On 09/07/2014 05:58 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
+ Lehman and Yao don't require read locks, but assume that in-memory
+ copies of tree pages are unshared. Postgres shares in-memory buffers
+ among backends. As a result, we do page-level read locking on btree
+ pages in order to guarantee that no
On 2014-09-09 07:54, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 09/05/2014 05:21 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
*shrug* Doing it in SQL would probably break more stuff. I'm trying to
contain the damage. And arguably, this is mostly only useful in PL/PgSQL.
I've wanted assertions in SQL enough that I often write
On 08/15/2014 11:55 AM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
Hi,
On 8/8/14 3:18 PM, I wrote:
Currently there's no way to generate or extract armor headers from the
PGP armored format in pgcrypto. I've written a patch to add the
support.
Latest version of the patch here, having fixed some small coding
On 9/9/14 10:54 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
So I think this (and the corresponding dearmor code too) should be
refactored to use a StringInfo that gets enlarged as needed, instead of
hoping to guess the size correctly beforehand. To ease review, might
make sense to do that as a separate patch
On 2014-09-04 08:18:37 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
If you want to do that, it's fine with me. What I would do is:
- Back-patch the
On 09/03/2014 06:39 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to wrote:
On 9/3/14 4:46 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Making it
suck more because you don't think it's as important as your feature
is, in my opinion, not cool.
I really can't see how that would
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 2:32 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
Another point about error handling is that to execute the sql in
function pg_background_worker_main(), it starts the transaction
which I think
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:11 AM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote:
On 5 September 2014 14:19, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
Apart from above, I think for this patch, cat version bump is required
as I have
Hi, I added and edited some comments.
Sorry, It tha patch contains a silly bug. Please find the
attatched one.
regards,
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
From eb91a7c91e1fd3b24bf5bff0eb885f1c3d274637 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi
On 9/9/14 11:57 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
What's not clear to me is whether it make sense to do 1) without 2) ? Is
UPDATE .. LIMIT without support for an ORDER BY useful enough?
I'd say so; I could use it right now. I have to remove millions of
lines from a table, but I don't want the
On 9/9/14 12:37 PM, I wrote:
And no, these are not routine things so keep your use
partitions suggestions to yourselves.
My apologies. This was not directed at you personally, Heikki, and in
any case it was unnecessarily hostile.
.marko
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 09/05/2014 06:38 PM, Jan Wieck wrote:
On 09/05/2014 10:12 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
Note that despite pg appaling latency performance, in may stay well over
the 90% limit, or even 100%: when things are going well a lot of
transaction run in about ms, while when things are going bad
On 09/09/2014 01:46 PM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
On 9/9/14 12:37 PM, I wrote:
And no, these are not routine things so keep your use
partitions suggestions to yourselves.
My apologies. This was not directed at you personally, Heikki, and in
any case it was unnecessarily hostile.
No worries, it
On 09/09/2014 01:49 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I think we have to reconsider what we're reporting in 9.4, when --rate
is enabled, even though it's already very late in the release cycle.
It's a bad idea to change the definition of latency between 9.4 and 9.5,
so let's get it right in 9.4.
On 09/08/2014 07:02 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Here's version 18. I have renamed it: These are now BRIN indexes.
I have fixed numerous race conditions and deadlocks. In particular I
fixed this problem you noted:
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Another race condition:
If a new tuple is inserted to
Hello, I will be the reviewer of this patch.
You approach that coloring tokens seems right, but you have
broken the parse logic by adding your code.
Other than the mistakes others pointed, I found that
- non-SQL-ident like tokens are ignored by their token style,
quoted or not, so the
Hi
Well, I'd like to hear someone from the field complaining that
pg_receivexlog is thrashing the cache and thus reducing the performance of
some other process. Or a least a synthetic test case that demonstrates that
happening.
It's not with pg_receivexlog but it's related.
