Re: [HACKERS] VS 2015 support in src/tools/msvc

Michael Paquier wrote: > - 0001, as mentioned by Petr upthread, psed is removed from the core > distribution of Perl in 5.22, so when installing ActivePerl it is not > possible to create probes.h, and the code compilation would fail. I > bumped into that so here is a patch. What I am proposing

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

Corey Huinker wrote: > So, for me, RAW is the right solution, or at least *a* right solution. Questions on how to extract from a bytea column come up on a regular basis, as in [1] [2] [3], or [4] a few days ago, and so far the answers are to encode the contents in text and decode them in

Re: [HACKERS] VS 2015 support in src/tools/msvc

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > I still need to dig into that in more details. For the time being the > patch attached is useful IMO to plug in VS 2015 with the existing > infrastructure. So if anybody has a Windows environment, feel free to >

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw vs. force_parallel_mode on ppc

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 12:46 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> A couple of my colleagues have been looking into this. It's not >> entirely clear to me what's going on here yet, but it looks like the >> stats get there if you wait long

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Well, my point is that no such path would have been generated if the > subquery hadn't had an internal reason to consider sorting on b.id. > The "accidental" part of this is that the subquery's GROUP BY key > matches what the

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

On 4 March 2016 at 13:41, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Alexander Korotkov >> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Amit Kapila

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

On 4 March 2016 at 13:35, Thom Brown wrote: > On 4 March 2016 at 04:05, Amit Kapila wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Amit Kapila >>>

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Amit Kapila >> wrote: >> >>> > I think the wait event types should be

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

On 4 March 2016 at 04:05, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Amit Kapila >> wrote: >> >> I wouldn't bother tinkering with it at this point. The

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Amit Kapila > wrote: > >> > I think the wait event types should be documented - and the wait >> > events too, perhaps. >> > >> >> As discussed upthread, I

Re: [HACKERS] improving GROUP BY estimation

On Thu, 2016-03-03 at 11:42 -0800, Mark Dilger wrote: > > On Mar 3, 2016, at 11:27 AM, Alexander Korotkov > > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Tomas Vondra > > wrote: > > So yes, each estimator works great for exactly the

Re: [HACKERS] Equivalent of --enable-tap-tests in MSVC scripts

On 2 March 2016 at 10:19, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Andrew Dunstan > wrote: > > On 03/01/2016 08:00 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> As of now the MSVC scripts control if TAP tests are enabled or not > >> using a

Re: [HACKERS] TAP / recovery-test fs-level backups, psql enhancements etc

On 4 March 2016 at 20:35, Craig Ringer wrote: > Fix attached. > > Apparently I need a "remind me if you see the word attach in an email" plugin. Sigh. -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &

Re: [HACKERS] TAP / recovery-test fs-level backups, psql enhancements etc

On 4 March 2016 at 05:08, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Okay, so far I have pushed 0001 and 0002 squashed (commit 5bec1ad4648), > 0003 (commit 7d9a4301c08), 0005 and 0006 squashed (commit 2c83f435a3de). > In the last one I chose to rename your psql_check to safe_psql and >

Re: [HACKERS] Greeting for coming back, and where is PostgreSQL going

Tasunakawa-san, Welcome back to PostgreSQL! -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp > Hello, > > > Long time no see. I'm back. > > Although you may not remember me, I was certainly here more than a year ago, >

Re: [HACKERS] ExecGather() + nworkers

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Amit Kapila > wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Haribabu Kommi < > kommi.harib...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:19

Re: [HACKERS] ExecGather() + nworkers

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Haribabu Kommi > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Amit Kapila >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> > Changed the code such that

Re: [HACKERS] Greeting for coming back, and where is PostgreSQL going

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:20 PM, MauMau wrote: > Long time no see. I'm back. This is a good surprise. > Although you may not remember me, I was certainly here more than a year ago, > submitting tiny patches for bug fixes and trivial functionalities, and > reviewing/testing

Re: [HACKERS] ExecGather() + nworkers

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Amit Kapila > wrote: > >> > > > > Changed the code such that nworkers_launched gets used wherever > > appropriate instead of nworkers. This includes

[HACKERS] Greeting for coming back, and where is PostgreSQL going

Hello, Long time no see. I'm back. Although you may not remember me, I was certainly here more than a year ago, submitting tiny patches for bug fixes and trivial functionalities, and reviewing/testing patches from others. That was a fruitful and fun time for me. Thank you a lot for

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

Hi, On 03/03/2016 01:10 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Hmmm ... I'm now wondering about the "measurement error" theory. I tried to repeat this measurement locally, focusing on the select-only number since that should have a higher ratio of planning time to execution. Test setup: cassert-off build pgbench

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > I think the wait event types should be documented - and the wait > > events too, perhaps. > > > > As discussed upthread, I have added documentation for all the possible > wait events and an example. Some of the

Re: [HACKERS] raw output from copy

Hi Pavel 27/02/16 10:26, Pavel Stehule пишет: Hi 2015-08-06 10:37 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule >: Hi, Psql based implementation needs new infrastructure (more than few lines) Missing: * binary mode support *

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench small bug fix

> Attached is a v3 which test integers more logically. I'm a lazy > programmer who tends to minimize the number of key strokes. Well. From what I can tell this patch is Ready for Committer. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your

Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

Hello, Sorry for long, hard-to-read writings in advance.. At Thu, 3 Mar 2016 23:30:49 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote in > Hi, > > Thank you so much for reviewing this patch! > > All review comments

<    1   2