[HACKERS] Some never executed code regarding the table sync worker

Hi all, After launched the sync table worker it enters ApplyWorkerMain function. And then the table sync worker calls LogicalRepSyncTableStart to synchronize the target table. In LogicalRepSyncTableStart, finish_sync_worker is always called and then the table sync worker process always exits

Re: [HACKERS] Somebody has not thought through subscription locking considerations

Masahiko Sawada writes: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> On 30/03/17 07:25, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I await with interest an explanation of what "VACUUM FULL pg_class" is >>> doing trying to acquire ShareRowExclusiveLock

Re: [HACKERS] Allow to specify #columns in heap/index_form_tuple

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > The covering indexes patch [1] really needs a version of > heap_form_tuple/index_form_tuple that allows to specify the number of > columns in the to-be generated tuple. Previously the faster expression > evaluation stuff

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Transaction traceability - txid_status(bigint)

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:08 AM, David Steele wrote: > On 3/31/17 10:46 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: >> Patches 1 and 2 were the key parts and thanks to Robert's helpful >> review, advice and edits they're committed now. >> >> Committed, done. Yay. > > Excellent. I have marked

Re: [HACKERS] REFERENCES privilege should not be symmetric (was Re: [GENERAL] Postgres Permissions Article)

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> In short, it seems like this statement in the docs is correctly describing >>> our code's behavior, but

[HACKERS] Allow to specify #columns in heap/index_form_tuple

Hi, The covering indexes patch [1] really needs a version of heap_form_tuple/index_form_tuple that allows to specify the number of columns in the to-be generated tuple. Previously the faster expression evaluation stuff could also have benefited form the same for both forming and deforming

Re: [HACKERS] delta relations in AFTER triggers

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > New version attached. It needs some of these problem cases added to > the testing, and a mention in the docs that only C and plpgsql > triggers can use the feature so far. I'll add those tomorrow. Done and attached.

Re: [HACKERS] Variable substitution in psql backtick expansion

Corey Huinker writes: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> single-quoted according to Unix shell conventions. (So the >> processing would be a bit different from what it is for the >> same notation in SQL contexts.) > +1 Here's a

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 5:20 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > On 2017/03/21 18:40, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > >> Ok, I'll update the patch. One thing I'd like to revise in addition to >> that is (1) add to JoinPathExtraData a flag member to indicate whether >> to give the FDW

Re: [HACKERS] delta relations in AFTER triggers

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > my only other comment would be a bikeshed issue: > Enr isn't a great name for a struct. I know, but EphemeralNamedRelation starts to get kinda long, especially when making the normal sorts of concatenations.

Re: [HACKERS] [bug fix] Savepoint-related statements terminates connection

Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > Please add this to the next commitfest. If this cannot be reproduced in 9.6, then it must be added to the Open Items wiki page instead. -- Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: pageinspect / add page_checksum and bt_page_items(bytea)

Hi, On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:38 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > > > On 03/24/2017 04:27 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> >> On 3/17/17 18:35, Tomas Vondra wrote: >>> >>> On 03/17/2017 05:23 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I'm struggling to find a good way to share

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw: support parameterized foreign joins

Hello, On 31.03.2017 18:47, David Steele wrote: Hi Arthur. On 3/23/17 8:45 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: Done. Also, I added regression tests and revised code and comments a bit. (As for create_foreignscan_path(), I haven't done anything about that yet.) Please find attached a new version

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw: support parameterized foreign joins

Hi Arthur. On 3/23/17 8:45 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: On 2017/03/21 18:38, Etsuro Fujita wrote: On 2017/03/16 22:23, Arthur Zakirov wrote: Can you rebase the patch? It is not applied now. Ok, will do. Thanks for the report! Done. Also, I added regression tests and revised code and

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] reorder tablespaces in basebackup tar stream for backup_label

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 02:11:44PM +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Fri, 31 Mar 2017 13:37:38 +0900, Michael Paquier > wrote in >

[HACKERS] pg_partman 3.0.0 - real-world usage of native partitioning and a case for native default

I've gotten pg_partman working with native partitioning already so I can hopefully have things ready to work when 10 is released. I've got a branch on github with this version for anyone to test and I'll hopefully have this released in the next few weeks after I finish some more testing myself.

