On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:05 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
My experimental branch works just fine (with a variant jjanes_upsert
with subxact looping), until I need to restart an update after a
failed heap_update() that still returned HeapTupleMayBeUpdated
(having super deleted
On 03/02/2015 11:21 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
Hmm. I used a b-tree to estimate the effect that the locking would have in
the UPSERT case, for UPSERT into a table with a b-tree index. But you're
right that for the
2015-03-02 23:07 GMT+09:00 Kouhei Kaigai kai...@ak.jp.nec.com:
I seem to be getting a problem with whole-row references:
# SELECT p.name, c.country, e.pet_name, p FROM pets e INNER JOIN people p on
e.person_id = p.id inner join countries c on p.country_id = c.id;
ERROR: table r has 3 columns
Thanks for reviewing my patch.
2015-03-02 22:50 GMT+09:00 Thom Brown t...@linux.com:
I seem to be getting a problem with whole-row references:
# SELECT p.name, c.country, e.pet_name, p FROM pets e INNER JOIN people p on
e.person_id = p.id inner join countries c on p.country_id = c.id;
ERROR:
Kaigai-san,
The v6 patch was cleanly applied on master branch. I'll rebase my
patch onto it, but before that I have a comment about name of the new
FDW API handler GetForeignJoinPath.
Obviously FDW can add multiple paths at a time, like GetForeignPaths,
so IMO it should be renamed to
On 2015-03-02 16:32:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
The easiest way to solve this would teach ruleutils.c to simply always
attach AS clauses for auto-generated columnnames. Won't look too pretty
though. Does somebody have a better idea?
No, it would
I rebased join push-down patch onto Kaigai-san's Custom/Foreign Join
v6 patch. I posted some comments to v6 patch in this post:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAEZqfEcNvjqq-P=jxnw1pb4t9wvpcporcn7g6cc46jgub7d...@mail.gmail.com
Before applying my v3 patch, please apply Kaigai-san's v6 patch
Hi,
Sorry for the delay, I missed this thread.
Here is a new version of this patch considering Andreas' comments.
On 30/12/2014 03:48, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
- A test fails in create_view.out. I looked some into it and did not see
how this could happen.
***
On 2015-03-03 15:21:24 +, Greg Stark wrote:
Fwiw this concerns me slightly. I'm sure a lot of people are doing
things like kill -HUP `cat .../postmaster.pid` or the equivalent.
postmaster.pid already contains considerably more than just the pid. e.g.
4071
/srv/dev/pgdev-master
1425396089
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-03-03 15:21:24 +, Greg Stark wrote:
Fwiw this concerns me slightly. I'm sure a lot of people are doing
things like kill -HUP `cat .../postmaster.pid` or the equivalent.
postmaster.pid already contains considerably more than just the
Hi,
I've regularly wished we had automated tests that setup HS and then
compare primary/standby at the end to verify replay worked
correctly.
Heikki's page comparison tools deals with some of that verification, but
it's really quite expensive and doesn't care about runtime only
differences. I.e.
Hello,
It would be good to get those problems fixed first. Could you send an updated
patch?
Please find attached updated patch with WAL replay error fixed. The patch
follows chunk ID approach of xlog format.
Following are brief measurement numbers.
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
After sleeping on it, I realised that the code would return '{all}' for
'all' in pg_hba.conf, but '{all}' for 'all'. So it's not exactly
ambiguous, but I don't think it's especially useful for callers.
Hm. Nope, it
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 1:26 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
1. Extend the definition of the postmaster.pid file to add another
line, which will contain the time of the last postmaster configuration
load attempt (might as well be a numeric Unix-style timestamp) and
a boolean indication
Hi all,
I have encountered a performance problem with relatively simple query,
which I think is caused by the overly pesimistic estimates in optimizer. I
have originally run into this issue on a table few GBs large, but it can be
reproduced with much smaller table as follows:
-- Setup main fact
Hi all,
I have encountered a performance problem with relatively simple query,
which I think is caused by the overly pesimistic estimates in optimizer. I
have originally run into this issue on a table few GBs large, but it can be
reproduced with much smaller table as follows:
-- Setup main fact
On 2015-03-03 09:39:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
For this case it seems easiest if we'd make get_rule_expr() (and some of
its helpers) return whether an implicit cast has been added.
