On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Some of the Windows buildfarm members occasionally fail like this:
>
> LOG: could not bind IPv4 socket: No error
> HINT: Is another postmaster already running on port 64470? If not, wait
a few seconds and retry.
>
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:29 AM, Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 12/13/2015 08:38 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 12/13/2015 06:13 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> >
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:37 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> /me waves hand
>>
>> There are quite a few contributing companies that likely have people that
>> could help out with this in an educated fashion but aren't coders.
>
> Sort of like how they could also have helped
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Dickson S. Guedes wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm wondering whether the #ifdef FORCE_PARALLEL_MODE code [1] was deprecated:
>
> *
> * FIXME: It's assumed that code further down will set parallelModeNeeded
> * to true if a parallel
On 01/10/2016 06:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
[snip]
No arguments with what was written above.
If we had an "issue" tracker rather than a bug tracker, I'd expect a
lot more unproductive bickering.
This I disagree with. It wouldn't be any worse than we have now. An
issue tracker (if it is a
The second part is not necessary, because there is already code that
completes FDW names after "FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER". So this already works.
The other two parts are valid improvements, but they should be done
consistently across commands. So please
- Also complete RENAME TO in ALTER FOREIGN
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 10 January 2016 at 16:32, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 5:13 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> > Avoid pin scan for replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM
>> > Replay of
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> I don't really understand why this should be so. I thought the idea
>> of parallel sort is (roughly) that each worker should read data until
>> it fills work_mem, sort that data, and write a tape. Repeat until no
>>
On 27 December 2015 at 07:04, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> I'd like to present OR-clause support for indexes. Although OR-clauses
> could be supported by bitmapOR index scan it isn't very effective and such
> scan lost any order existing in index. We (with Alexander Korotkov)
>
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Robert Haas
wrote:
> >> I'm not sure why the test for nworkers following the
> >> LaunchParallelWorkers() call doesn't look like this, though:
> >>
> >> /* Set
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:29 AM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 12/13/2015 08:38 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 12/13/2015 06:13 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> >
>>
>>> ...
>>>
>> >
>>
>>> Is there a reason why you can't use existing function
>>>
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2016-01-09 19:05:54 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Right that won't be acceptable, however I think with your latest
> > proposal [1]
>
> Sure, that'd address that problem.
>
>
> > [...] think that idea will help to
>
> > More importantly, I have other, entirely general concerns. Other major
> > RDBMSs have settings that are very similar to max_parallel_degree,
> > with a setting of 1 effectively disabling all parallelism. Both Oracle
> > and SQL Server have settings that they both call the "maximum degree
>
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 8:10 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 2:00 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> I downloaded the official Cygwin packages into a Cygwin instance and checked
>> how they do things. As I rather expected, they do
On 9 January 2016 at 20:28, Stas Kelvich wrote:
> Thanks a lot for your edits, now that patch is much more cleaner.
>
> > Your comments say
> >
> > "In case of crash replay will move data from xlog to files, if that
> hasn't happened before."
> >
> > but I don't see
On 29/12/2015 00:30, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>>
>> I'll prepare a patch for core for the January commitfest, and see if
>> it flies. If not, there is always the extension to fall back to.
>
> Here is an updated patch. I've
On 10 January 2016 at 19:34, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Attached patch fixes a couple of misspellings.
>
Snap!
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKJS1f-AGgQaurTwhY=wkJjspgDcmDUE8Yx03XTXCDz=kae...@mail.gmail.com
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 5:13 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Avoid pin scan for replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM
> Replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM during Hot Standby was previously thought to
> require
> complex interlocking that matched the requirements on the master. This
> required
>
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 12:29 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> The Gather node executor function ExecGather() does this:
> [ code ]
> I'm not sure why the test for nworkers following the
> LaunchParallelWorkers() call doesn't look like this, though:
>
> /* Set up tuple queue
On 12/13/15 9:16 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Please see the attached to address those things (and others) with
> extra fixes for a couple of comments.
