On 1/26/15 1:14 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-01-26 13:02 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
I can see where it's a lot nicer not to have the context visible for
people who only care about the contents of the message, but the way it's
done in PL/PgSQL right now is just not good enough. On
On 1/26/15 1:44 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-01-26 13:39 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
On 1/26/15 1:14 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I afraid about some unexpected side effects of your proposal if somebody
mix languages - these side effects should not be critical
I have no idea what
On 01/26/2015 02:56 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
Hi,
Attached patch fixes the typo in guc.c.
It's typo, I think.
diff --git a/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c b/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c
index f6df077..f4f1965 100644
--- a/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c
+++ b/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c
@@ -3880,7
2015-01-26 13:39 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
On 1/26/15 1:14 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-01-26 13:02 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
I can see where it's a lot nicer not to have the context visible for
people who only care about the contents of the message, but the way
Hi,
Attached patch fixes the typo in guc.c.
It's typo, I think.
Regards,
---
Sawada Masahiko
fix_typo_guc_c.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
On 01/23/2015 02:18 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 06:51:34PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
The following case has just been brought to my attention (look at the
differing number of backslashes):
andrew=# select jsonb '\\u';
jsonb
--
\u
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-01-23 16:47:30 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
There are at least two bugs in reorderbuffer.c's ReorderBufferCommit():
Thanks for fixing these!
Unfortunately there's more - we'll currently do bad things if
transaction commit fails. At the very
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-01-25 14:02:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I've been looking for other instances of the problem Mark Wilding
pointed out, about missing volatile markers on variables that
are modified in PG_TRY blocks and then used in the PG_CATCH stanzas.
There
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
This is scary as hell. I intend to go around and manually audit
every single PG_TRY in the current source code, but that is obviously
not a long-term solution. Anybody have an idea about how we might
get trustworthy
On 2015-01-26 10:52:07 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
This is scary as hell. I intend to go around and manually audit
every single PG_TRY in the current source code, but that is obviously
not a long-term solution. Anybody have
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
2015-01-26 14:02 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
I am thinking, so solution
/* if we are doing RAISE, don't report its location */
if (estate-err_text == raise_skip_msg)
return;
is too simple, and this part should be
2015-01-26 16:14 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
2015-01-26 14:02 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
I am thinking, so solution
/* if we are doing RAISE, don't report its location */
if (estate-err_text == raise_skip_msg)
* Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
On 2015-01-26 13:47:02 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Right. We already have a role attribute which allows pg_basebackup
(replication). Also, with pg_basebackup / rolreplication, your role
is able to read the entire data directory from the
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Now that these issues are fixed and the buildfarm is green again, I'm
going to try re-enabling this optimization on Windows. My working
theory is
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
On 01/26/2015 02:56 PM, Sawada Masahiko wrote:
Hi,
Attached patch fixes the typo in guc.c.
It's typo, I think.
diff --git a/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c b/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c
index
2015-01-26 14:02 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
On 1/26/15 1:44 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-01-26 13:39 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
On 1/26/15 1:14 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I afraid about some unexpected side effects of your proposal if somebody
mix languages - these
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I guess we'd need to tie it into PG_exception_stack levels, so it
correctly handles nesting with sigsetjmp locations. In contrast to
sigsetjmp() style handlers we can't rely on PG_CATCH cleaning up that
state.
I was
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2015-01-26 13:47:02 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Right. We already have a role attribute which allows pg_basebackup
(replication). Also, with pg_basebackup /
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:22 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
There's a fairly serious readability problem when someone has posted a
patch as a subthread of some more general discussion. For example,
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 9:20 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:22 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
There's a fairly serious readability problem when someone has
On 2015-01-26 13:47:02 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Adam Brightwell
adam.brightw...@crunchydatasolutions.com wrote:
After re-reading through this thread is seems like EXCLUSIVEBACKUP
(proposed
by Magnus)
On 2015-01-26 14:05:03 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
This capability would be used in conjunction with the SAN snapshot
capability, it's not intended to be a comparison to what SANs offer.