Aside from being pretty ugly, that doesn't seem particularly
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 04:55:56PM +0300, Vladimir Borodin wrote:
OK, hmmm. Thanks for testing. It feels like you didn't have your new
master set up for streaming replication when you ran pg_upgrade. Is
that correct? Should I specify that specifically in the instructions?
On 2015-02-25 14:04:55 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I'm pretty sure this will entirely fail if you have a transaction that's
large enough to spill to disk. Calling ReorderBufferIterTXNNext() will
reuse the memory
2 марта 2015 г., в 21:28, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us написал(а):
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:13:17PM +0300, Vladimir Borodin wrote:
20 февр. 2015 г., в 18:21, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us написал(а):
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 09:45:08AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Thanks for the detailed comments.
2015-03-03 18:01 GMT+09:00 Kouhei Kaigai kai...@ak.jp.nec.com:
Hanada-san,
I checked the patch, below is the random comments from my side.
* Context variables
---
Sorry, I might give you a wrong suggestion.
The foreign_glob_cxt and
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
On 03/03/2015 01:43 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-03-02 15:40:27 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
! #max_wal_size = 1GB # in logfile segments
Independent of the rest of the changes, the in logfile
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 03:12:12PM -0500, Magnus Hagander wrote:
# Attempt to identify the file using magic information
mtype = mag.buffer(contents)
if mtype.startswith('text/x-diff'):
a.ispatch = True
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-03-03 09:39:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
And on the third hand ... doing that would really only be robust as long
as you assume that the output will be read by a server using exactly the
same FigureColname() logic as what we are using. So
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:58:28AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Would you suggest removing the automated system completely, or keep it
around
and just make it possible to override it (either by removing the note that
something is a patch, or by making something that's not listed as a patch
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 01:21:53PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 09:20:22AM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I looked into this, and came up with more questions. Why is
On 2015-03-03 11:09:29 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-03-03 09:39:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I think this is the way to go though. There's different extremes we can
go to though - the easiest is to simply remove the attname = ?column?
assignment
On 3 March 2015 at 12:34, Shigeru Hanada shigeru.han...@gmail.com wrote:
I rebased join push-down patch onto Kaigai-san's Custom/Foreign Join
v6 patch. I posted some comments to v6 patch in this post:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 08:38:50AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
2015-02-24 11:47:22.861 MSK WARNING: WAL was generated with wal_level=
minimal, data may be missing
2015-02-24 11:47:22.861 MSK HINT: This happens if you temporarily set
wal_level=minimal without taking a new base backup.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:38:58AM +0300, Vladimir Borodin wrote:
No, you would not need to take a full backup if you use these
instructions.
Although it would be applied to documentation for 9.5 only, are these
instructions applicable for upgrading from 9.3.6 to 9.4.1?
Yes. They
On 3/3/15 9:26 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-03-03 15:21:24 +, Greg Stark wrote:
Fwiw this concerns me slightly. I'm sure a lot of people are doing
things like kill -HUP `cat .../postmaster.pid` or the equivalent.
postmaster.pid already contains considerably more than just the pid.
On March 3, 2015 10:29:43 AM Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-03-03 15:21:24 +, Greg Stark wrote:
Fwiw this concerns me slightly. I'm sure a lot of people are doing
things like kill -HUP `cat .../postmaster.pid` or the equivalent.
postmaster.pid
On March 3, 2015 11:09:29 AM Jim Nasby wrote:
On 3/3/15 9:26 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-03-03 15:21:24 +, Greg Stark wrote:
Fwiw this concerns me slightly. I'm sure a lot of people are doing
things like kill -HUP `cat .../postmaster.pid` or the equivalent.
postmaster.pid
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 01:55:44PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 02/26/2015 01:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
This patch decouples these three things so that they
can changed freely -- but provides no user interface to do so. I think
that trying to only decouple the thing we currently have in
On 3/3/15 11:23 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 01:55:44PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 02/26/2015 01:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
This patch decouples these three things so that they
can changed freely -- but provides no user interface to do so. I think
that trying to only
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:24:38AM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 3/3/15 11:23 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 01:55:44PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 02/26/2015 01:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
This patch decouples these three things so that they
can changed freely -- but
On 3/3/15 11:15 AM, Jan de Visser wrote:
On March 3, 2015 11:09:29 AM Jim Nasby wrote:
On 3/3/15 9:26 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-03-03 15:21:24 +, Greg Stark wrote:
Fwiw this concerns me slightly. I'm sure a lot of people are doing
things like kill -HUP `cat .../postmaster.pid` or
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:09:35AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
On 27-02-2015 AM 03:24, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-02-26 12:15:17 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
On 26-02-2015 AM 05:15, Josh Berkus wrote:
I would love to have it for 9.5, but I guess the
patch isn't nearly baked enough for
On 03/03/2015 10:37 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 03/03/2015 08:31 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/03/2015 10:29 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 03/03/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/03/2015 10:15 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/02/2015 11:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I propose
On 03/03/2015 07:49 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
I'd very much like to add a automated test like this to the tree, but I
don't see wa way to do that sanely without a comparison tool...