Re: [HACKERS] REFERENCES privilege should not be symmetric (was Re: [GENERAL] Postgres Permissions Article)

Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> In short, it seems like this statement in the docs is correctly describing >> our code's behavior, but said behavior is wrong and should be changed. >> I'd propose fixing it like

Re: [HACKERS] multivariate statistics (v25)

On 31 March 2017 at 21:18, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI < horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > > When adding these two parameters I had 2nd thoughts that the > "tryextstats" > > was required at all. We could just have this controlled by if the rel is > a > > base rel of kind RTE_RELATION. I ended up

Re: [HACKERS] Variable substitution in psql backtick expansion

"Daniel Verite" writes: > ISTM that expr is too painful to use to be seen as the > idiomatic way of achieving comparison in psql. I'm not proposing it as the best permanent solution, just saying that having this in v10 is a lot better than having nothing in v10. And we

Re: [HACKERS] Variable substitution in psql backtick expansion

Corey Huinker writes: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> single-quoted according to Unix shell conventions. (So the >> processing would be a bit different from what it is for the >> same notation in SQL contexts.) > Any reason we

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Transaction traceability - txid_status(bigint)

On 3/31/17 10:46 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: Patches 1 and 2 were the key parts and thanks to Robert's helpful review, advice and edits they're committed now. Committed, done. Yay. Excellent. I have marked this a "Committed" by Robert. One down... -- -David da...@pgmasters.net -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq

Hi, On 3/30/17 2:12 PM, Daniel Verite wrote: Vaishnavi Prabakaran wrote: Hmm, With batch mode, after sending COPY command to server(and server started processing the query and goes into COPY state) , client does not immediately read the result , but it keeps sending other queries to

Re: [HACKERS] Other formats in pset like markdown, rst, mediawiki

On Friday, March 31, 2017 7:17:08 AM CEST, Jan Michálek wrote: 2017-03-30 21:53 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule : 2017-03-29 20:11 GMT+02:00 Jan Michálek : 2017-03-27 19:41 GMT+02:00 Jan Michálek : 2017-03-23 17:26

[HACKERS] Re: PATCH: pageinspect / add page_checksum and bt_page_items(bytea)

On 3/29/17 11:08 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: The attached patch is the best I came up with - it essentially shares just the tuple-forming part, which is exactly the same in both cases. I have marked this submission "Needs Review". -- -David da...@pgmasters.net -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Transaction traceability - txid_status(bigint)

On 31 Mar. 2017 22:31, "David Steele" wrote: On 3/25/17 12:12 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I'm wondering if this is a perl version/platform issue around >> >> $tx->pump until $stdout =~ /[[:digit:]]+[\r\n]$/; >> >> where we're not recognising the required output from

Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

On 3/29/17 8:13 AM, Rahila Syed wrote: Thanks for reporting. I have identified the problem and have a fix. Currently working on allowing adding a partition after default partition if the default partition does not have any conflicting rows. Will update the patch with both of these. The CF has

Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > I was thinking that the status of this patch is still "Needs review" > because I sent latest version patch[1]. I think you're right. I took a look at this today. I think there is some problem with the design of

Re: [HACKERS] BRIN cost estimate

On 3/26/17 7:44 AM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: If we want to have a variable which stores the number of ranges, then I think numRanges is better than numBlocks. I can't imagine many people would disagree there. I renamed it with other two. At the very least please write a comment to explain this

Re: [HACKERS] Variable substitution in psql backtick expansion

2017-03-31 15:00 GMT+02:00 Daniel Verite : > Tom Lane wrote: > > > Thoughts? > > ISTM that expr is too painful to use to be seen as the > idiomatic way of achieving comparison in psql. > > Among its disadvantages, it won't work on windows, and its > interface is

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Transaction traceability - txid_status(bigint)

On 3/25/17 12:12 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I'm wondering if this is a perl version/platform issue around $tx->pump until $stdout =~ /[[:digit:]]+[\r\n]$/; where we're not recognising the required output from psql when we get it. What's in src/test/recovery/tmp_check/log/regress_log_011*

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > > 2. WARM is a non-optional feature which touches the on-disk format. > There is nothing more dangerous than that. If hash indexes have bugs, > people can avoid those bugs by not using them; there are good reasons >

Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.

On 3/29/17 2:23 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:23 AM, David Steele wrote: On 3/23/17 1:54 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Peter Geoghegan

[HACKERS] [PATCH] Remove unused argument in btree_xlog_split

Hi, Turned out that there is an unused argument `isroot` in `btree_xlog_split` procedure. Suggested patch fixes it. This issue was discovered by Anastasia Lubennikova, coding is done by me. -- Best regards, Aleksander Alekseev diff --git a/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtxlog.c

Re: [HACKERS] Fix obsolete comment in GetSnapshotData

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:00 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > There's an outdated reference to GetOldestXmin(true, true) in > GetSnapshotData. It hasn't had that call signature for a long while > now. Update the comment to reflect the current signature. > > diff --git

Re: [HACKERS] Other formats in pset like markdown, rst, mediawiki

2017-03-31 12:01 GMT+02:00 Pierre Ducroquet : > On Friday, March 31, 2017 7:17:08 AM CEST, Jan Michálek wrote: > >> >> >> 2017-03-30 21:53 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule : >> >> >> 2017-03-29 20:11 GMT+02:00 Jan Michálek : >> >> >>