Oh, on a reread that's now clear. Many of those actually allow hooks to
be run when taking a snapshot,
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2015-01-26 13:47:02 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Adam Brightwell
adam.brightw...@crunchydatasolutions.com wrote:
After re-reading
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
In other words, even on systems that don't HAVE_LOCALE_T, we still
have to support the default collation and the C collation, and they
have to behave differently. There's no way to make that work using
only strxfrm(),
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Now that these issues are fixed and the buildfarm is green again, I'm
going to try re-enabling this optimization on Windows. My working
theory is that disabling that categorically was a mis-diagnosis of the
real
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:22 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
There's a fairly serious readability problem when someone has posted a
patch as a subthread of some more general discussion. For example, look
at the adaptive ndistinct estimator patch: it's not obvious which
Aside from any reduction in the need
for volatile, this might actually perform slightly better, because
sigsetjmp() is a system call on some platforms. There are probably
few cases where that actually matters, but the one in pq_getmessage(),
for example, might not be entirely
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Adam Brightwell
adam.brightw...@crunchydatasolutions.com wrote:
After re-reading through this thread is seems like EXCLUSIVEBACKUP (proposed
by Magnus) seemed to be a potentially acceptable alternative.
So this
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Well, if it's essentially unusable, then we've reached parity with the
old app (yes, you deserved that).
No, I didn't. What we had before I wrote that tool was a bunch of
wiki pages you put together which were forever having
On 01/26/2015 01:29 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Furthermore,
if it sucked so bad, why did it take anyone 5 years to get around to
rewriting it? It took me less than a year to get around to replacing
what you wrote.
Because whoever replaced it knew they'd be facing a shitstorm of criticism?
--
On 1/25/15 4:23 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I tested a concept iteration over array in format [key1, value1, key2, value2,
.. ] - what is nice, it works for [[key1,value1],[key2, value2], ...] too
It is only a few lines more to current code, and this change doesn't break a
compatibility.
Do
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
Yes, and the agreement after that feedback was to try it out and then
figure
out what changes were needed? As about half the feedback said
On 1/23/15 2:15 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
I happen to like the idea specifically because it would allow regular
roles to change the auditing settings (no need to be a superuser or to
be able to modify postgresql.conf/postgresql.auto.conf)
Is there really a use case for non-superusers to be
On 2015-01-26 13:32:51 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 01/26/2015 01:29 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Furthermore,
if it sucked so bad, why did it take anyone 5 years to get around to
rewriting it? It took me less than a year to get around to replacing
what you wrote.
Because whoever replaced
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Well, I'm still of the view that there's little to lose by having this
remain out-of-core for a release or three. We don't really all agree
on what we want, and non-core code can evolve a lot faster than core
code, so
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I can't speak to anyone else's opinion, but I'm quite sure I
raised the issue that we need a way to call out which messages in the
thread are important, and I think that's pretty much what Peter is
saying, too.
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
I assume what was referred to was that the old cf app would show the last 3
(I think it was) comments/patches/whatnot on a patch on the summary page
(and then clickthrough for more details).
Yep.
--
Robert Haas
On 01/26/2015 12:46 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
I find the new tool essentially unusable - having one
link to the whole thread instead of individual links to just the
important messages in that thread is a huge regression for me, as is
the lack of the most recent activity on the summary page.
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
According to my mailbox, you didn't even respond on that thread. But it may
well be that your email ended up on some other thread and therefor was not
included when I went back and looked over all the responses I got on
Hi,
dbase_redo does:
if (InHotStandby)
{
/*
* Lock database while we resolve conflicts to ensure
that
* InitPostgres() cannot fully re-execute concurrently.
This
*
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Another spinoff from the abbreviation discussion. Peter Geoghegan
suggested on IRC that numeric would benefit from abbreviation, and
indeed it does (in some cases by a factor of about 6-7x or more, because
On 1/23/15 10:16 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
Further, if we want to just get the benefit of parallel I/O, then
I think we can get that by parallelising partition scan where different
table partitions reside on different disk partitions, however that is
a matter of separate patch.
I don't think we
On 1/24/15 2:48 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
with array_offsets - returns a array of offsets
+ entryreturns a offset of first occurrence of some element in a
array. It uses
should be
+ entryreturns the offset of the first occurrence of some element in
an array. It uses
+
On 1/23/15 12:40 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
That said, the whole timestamp race condition in rsync gives me the
heebie-jeebies. For normal workloads maybe it's not that big a deal, but when
dealing with fixed-size data (ie: Postgres blocks)? Eww.