We could use a comparison tool anyway. Baron Schwartz was pointing out
that Percona has a comparison tool for
On 03/03/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/03/2015 10:15 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/02/2015 11:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I propose that we remove the comment from max_wal_size, and also remove
the in milliseconds from wal_receiver_timeout and
autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay.
+1
On 3/3/15 9:08 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
After sleeping on it, I realised that the code would return '{all}' for
'all' in pg_hba.conf, but '{all}' for 'all'. So it's not exactly
ambiguous, but I don't think it's
On 03/03/2015 10:15 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/02/2015 11:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I propose that we remove the comment from max_wal_size, and also remove
the in milliseconds from wal_receiver_timeout and
autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay.
+1
Actually, let's be consistent about
On 03/03/2015 08:31 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/03/2015 10:29 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 03/03/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/03/2015 10:15 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/02/2015 11:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I propose that we remove the comment from max_wal_size, and
Naive question: would it be /possible/ to change configuration to accept
percentages, and have a percent mean of existing RAM at startup time?
I ask because most of the tuning guidelines I see suggest setting memory
parameters as a % of RAM available.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Heikki
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
Do we want to remove unit comments from all settings which accept
MB,GB or ms,s,min? There's more than a few. I'd be in favor of
this, but seems like (a) it should be universal, and (b) its own patch.
Meh. Doing this strikes me as a serious
On 03/03/2015 11:57 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
Do we want to remove unit comments from all settings which accept
MB,GB or ms,s,min? There's more than a few. I'd be in favor of
this, but seems like (a) it should be universal, and (b) its own patch.
Meh.
On 03/02/2015 11:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I propose that we remove the comment from max_wal_size, and also remove
the in milliseconds from wal_receiver_timeout and
autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay.
+1
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:00 AM, Jeremy Harris j...@wizmail.org wrote:
Yes; there seemed no advantage to any additional complexity.
The merge consistently performs fewer comparisons than the
quicksort, on random input - and many fewer if there are
any sorted (or reverse-sorted) sections.
On 03/03/2015 10:29 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 03/03/2015 08:21 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/03/2015 10:15 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/02/2015 11:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I propose that we remove the comment from max_wal_size, and also remove
the in milliseconds from
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
What about a separate column that's just the text from pg_hba? Or is that
what you're opposed to?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. There's a rawline field we could
put somewhere but it contains the entire line.
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 05:49:06PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Jim Nasby wrote:
FWIW, what I would find most useful at this point is a way to get
the equivalent of an AFTER STATEMENT trigger that provided all
changed rows in a MV as the result of a statement.
Ah, like
No intention to hijack. Dropping issue for now.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
On 03/03/2015 10:58 AM, Corey Huinker wrote:
Naive question: would it be /possible/ to change configuration to accept
percentages, and have a percent mean of existing RAM at
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Coverity is pointing out that addRangeTableEntry contains the
following code path that does a NULL-pointer check on pstate:
if (pstate != NULL)
pstate-p_rtable = lappend(pstate-p_rtable,
On 3/1/15 2:17 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
Peter, if you have a minute, could you take a look at this thread and
discussion of having TAP tests under src/test/modules which need to
install an extension? I think it's something we certainly want to
support but I'm not sure it's a good idea to just
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Per document,
--
In fast failover, the server is brought up immediately. Any WAL files
in the archive that have not yet been applied
Jim Nasby wrote:
FWIW, what I would find most useful at this point is a way to get the
equivalent of an AFTER STATEMENT trigger that provided all changed rows in a
MV as the result of a statement.
Ah, like
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote:
You can add tests in src/test/modules/dummy_seclabel.