Re: [HACKERS] Multiple false-positive warnings from Valgrind

Hi Kyotaro, > > And it seems to me that this is caused by the routines of OpenSSL. > > When building without --with-openssl, using the fallback > > implementations of SHA256 and RAND_bytes I see no warnings generated > > by scram_build_verifier... I think it makes most sense to discard that > >

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication launcher crash on buildfarm

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > Sigh, forgot git add for the docs, so one more try... +if (strncmp(worker->bgw_library_name, "postgres", 8) != 0) +return NULL; I think that's not right. You don't want to match

Re: [HACKERS] REFERENCES privilege should not be symmetric (was Re: [GENERAL] Postgres Permissions Article)

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > In short, it seems like this statement in the docs is correctly describing > our code's behavior, but said behavior is wrong and should be changed. > I'd propose fixing it like that in HEAD; I'm not sure if the back branches >

Re: [HACKERS] strange parallel query behavior after OOM crashes

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Kuntal Ghosh wrote: > 2. the server restarts automatically, initialize > BackgroundWorkerData->parallel_register_count and > BackgroundWorkerData->parallel_terminate_count in the shared memory. > After that, it calls

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel query execution with SPI

On 31.03.2017 13:48, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote: It is possible to execute query concurrently using SPI? If so, how it can be enforced? I tried to open cursor with CURSOR_OPT_PARALLEL_OK flag but it doesn't help:

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > So Andres says defer this, but Robert says "more review", which is > more than just deferral. > > We have some risky things in this release such as Hash Indexes, > function changes. I perfectly understand that perception

Re: [HACKERS] Variable substitution in psql backtick expansion

Tom Lane wrote: > Thoughts? ISTM that expr is too painful to use to be seen as the idiomatic way of achieving comparison in psql. Among its disadvantages, it won't work on windows, and its interface is hard to work with due to the necessary quoting of half its operators, and the

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6

On 2017/03/30 20:16, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: The patch applies cleanly, compiles. make check in regress as well as postgres_fdw works fine. Here are few comments Thanks for the review! local-join should be local join. OK, done. The comments should explain why. +/* Should be

Re: [HACKERS] [bug fix] Savepoint-related statements terminates connection

Please add this to the next commitfest. I think there's some misunderstanding between exec_simple_query() and the way we manage transaction block state machine. In exec_simple_query() 952 * We'll tell PortalRun it's a top-level command iff there's exactly one 953 * raw parsetree. If

Re: [HACKERS] TPC-H Q20 from 1 hour to 19 hours!

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Tomas Vondra >> wrote: >>> What is however strange is that changing

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

On 30 March 2017 at 16:50, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote: >> On 2017-03-30 16:43:41 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote: >>> Looks like OID conflict to me.. Please try rebased set. >> >> Pavan, Alvaro, everyone: I

Re: [HACKERS] Variable substitution in psql backtick expansion

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > single-quoted according to Unix shell conventions. (So the > processing would be a bit different from what it is for the > same notation in SQL contexts.) > +1 Having been bit by format '%L' prepending an 'E' to any string

Re: [HACKERS] TPC-H Q20 from 1 hour to 19 hours!

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Tomas Vondra > wrote: >> What is however strange is that changing max_parallel_workers_per_gather >> affects row estimates *above* the Gather node. That

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel query execution with SPI

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik > wrote: >> It is possible to execute query concurrently using SPI? >> If so, how it can be enforced? >> I tried to open cursor with

Re: [HACKERS] Supporting huge pages on Windows

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:05 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: > From: Amit Kapila [mailto:amit.kapil...@gmail.com] >> The latest patch looks good to me apart from one Debug message, so I have >> marked it as Ready For Committer. > > Thank you so much! > > >> +

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote: > Well, > I don't know how can we estimate the quality of the review or testing. > The patch was reviewed by many people. > Here are those who marked themselves as reviewers on this and previous >

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel query execution with SPI

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote: > It is possible to execute query concurrently using SPI? > If so, how it can be enforced? > I tried to open cursor with CURSOR_OPT_PARALLEL_OK flag but it doesn't help: > query is executed by single backend

Re: [HACKERS] LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines

On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 12:29 AM, Alexander Korotkov < a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 11:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Alexander Korotkov writes: >> > I moved PPC implementation of pg_atomic_fetch_mask_add_u32() into >> >

Re: [HACKERS] ANALYZE command progress checker

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 6:19 PM, vinayak wrote: > > On 2017/03/30 17:39, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 5:38 PM, vinayak >> wrote: >>> >>> On 2017/03/25 4:30, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Mar 24, 2017