I have ported these changes to the new world order and divided them up
into more logical changes that are more clearly documented. Please
check
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> [ redirecting from -docs, which isn't the best place to discuss code fixes ]
>
> Whoever thought this was a good idea:
>
> StaticAssertStmt(NAMEDATALEN <= MAX_LEVENSHTEIN_STRLEN,
> "Levenshtein hinting
On 10 January 2016 at 16:32, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 5:13 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > Avoid pin scan for replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM
> > Replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM during Hot Standby was previously thought to
> require
> >
Hi,
On 01/10/2016 01:08 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
So, this seems to bring reasonable speedup, as long as the selectivity is
below 50%, and the data set is sufficiently large.
What about semijoins? Apparently
Hi,
On 01/10/2016 04:03 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
Also, have you considered Hash join conditions with multiple
attributes as a special case? I'm thinking of cases like this:
Sorry, accidentally fat-fingered my enter
Hi,
On 01/10/2016 05:11 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
Which means the "dim.r" column has 100 different values (0-99) with uniform
distribution. So e.g. "WHERE r < 15" matches 15%.
I think that the use of a
Some of the Windows buildfarm members occasionally fail like this:
LOG: could not bind IPv4 socket: No error
HINT: Is another postmaster already running on port 64470? If not, wait a few
seconds and retry.
WARNING: could not create listen socket for "127.0.0.1"
FATAL: could not create any
On 01/09/2016 01:30 PM, Steve Singer wrote:
On 12/31/2015 06:34 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
I'm not really sure what to do to 'recover' my cluster at this point
so I'll send this off and rebuild my cluster and start over.
I had a setup test1--->test2 (with 2 tables in the default set)
I
On 11 January 2016 at 09:30, Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 01/10/2016 04:03 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> Also, are you aware of this?
>>
>>
>>
Hello,
here's a one-line patch to close a handle leak in pg_SSPI_recvauth().
According to the docs, the token retrieved with
QuerySecurityContextToken() must be closed.
--
Christian
diff --git a/src/backend/libpq/auth.c b/src/backend/libpq/auth.c
new file mode 100644
index 0131bfd..57c2f48
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I'm not sure why the test for nworkers following the
>> LaunchParallelWorkers() call doesn't look like this, though:
>>
>> /* Set up tuple queue readers to read the results. */
>> if (pcxt->nworkers_launched >
I think this would be a useful addition. A couple of problems:
This change in the comment doesn't make sense to me and doesn't seem to
match the code:
- /* If we have COPY [BINARY] , complete it with "TO" or "FROM" */
+ /* If we have COPY|BINARY , complete it with "TO" or "FROM" */
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> With parallel sequential scan, a max_parallel_degree of 8 could result
> in 16 processes scanning in parallel.
I meant a max_worker_processes setting, which of course is different.
Nevertheless, I find it surprising that
Hi all,
I'm wondering whether the #ifdef FORCE_PARALLEL_MODE code [1] was deprecated:
*
* FIXME: It's assumed that code further down will set parallelModeNeeded
* to true if a parallel path is actually chosen. Since the core
* parallelism code isn't committed yet, this
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
> This really sounds like you're looking for leverage to fix one problem
> by finding other problems that you hope to solve with the same hammer.
> That's a recipe for a tool that solves neither problem well and gets
> ignored by
On 12/31/15 10:45 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> I noticed that the filter callback is documented as
> LogicalDecodeChangeCB in the logical decoding docs. Here is one-line
> patch to fix it.
applied to master and 9.5
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> I think this would be a useful addition. A couple of problems:
> This change in the comment doesn't make sense to me and doesn't seem to
> match the code:
> - /* If we have COPY [BINARY] , complete it with "TO" or "FROM" */
> + /* If we have
Hi,
On 12/13/2015 08:38 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
Hi,
On 12/13/2015 06:13 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
...
>
Is there a reason why you can't use existing function
GetFlushRecPtr() in xlog.c?
No, not really. I think I somehow missed that function when writing
the initial version of the patch.
On 1/10/16 8:01 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> The list of commands to allow as the "query" inside the parentheses is
> documented to be: SELECT, VALUES, INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE; and actually
> TABLE should also work. Your list doesn't include all of those.
To be fair, this is actually a recent
38 matches
Mail list logo