Patch attached to test sec label there, in addition to the other more
standard checks in event_trigger.
These tests seem worthwhile to me.
--
Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote:
but I'd like to have a more robust discussion about what we want the error
reporting to look like rather than just sliding it into this patch.
As an input, I suggest that the error reporting feature should provide a
clue
On 2/28/15 6:32 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
This isn't really /etc/shadow though, this is more like direct access to
the filesystem through the device node- and you'll note that Linux
certainly has got an independent set of permissions for that called the
capabilities system. That's because
On 3/3/15 2:36 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 03/03/2015 02:59 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 03/03/2015 11:57 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
Do we want to remove unit comments from all settings which accept
MB,GB or ms,s,min? There's more than a few. I'd be in favor of
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Haribabu Kommi
kommi.harib...@gmail.com wrote:
+ foreach(line, parsed_hba_lines)
In the above for loop it is better to add check_for_interrupts to
avoid it looping
if the parsed_hba_lines are more.
Updated patch is attached with the addition of
On 3/3/15 8:04 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
Note: The OID alias types don't sctrictly comply the transaction
isolation rules so do not use them where exact transaction
isolation on the values of these types has a
significance. Likewise, since they look as simple constants to
planner
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com
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
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:41 AM, Syed, Rahila rahila.s...@nttdata.com wrote:
Please find attached updated patch with WAL replay error fixed. The patch
follows chunk ID approach of xlog format.
(Review done independently of the chunk_id stuff being good or not,
already gave my opinion on the
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: not tested
Implements feature: tested, failed
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation:not tested
Tom suggested few changes already which I too think author needs to
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Asif Naeem anaeem...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you Michael. I have looked the patch.
Thanks for the review!
Overall logic looks good to me,
I have checked it with MSVC{2013,2008}. It works for MSVC 2013 but fail for
MSVC 2008, I think the condition if ($proj =~
Etsuro Fujita wrote:
While updating the patch, I noticed that in the previous patch, there is
a bug in pushing down parameterized UPDATE/DELETE queries; generic plans
for such queries fail with a can't-happen error. I fixed the bug and
tried to add the regression tests that execute the
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
While this generally works, the usual expectation is that functions
that should be superuser-only have a check in the function rather than
depending on the execute
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
On 3/3/15 11:48 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
It'll be confusing to have different interfaces in one/multiple error cases.
If we simply don't want the code complexity then fine, but I just don't
buy this argument. How could it possibly be confusing?
On March 3, 2015 04:57:58 PM Jim Nasby wrote:
On 3/3/15 11:48 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
I'm saying that you'll need a way to notice that a reload was processed
or not. And that can't really be the message itself, there has to be
some other field; like the timestamp Tom proposes.
Ahh,
Jim,
* Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote:
On 3/3/15 5:22 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
The
problem with the role attribute approach is that they aren't inheirted
the way GRANTs are, which means you can't have a backup role that is
then granted out to users, you'd have to set a BACKUP
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
I think the combine function is not actually a property of the
aggregate, but a property of the transition function. If two aggregates
have the same transition function, they
18.02.2015, 01:49, Jim Nasby kirjoitti:
On 2/17/15 4:39 PM, Oskari Saarenmaa wrote:
10.06.2013, 17:51, Dimitri Fontaine kirjoitti:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
In any case, no packager is going to ship an insecure-by-default
configuration, which is what Dimitri seems to be
On 2015/02/16 12:03, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I'll update the patch.
While updating the patch, I noticed that in the previous patch, there is
a bug in pushing down parameterized UPDATE/DELETE queries; generic plans
for such queries fail with a can't-happen error. I fixed the bug and
tried to add
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Tomas Vondra tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 28.1.2015 05:03, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
At 2015-01-27 17:00:27 -0600, jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
Otherwise, the code looks OK to me. Now, there are a few features I'd
like to have for production use
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
-1. If that policy exists at all, it's a BAD policy, because it
prevents users from changing the permissions using DDL. I think the
superuser check should be inside the function, when, for example, it
masks some of the
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Tomas Vondra
tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
This seems to happen because ordered_set_startup() calls
tuplesort_begin_datum() when (use_tuples == true), which only sets
'onlyKey' and
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 2/20/15 3:09 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
The 'combine' function gets two such 'state' values, while transition
gets 'state' + next value.
I think the combine function is not actually a property of the
aggregate, but a
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
That seems to make sense to me. Committed.