On a small box
Sorry for wrong suggestion. Setting in_quote is wrong there because it's
before the beginning quote. Although, advancing read pointer and replacing
c with the next value is still needed.
regards,
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
2014/09/09 20:49 Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Hello Heikki,
I think we have to reconsider what we're reporting in 9.4, when --rate
is enabled, even though it's already very late in the release cycle.
It's a bad idea to change the definition of latency between 9.4 and 9.5,
so let's get it right in 9.4.
Indeed.
As per the attached patch.
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for reviewing the patch! ISTM that I failed to make the patch from
my git repository... Attached is the rebased version.
I get some
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 9:07 PM, didier did...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
Well, I'd like to hear someone from the field complaining that
pg_receivexlog is thrashing the cache and thus reducing the performance of
some other process. Or a least a synthetic test case that demonstrates that
happening.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Heikki Uh, that's ugly. The EXPLAIN out I mean; as an implementation
Heikki detail chaining the nodes might be reasonable. But the above
Heikki
I'm continuously studying Postgres codebase. Hopefully I'll be able to make
some contributions in the future.
For now I'm intrigued about the extensive use of memory alignment. I'm sure
there's some legacy and some architecture that requires it reasoning behind
it.
That aside, since it wastes
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Tomas Vondra t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
So I only posted the separate patch for those who want to do a review,
and then a complete patch with both parts combined. But it sure may be
a bit confusing.
Let's do this: post each new version of the patches only on this
Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I agree with you on that point. So, I've updated the patch to have the
explicit flag, as you proposed. Attached is the updated version of the
patch. In this version, I've also revised code and its comments a bit.
Thank you, I have set the patch to Ready for Committer.
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Shigeru HANADA shigeru.han...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it's probably good to give an FDW the option of producing a
ForeignJoinPath for any join against a ForeignPath *or
ForeignJoinPath* for the same FDW. It's perhaps unlikely that an FDW
can perform a join
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote:
Maybe we ought to break down and support a real expression syntax.
Sounds like that would be better all around.
Adding operators is more or less orthogonal with providing a new expression
syntax. I'm not sure that there
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 11:08:05AM -0300, Arthur Silva wrote:
I'm continuously studying Postgres codebase. Hopefully I'll be able to make
some contributions in the future.
For now I'm intrigued about the extensive use of memory alignment. I'm sure
there's some legacy and some architecture
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 09:30:06AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 07:35:42PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:26:55AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I have developed the attached
Alvaro,
* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
Thanks. One more tweak --- the whole reason for fiddling with this is
to ensure that event triggers support this operation. Therefore this
node should be handled by ProcessUtilitySlow, not
standard_ProcessUtility, as in the attached
Hello Robert,
Writing a simple expression parser for pgbench using flex and bison
would not be an inordinately difficult problem.
Sure. Note that there is not only the parsing but also the evaluating to
think of, which mean a data structure to represent the expressions which
would be more
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-09-09 16:01 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Heikki
2014-09-09 16:01 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Heikki Uh, that's ugly. The EXPLAIN out I mean; as an implementation
Heikki
Hello, I've a problem, we're using sugarcrm, and we have a database
postgresql, but not in the default port, so, when I try to connect after I
put the port in the db_port parameter, but seems like he not recognized,
because still pointing to the other instance of the database that have the
5432
2014-09-09 7:55 GMT+02:00 Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com:
On 09/09/2014 05:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
I previously proposed RAISE ASSERT ... WHERE, which seems like a nice
variant of what we've already got, but perhaps this whole discussion
merely illustrates that it's hard to get
On 8/30/14 12:43 PM, Ali Akbar wrote:
While looking into this report
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/cf48ccfb.65a9d%tim.k...@gmail.com I
noticed that we don't accept empty values as xml content values, even
though this should apparently be allowed by the spec. Attached is
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote:
The fact that you're agonizing about which modulo to add is a sign that
the language is too impoverished to let you do anything non-trivial.
