if is meant - not sure
what the real story behind this is, but attached is a patch to fix the about
80 occurrences.
On 04/15/2014 05:36 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 04/15/2014 06:26 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
On 15 April 2014 23:19, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum
adsm...@wars-nicht.de wrote:
Hi,
stumbled over a number of iff in the source where if is meant -
not sure
what the real story behind this is, but attached
Steve Crawford scrawf...@pinpointresearch.com writes:
On 04/15/2014 05:36 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 04/15/2014 06:26 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
Yeah, apparently those are intentional, and mean if and only if
This is a reasonably common idiom, or used to be.
If it has fallen into disuse the
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum
adsm...@wars-nicht.de wrote:
Hi,
stumbled over a number of iff in the source where if is meant - not
sure what the real story behind this is, but attached is a patch to fix the
about 80 occurrences.
IFF is a common idiom in
Thom Brown-2 wrote
On 15 April 2014 23:19, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum lt;
adsmail@
gt; wrote:
Hi,
stumbled over a number of iff in the source where if is meant - not
sure
what the real story behind this is, but attached is a patch to fix the
about
80 occurrences.
This only appears in
Hi hackers,
I am learning about numeric .
The comment of NumericShort format is:
* In the NumericShort format, the remaining 14 bits of the header word
* (n_short.n_header) are allocated as follows: 1 for sign (positive or
* negative), 6 for dynamic scale, and 7 for weight. In practice, most
sure.postgres wrote
Hi hackers,
I am learning about numeric .
The comment of NumericShort format is:
* In the NumericShort format, the remaining 14 bits of the header word
* (n_short.n_header) are allocated as follows: 1 for sign (positive or
* negative), 6 for dynamic scale, and 7 for
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 3:01 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 12:33 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
For the create case, I'm wondering if we should put the block that
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Christian Ullrich
ch...@chrullrich.net wrote:
* From: Robert Haas
Why not just pass a command-line switch?
Because, as I wrote in the message you are quoting, I did not think that
having a command-line option for the sole purpose of telling the
postmaster
On 4/14/14, 10:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 04/14/2014 10:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
Add TAP tests for client programs
I assume the buildfarm would need to be taught about this?
Yes. It probably won't be a huge change, but it will
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On 4/14/14, 10:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Yes. It probably won't be a huge change, but it will need a bit of code.
It might be more future-proof if the build farm just called make
check-world and used some other way to identify the individual tests
On 4/9/14, 10:57 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
So it'd be an array, and by default you'd have something like:
basebackup_skip_path = $log_directory
?
Maybe use it to skip backup labels by default as well.
basebackup_skip_path = $log_directory,
Hi hackers,
I am learning about numeric .
The comment of NumericShort format is:
* In the NumericShort format, the remaining 14 bits of the header word
* (n_short.n_header) are allocated as follows: 1 for sign (positive or
* negative), 6 for dynamic scale, and 7 for weight. In practice, most
On 4/15/14, 11:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On 4/14/14, 10:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Yes. It probably won't be a huge change, but it will need a bit of code.
It might be more future-proof if the build farm just called make
check-world and used some
On 4/14/14, 3:28 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 4/4/14, 10:07 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
If
somebody previously tried to do the correct thing and attached
PGDLLEXPORT to their own *function* prototoype, it would cause problems
now.
What is the difference (on affected platforms) between
Hi,
Attached adds CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW AS to the list of statements
that can be EXPLAINed.
--
Amit
explain-create-materialized-view-as.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
Let me point out again that my patch doesn't actually do anything about
PGDLLEXPORT or the like. It just adds automatic prototypes into
PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1, to reduce compiler warnings in extensions and
reduce some boilerplate in general.
Hmm ... for
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
What I think this discussion shows that this patch isn't ready for
9.4. The first iteration of the patch came in 2013-11-06. Imo that's
pretty damn late for a relatively complex patch. And obviously we
don't have agreement on the course
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Yeah. After a fast review of the custom-scan and cache-scan
patches, it seems to me that my original fears
On 04/16/2014 01:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Is there a way to force it to prefer a plan where the results of (select
id from onemillion where data '0.9' limit 100)
are passed to FDW as a single IN ( = ANY(...)) query and are retrieved
all at once ?
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Ants Aasma a...@cybertec.at wrote:
There's a paper on a non blocking GCLOCK algorithm, that does lock
free clock sweep and buffer pinning[7]. If we decide to stay with
GCLOCK it may be
On 04/16/2014 06:12 AM, Hannu Krosing wrote:
On 04/16/2014 01:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Is there a way to force it to prefer a plan where the results of (select
id from onemillion where data '0.9' limit 100)
are passed to FDW as a single IN ( =
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
In the past, various hackers have noted problems they've observed with
this scheme. A common pathology is to see frantic searching for a
victim buffer only to find all buffer usage_count values at 5. It may
take multiple
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Hackers,
I think 9.3 has given us evidence that our users aren't giving new
versions of PostgreSQL substantial beta testing, or if they are, they
aren't sharing the results with us.
How can we make beta testing better
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Amit Langote amitlangot...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Attached adds CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW AS to the list of statements
that can be EXPLAINed.
Now that you mention that, REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW can be EXPLAIN'ed
as well, except that it returns that and does not
64 matches
Mail list logo