Thanks.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 3/3/15 5:13 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
On 3/3/15 11:48 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
It'll be confusing to have different interfaces in one/multiple error cases.
If we simply don't want the code complexity then fine, but I just don't
buy this argument. How
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:17 AM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
I can make these changes if you want.
Personally I'm just not convinced this is worth it. It makes the
catalogs harder for people to read and use and only benefits people
who have users named all or databases named all,
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Haribabu Kommi
kommi.harib...@gmail.com wrote:
Out of curiosity, regarding the result materialize code addition, Any
way the caller of hba_settings function
ExecMakeTableFunctionResult also stores the results in tuple_store.
Is there any advantage
doing it in
SnapBuildCommitTxn() has what I gather is an obsolete reference to
SnapshotNow(). Attached patch corrects this.
--
Peter Geoghegan
diff --git a/src/backend/replication/logical/snapbuild.c b/src/backend/replication/logical/snapbuild.c
index e911453..ff5ff26 100644
---
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
It's not a documented policy but it's certainly what a whole slew of
functions *do*. Including pg_start_backup, pg_stop_backup,
pg_switch_xlog, pg_rotate_logfile, pg_create_restore_point,
pg_xlog_replay_pause, lo_import, lo_export, and
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I find your statement that this is a pre-existing issue in
tuplesort_begin_datum() to be pretty misleading, unless what you mean
by it is pre-existing since November, when an earlier patch by Peter
Geoghegan changed the
On 3/3/15 5:22 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
The
problem with the role attribute approach is that they aren't inheirted
the way GRANTs are, which means you can't have a backup role that is
then granted out to users, you'd have to set a BACKUP role attribute
for every role added.
Yeah, but you'd
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:41:20AM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
Wouldn't it need attno info too, so all 3 orderings?
Uh, what is the third ordering? Physical, logical, and ? It already
gets information about dropped columns, if that is the third one.
attnum; used in other catalogs to
On 03/03/2015 05:07 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:17 AM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
I can make these changes if you want.
Personally I'm just not convinced this is worth it. It makes the
catalogs harder for people to read and use and only benefits people
who
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:18 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Haribabu Kommi
kommi.harib...@gmail.com wrote:
Out of curiosity, regarding the result materialize code addition, Any
way the caller of hba_settings function
ExecMakeTableFunctionResult also
On 3/3/15 3:34 PM, David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 05:49:06PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Jim Nasby wrote:
FWIW, what I would find most useful at this point is a way to get
the equivalent of an AFTER STATEMENT trigger that provided all
changed rows in a MV as the result of a
On 3/3/15 12:57 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
What about a separate column that's just the text from pg_hba? Or is that what
you're opposed to?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. There's a rawline field we could
put
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
On further review I've made a few more changes attached.
I think we should change the column names to users and databases
to be clear they're lists and also to avoid the user SQL reserved
word.
I removed the dependency on
On 3/3/15 11:48 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-03-03 11:43:46 -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
It's certainly better than now, but why put DBAs through an extra step for
no reason?
Because it makes it more complicated than it already is? It's nontrivial
to capture the output, escape it to somehow fit
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
The discussion I'm having with Peter on another thread is a very similar
case that should be looping in, which is if we should continue to have
any superuser check on updating catalog tables. He is advocating
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
toast_save_datum() is called with a heap_insert() call before heap
insertion for the tuple proper. We're relying on the assumption that
if there is no immediate super deletion record, things are fine. We
cannot
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2015-02-20 22:19:54 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 2/20/15 8:46 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Or what about just doing CSV?
I don't think that would actually address the problems.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
- set up basic scaffolding for TAP tests in src/bin/pg_dump
Agreed.
- write a Perl function that can create an extension on the fly, given
name, C code, SQL code
I am perplex about that. Where would the SQL code or C
It feels like MD5 has accumulated enough problems that we need to start
looking for another way to store and pass passwords. The MD5 problems
are:
1) MD5 makes users feel uneasy (though our usage is mostly safe)
2) The per-session salt sent to the client is only 32-bits, meaning
that it is
Obviously FDW can add multiple paths at a time, like GetForeignPaths,
so IMO it should be renamed to GetForeignJoinPaths, with plural form.
In addition to that, new member of RelOptInfo, fdw_handler, should be
initialized explicitly in build_simple_rel.
Please see attached a patch for
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