I'm not agonizing about which modulo to use:-) I know I do not want the
C/SQL
Robert == Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Robert Sure, showing the sort and aggregation steps is fine. But I
Robert don't see what advantage we get out of showing them like
Robert this:
Robert Aggregate
Robert - Sort
Robert- ChainAggregate
Robert - Sort
Robert
On 09/08/2014 05:27 PM, Bianca Santana Espichicoquez wrote:
Hello, I've a problem, we're using sugarcrm, and we have a database
postgresql, but not in the default port, so, when I try to connect
after I put the port in the db_port parameter, but seems like he not
recognized, because still
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 6:20 PM, David G Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Robert Haas [via PostgreSQL] [hidden
email] wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 6:38 PM, David Johnston
[hidden email] wrote:
One of the trade-offs I mentioned...its more style
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Honestly, ChainAggregate is _trivial_ compared to trying to make the
GroupAggregate code deal with multiple inputs, or trying to make some
new sort of plumbing node to
On 2014-08-28 13:54:28 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-08-28 13:20:07 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
I've attached a incremental patch.
Apparently I didn't attach the patch, as so much a file containing the
name of the patchfile...
Which you obviously didn't integrate. And didn't comment
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Robert == Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Robert Sure, showing the sort and aggregation steps is fine. But I
Robert don't see what advantage we get out of showing them like
Robert this:
Robert
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com
wrote:
I agree. If we are to support UPDATE .. ORDER BY .. LIMIT, it should work
with inheritance. So the path forward is (using Marko's phrasing upthread):
1) We put the LIMIT inside ModifyTable like this patch
On 29/07/14 18:51, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
What I'm thinking of is providing an actual API for the writes instead
of hooking into the socket API in a couple places. I.e. have something
like
typedef struct DestIO DestIO;
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Honestly, ChainAggregate is _trivial_ compared to trying to make the
GroupAggregate code deal with multiple inputs, or trying to make some
new sort of plumbing node to feed input to those sorts. (You'd think
that it should be possible to use
Hi,
I recently wanted several times to have slave server prepared at certain
point in time to reduce the time it takes for it to replay remaining
WALs (say I have pg_basebackup -x on busy db for example).
Currently the way to do it is to have pause_at_recovery_target true
(default) and wait
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 6:20 PM, David G Johnston
david.g.johns...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Robert Haas [via PostgreSQL] [hidden
email] wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 6:38 PM, David Johnston
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I am not sure if what Andres proposed is the right solution, but I do agree
here that the hook definitely isn't.
Well, that doesn't get me very far. Andres never responded to my
previous comments about why I did it that
Hi,
I worked bit on this patch to make it closer to committable state.
There are several bugs fixed, including ones mentioned by Jamie (writing
WAL during recovery).
Also support for pg_resetxlog/pg_upgrade has been implemented by Andres.
I added simple regression test and regression
On 09/09/14 18:49, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I am also not sure that I like the pq_redirect_to_shm_mq being directly
exposed for use in bgworker, what I would like is to have elog interface to
which you tell that you want errors
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
This has been pending for almost two months now and, at your request,
my patch to make spinlocks act as compiler barriers is waiting behind
it. Can we please get this moving again soon, or can I commit that
patch and
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 8:07 AM, didier did...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I'd like to hear someone from the field complaining that
pg_receivexlog is thrashing the cache and thus reducing the performance of
some other process. Or a least a synthetic test case that demonstrates that
happening.
It's
Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 07/09/14 21:09, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-09-07 15:05:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I think the main remaining issue is that we don't have consensus on
the function name AFAICT. I'm okay with using width_bucket(), as
is done in the latest patch,
Hi,
Given we already have three topics for --help and I can see others I
went with my --help= proposal.
On 2014-08-28 13:20:07 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
Some stuff I changed:
* I rephrased the sgml changes
* s/Printing options/Display options/. Or maybe Display influencing
variables?
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think that's completely wrong. As the patch series demonstrates,
it's not limited to propagating ErrorResponse and NoticeResponse. It
can also propagate NotifyResponse and RowDescription and DataRow and
anything else
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Eh, maybe? I'm not sure why the case where we're using abbreviated
keys should be different than the case we're not. In either case this
is a
On 2014-09-09 13:52:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I had forgotten that it needed an update. Thanks for the reminder. Here's
v2.