The race condition is a problem for
On 1/25/15 7:42 PM, Amit Langote wrote:
On 21-01-2015 PM 07:26, Amit Langote wrote:
Ok, I will limit myself to focusing on following things at the moment:
* Provide syntax in CREATE TABLE to declare partition key
While working on this, I stumbled upon the question of how we deal with
any
On 1/26/15 9:46 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
The design I thought had been agreed on was to add some new option to
plpgsql's RAISE command which would cause suppression of all CONTEXT lines
not just the most closely nested one. You could argue about whether the
behavior needs to be
Hi,
On 2015-01-22 19:56:07 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2015-01-20 16:28:19 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
I'm analyzing a problem in which a customer had a pg_basebackup (from
standby) created 9.2 cluster that failed with WAL contains references to
invalid pages. The failed record
On 2015-01-26 12:54:04 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I can't speak to anyone else's opinion, but I'm quite sure I
raised the issue that we need a way to call out which messages in the
thread are important, and
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:05 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 2015-01-26 12:54:04 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Well, I can't speak to anyone else's opinion, but I'm quite sure I
raised the
2015-01-26 22:34 GMT+01:00 Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com:
On 1/22/15 2:01 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
* I would to simplify a behave of evaluating of message
expression - probably I disallow NULL there.
Well, the only thing I could see you doing there is throwing a
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
On 01/26/2015 01:29 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Furthermore,
if it sucked so bad, why did it take anyone 5 years to get around to
rewriting it? It took me less than a year to get around to replacing
what you wrote.
Because
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2015-01-26 19:58:25 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 01:43:41AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
master + 32align.patch:
-c max_connections=400
tps = 183791.872359 (high run vs. run variability)
On 2015/01/27 9:15, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 12/22/14 12:50 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I think ExplainModifyTarget should show the parent of the inheritance
tree in multi-target-table cases, as described there, but noticed that
it doesn't always work like that. Here is an example.
Anything ever
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think having two columns would work. The columns could be called
database and database_list and user and user_list respectively.
The database column may contain one of all, sameuser, samegroup,
replication, but
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Contrary opinions? Robert?
I'm totally OK with further aligning just that one allocation.
Of course, now that I think about it, aligning it probably works
mostly because the size is almost exactly one cache line. If it
This developed a slight merge conflict. I've rebased the attached
version, and I also took the step of getting rid of buf_table.c, as I
think I proposed somewhere upthread. This avoids the overhead of
constructing a BufferTag only to copy it into a BufferLookupEnt, plus
some function calls and
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Unfortunately that Assert()s when there's a lock conflict because
e.g. another backend is currently connecting. That's because ProcSleep()
does a enable_timeout_after(DEADLOCK_TIMEOUT, DeadlockTimeout) - and
there's
On 2015-01-26 22:03:03 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
Attached is a patch trying to this. Doesn't look too bad and lead me to
discover missing recovery conflicts during a AD ST.
But: It doesn't actually work on standbys, because lock.c prevents any
stronger lock than RowExclusive from being
On 23 January 2015 21:10, Alvaro Herrera Wrote,
In case you're up for doing some more work later on, there are two
ideas
here: move the backend's TranslateSocketError to src/common, and try to
merge pg_dump's select_loop function with the one in this new code.
But that's for another patch
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 4:21 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
That's what I hope to find out. :-)
Buildfarm seems happy now. I just gave a try to that on one of my
small Windows VMs and compared the performance with 9.4 for this
simple test case when building with MSVC 2010:
create
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:18 AM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
On 1/23/15 10:16 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
Further, if we want to just get the benefit of parallel I/O, then
I think we can get that by parallelising partition scan where different
table partitions reside on different
On 23 January 2015 23:55, Alvaro Herrera,
-j1 is now the same as not specifying anything, and vacuum_one_database
uses more common code in the parallel and not-parallel cases: the not-
parallel case is just the parallel case with a single connection, so
the setup and shutdown is mostly the
On 01/23/2015 02:58 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 23/01/15 00:40, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
- Renamed some things from int12 to int128, there are still some places
with int16 which I am not sure what to do with.
I'd vote for renaming them to int128 too, there is enough C functions
that user int16
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 09:20:54AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 01/23/2015 02:18 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 06:51:34PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
We could probably fix this fairly easily for non- U+ cases by having
jsonb_to_cstring use a different escape_json
On 1/26/15 4:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
On 1/24/15 3:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Another idea is to teach Valgrind that whenever a backend reduces its
pin count on a shared buffer to zero, that buffer should become undefined
memory.
paranoia
Shouldn't
On 12/22/14 12:50 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I think ExplainModifyTarget should show the parent of the inheritance
tree in multi-target-table cases, as described there, but noticed that
it doesn't always work like that. Here is an example.
Anything ever happen with this?
--
Jim Nasby, Data
On 2015-01-26 18:30:13 -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 12/23/14 11:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
I think it'd generally be useful to have something like errhidecontext()
akin to errhidestatement() to avoid things like the above.
Under this proposal, do you want to suppress the
On 12/26/14 1:38 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
At 2014-09-25 15:40:11 +0530,a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
All right, then I'll post a version that addresses Amit's other
points, adds a new file/function to pgstattuple, acquires content
locks, and uses HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum, hint-bit setting
On 2015-01-26 19:58:25 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 01:43:41AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
master + 32align.patch:
-c max_connections=400
tps = 183791.872359 (high run vs. run variability)
-c max_connections=401
tps = 185494.98244 (high run vs. run variability)
Hi PG devs!
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Wait for first IO, issue second IO request
Compute
Already have second IO request, issue third
...
We'd be a lot less sensitive to IO latency.
It would take about five minutes of coding to prove or disprove this:
stick a PrefetchBuffer
Hi,
When working on getting rid of ImmediateInterruptOK I wanted to verify
that ssl still works correctly. Turned out it didn't. But neither did it
in master.
Turns out there's two major things we do wrong:
1) We ignore the rule that once called and returning
SSL_ERROR_WANTS_(READ|WRITE)
On 2015-01-26 11:14:05 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
My testcase for this is just to setup a server with a low
ssl_renegotiation_limit, generate lots of WAL (wal.sql attached) and
receive data via pg_receivexlog -n. Usually it'll error out quickly.
...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres
On 2015-01-22 22:58:17 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
Because the way it currently works is a major crock. It's more luck than
anything that it actually somewhat works. We normally rely on WAL to
bring us into a consistent state. But around CREATE/MOVE/DROP DATABASE
we've ignored that.
Hah:
Hackers,
when pg_dump is run with both --serializable-deferrable and -j options to
pg_dump, it returns errors:
pg_dump: [archiver (db)] query failed: ERROR: a snapshot-importing
transaction must not be READ ONLY DEFERRABLE
pg_dump: [archiver (db)] query failed: ERROR: a snapshot-importing
Hi Tom,
On 2015-01-23 16:47:30 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
There are at least two bugs in reorderbuffer.c's ReorderBufferCommit():
Thanks for fixing these!
Unfortunately there's more - we'll currently do bad things if
transaction commit fails. At the very least the (sub-)transaction begin
commands
Hi,
On 2015-01-25 14:02:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I've been looking for other instances of the problem Mark Wilding
pointed out, about missing volatile markers on variables that
are modified in PG_TRY blocks and then used in the PG_CATCH stanzas.
There definitely are some. Current gcc
On 2015-01-25 15:40:10 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Greg Stark st...@mit.edu writes:
Perhaps Clang has a more useful warning?
Clang, at least the version on my Mac, doesn't warn either with the
settings we normally use, and it doesn't have -Wclobber at all.
I tried turning on -Weverything, and
On 1/22/15 6:03 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-01-22 12:37 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
Or is that a stupid idea? I just think hacking libpq for something like
this is a huge overkill.
I don't think so only plpgsql solution is satisfactory idea. There are
some mix plpgsql / plperl
2015-01-26 13:02 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
On 1/22/15 6:03 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-01-22 12:37 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja ma...@joh.to:
Or is that a stupid idea? I just think hacking libpq for something like
this is a huge overkill.