I've attached a incremental patch fixing minor gripes. Other than that I
think you can go ahead with this once the buildfarm accepts the sparc
fixes (man, those
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
While I gave serious consideration to your idea of having a dedicated
abbreviation comparator, and not duplicating sortsupport state when
abbreviated keys are used (going so far as to almost fully implement
the idea), I
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-09-09 13:52:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I had forgotten that it needed an update. Thanks for the reminder. Here's
v2.
I've attached a incremental patch fixing minor gripes. Other than that I
think you can
On 2014-09-09 17:30:44 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-09-09 13:52:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I had forgotten that it needed an update. Thanks for the reminder.
Here's v2.
I've attached a incremental
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-09-09 17:30:44 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-09-09 13:52:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I had forgotten that it needed an update.
On 2014-09-09 17:54:03 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
So, that's committed, then.
Yay, finally.
I think we should pick something that uses
spinlocks and is likely to fail spectacularly if we haven't got this
totally right yet, and de-volatilize it. And then watch to see what
turns red in the
On 09/09/14 22:48, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think that's completely wrong. As the patch series demonstrates,
it's not limited to propagating ErrorResponse and NoticeResponse. It
can also propagate NotifyResponse and
On 2014-09-09 22:22:45 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
I plan to push this soon.
Done.
Thanks for the patch!
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
Hi,
I noticed when trying to set pgbench's client count to a high number, I had
to reduce it, and I found the maximum I can get away with is 1014. Any
higher and I get:
invalid number of clients: 1015
I find this in pgbench.c:
#ifdef FD_SETSIZE
#define MAXCLIENTS (FD_SETSIZE - 10)
#else
On 9.9.2014 16:09, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Tomas Vondra t...@fuzzy.cz wrote:
So I only posted the separate patch for those who want to do a review,
and then a complete patch with both parts combined. But it sure may be
a bit confusing.
Let's do this: post each new
Thom Brown t...@linux.com writes:
I find this in pgbench.c:
#ifdef FD_SETSIZE
#define MAXCLIENTS (FD_SETSIZE - 10)
#else
#define MAXCLIENTS 1024
#endif
FD_SETSIZE is supposed to be defined, according to the POSIX spec:
The sys/select.h header shall define the following
Hmm. Sorry, I misunderstood the specification.
You approach that coloring tokens seems right, but you have
broken the parse logic by adding your code.
Other than the mistakes others pointed, I found that
- non-SQL-ident like tokens are ignored by their token style,
quoted or not, so
On 05/09/14 23:50, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Mark Kirkwood
mark.kirkw...@catalyst.net.nz mailto:mark.kirkw...@catalyst.net.nz
wrote:
On 04/09/14 14:42, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Mark Kirkwood
mark.kirkw...@catalyst.net.nz
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Yes, I did think about that, but it seems like a behavior change.
However, it is tempting to avoid future bug reports about this.
When this came up in March, Tom and I agreed that this wasn't something
we wanted to slip
(2014/09/09 18:57), Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 09/03/2014 06:39 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Now some people might argue that we have that anyway, but the fact is
that a lot of people are using inheritance today, even with all its
flaws, and they wouldn't be if there were a long laundry list of
(2014/09/09 22:17), Fujii Masao wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
I get some compiler warnings on v2 of this patch:
reloptions.c:219: warning: excess elements in struct initializer
reloptions.c:219: warning: (near initialization for 'intRelOpts[15]')
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Etsuro Fujita
fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote:
(2014/09/09 22:17), Fujii Masao wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
I get some compiler warnings on v2 of this patch:
reloptions.c:219: warning: excess elements in
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
One regression failed on linux due to spacing issue which is
fixed in attached patch.
I just read the latest patch by curiosity, wouldn't it make
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
Do we really want those Asserts? There is not a single Assert in
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think that's completely wrong. As the patch series demonstrates,
it's not limited to propagating ErrorResponse and NoticeResponse. It
can
77 matches
Mail list logo