I don't think so only plpgsql
2015-01-26 23:01 GMT+01:00 Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com:
On 1/24/15 2:48 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
with array_offsets - returns a array of offsets
+ entryreturns a offset of first occurrence of some element in a
array. It uses
should be
+ entryreturns the offset of
On 1/24/15 3:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Another idea is to teach Valgrind that whenever a backend reduces its
pin count on a shared buffer to zero, that buffer should become undefined
memory.
paranoia
Shouldn't this technically tie in with ResourceOwners? If a pointer takes the
pin count from 1
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
On 1/23/15 10:16 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
Further, if we want to just get the benefit of parallel I/O, then
I think we can get that by parallelising partition scan where different
table partitions reside on different disk partitions, however that is
a
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
I don't disagree with you about any of that. I don't think you disagree
with my comment either. What I'm not entirely clear on is how consensus
could be reached. Leaving it dormant for the better part of a year
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
In order to get a consensus on moving to a new app I had to explain what
was wrong with the old app. Eventually I had to use strong language to
do so, because nobody was paying attention otherwise. While Magnus's
app isn't
On 1/26/15 5:11 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
The race condition is a problem for pg_start/stop_backup and friends.
In this instance, everything will be shut down when the rsync is
running, so there isn't a timestamp race condition to worry about.
Yeah, I'm more concerned about people that use rsync
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Obvious overheads in float8 comparison include having to check for NaN,
and the fact that DatumGetFloat8 on 64bit doesn't get inlined and forces
a store/load to memory rather than just using a register. Looking at
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Well, I'm still of the view that there's little to lose by having this
remain out-of-core for a release or three. We don't really all agree
on what we want, and
Jim,
* Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote:
When it comes to changing auditing settings, I think that needs to be very
restrictive. Really, it should be more (or differently) restrictive than SU,
so that you can effectively audit your superusers with minimal worries about
superusers
On 1/26/15 4:17 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Any way to reduce the code duplication between the array and non-array
versions? Maybe factor out the operator caching code?
I though about it - but there is different checks, different result processing,
different result type.
I didn't find any
Jim,
* Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote:
On 1/23/15 12:40 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
That said, the whole timestamp race condition in rsync gives me the
heebie-jeebies. For normal workloads maybe it's not that big a deal, but
when dealing with fixed-size data (ie: Postgres blocks)?
Robert,
Didn't stop me. And actually, I didn't face a shitstorm of criticism.
The way I remember it, I got a pretty much unqualified positive
reaction at the time.
Including from me, because it was a huge improvement on what we had
before. As the new app is.
Only later, when you had
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
On 1/24/15 3:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Another idea is to teach Valgrind that whenever a backend reduces its
pin count on a shared buffer to zero, that buffer should become undefined
memory.
paranoia
Shouldn't this technically tie in with
Peter == Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com writes:
Peter What I find particularly interesting about this patch is that it
Peter makes sorting numerics significantly faster than even sorting
Peter float8 values,
I get a much smaller difference there than you do.
Obvious overheads in float8
On 2015-01-26 15:35:44 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Obvious overheads in float8 comparison include having to check for NaN,
and the fact that DatumGetFloat8 on 64bit doesn't get inlined and forces
a
On 1/26/15 5:08 PM, David Steele wrote:
I've written tests to show the rsync vulnerability and another to show
that this can affect a running database. However, to reproduce it
reliably you need to force a checkpoint or have them happening pretty
close together.
Related to this and Stephen's
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com
wrote:
But one backend can effectively pin a buffer more than once, no? If so,
then ISTM there's some risk that code path A pins and forgets to unpin, but
path B accidentally unpins for A.
The danger is that there's a
On 27/01/15 00:51, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-01-26 15:35:44 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Andrew Gierth
and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk wrote:
Obvious overheads in float8 comparison include having to check for NaN,
and the fact that DatumGetFloat8 on 64bit
On 12/23/14 11:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
I think it'd generally be useful to have something like errhidecontext()
akin to errhidestatement() to avoid things like the above.
Under this proposal, do you want to suppress the context/statement
unconditionally or via some hook/variable,
On 2015-01-05 21:43:04 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 06:25:52PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
I can't run tests right now...
What exactly do you want to see with these tests? that's essentially
what I've already benchmarked + some fprintfs?
I want to test two patches
On 12/23/14 12:52 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
* José Luis Tallón (jltal...@adv-solutions.net) wrote:
On 12/23/2014 05:29 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
The capabilities would be:
* MAINTENANCE --- Ability to run
VACUUM [ANALYZE | FREEZE] (but not VACUUM FULL),
ANALYZE (including SET
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