Re: [HACKERS] show "aggressive" or not in autovacuum logs

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Hello, it would be too late but I'd like to propose this because > this cannot be back-patched. > > > In autovacuum logs, "%u skipped frozen" shows the number of pages > skipped by ALL_FROZEN only in

Re: [HACKERS] Foreign tables don't enforce the partition constraint

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > We don't enforce the constraints defined on foreign tables in ExecInsert() > and ExecUpdate(). (COPY FROM does not support foreign tables at all.) > Since partition constraints are enforced using

Re: [HACKERS] multivariate statistics (v25)

On 31 March 2017 at 21:18, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI < horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > Hello, > > At Fri, 31 Mar 2017 03:03:06 +1300, David Rowley < > david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote in T5JLce5ynCi1vvezXxX=w...@mail.gmail.com> > > FWIW, I tries this. This

Re: [HACKERS] Something broken around FDW connection close

On 31 March 2017 at 16:32, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > On 2017/03/31 8:28, David Rowley wrote: > >> create table t (a int, b int); >> insert into t1 select x/100,x/100 from generate_series(1,10) x; >> create extension if not exists postgres_fdw; >> create server

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

Hi Amit, Thanks for the updated patches. On 2017/03/28 19:12, Amit Khandekar wrote: > On 27 March 2017 at 13:05, Amit Khandekar wrote: >>> Also, there are a few places in the documentation mentioning that such >>> updates cause error, >>> which will need to be updated.

Re: [HACKERS] Partitioned tables and relfilenode

At Fri, 31 Mar 2017 16:17:05 +0900, Amit Langote wrote in <2dec1acb-6e2f-5aa5-0e26-fcc172ce9...@lab.ntt.co.jp> > Horiguchi-san, > > On 2017/03/31 15:50, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > At Thu, 30 Mar 2017 20:58:35 +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > >> Updated patch

Re: [HACKERS] multivariate statistics (v25)

Hello, At Fri, 31 Mar 2017 03:03:06 +1300, David Rowley wrote in > On 25 March 2017 at 07:35, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > As I said in another thread, I pushed parts

Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0

Thanks for the feedback. I will look at it when I get the time. On 03/31/2017 08:27 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: - Do a per-index rebuild and not a per-relation rebuild for concurrent indexing. Doing a per-relation reindex has the disadvantage that many objects need to be created at the same

[HACKERS] Foreign tables don't enforce the partition constraint

We don't enforce the constraints defined on foreign tables in ExecInsert() and ExecUpdate(). (COPY FROM does not support foreign tables at all.) Since partition constraints are enforced using ExecConstraints() which is not called for foreign tables, they will not be checked if one inserts

Re: [HACKERS] Allow interrupts on waiting standby

From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael.paqu...@gmail.com] > Oops, sorry for that, I quite mess up with this patch. The WaitLatch() call > should still have WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH so as it can leave earlier, but yes > I agree with your analysis that HandleStartupProcInterrupts() as this is > part of

[HACKERS] Parallel query execution with SPI

Hi hackers, It is possible to execute query concurrently using SPI? If so, how it can be enforced? I tried to open cursor with CURSOR_OPT_PARALLEL_OK flag but it doesn't help: query is executed by single backend while the same query been launched at top level uses parallel plan:

Re: [HACKERS] Partitioned tables and relfilenode

Horiguchi-san, On 2017/03/31 15:50, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Thu, 30 Mar 2017 20:58:35 +0900, Amit Langote wrote: >> Updated patch attached. > > Thank you. > > - Applies cleanly on master (f90d23d) > - Compiled without error > - Code seems fine. > - Documentaion seems fine.. for me. > -

[HACKERS] [bug fix] Savepoint-related statements terminates connection

Hello, I found a trivial bug that terminates the connection. The attached patch fixes this. PROBLEM Savepoint-related statements in a multi-command query terminates the connection unexpectedly, as follows. $ psql -d postgres -c "SELECT 1; SAVEPOINT

Re: [HACKERS] Implementation of SASLprep for SCRAM-SHA-256

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:01 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> This way, we can be sure that two UTf-8 strings are considered as >> equivalent in a SASL exchange, in our case we care about the

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > I am not sure if we can consider it as completely synthetic because we > might see some similar cases for json datatypes. Can we once try to > see the impact when the same test runs from multiple clients? For > your

Re: [HACKERS] Typo in libpq

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > There seems to be a typo in libpq as per attached, “..we will loose error > messages” should probably be “..we will lose error messages”. > Applied, thanks. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work:

Re: [HACKERS] gitlab post-mortem: pg_basebackup waiting for checkpoint

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Michael Banck wrote: > Hi, > > Am Montag, den 27.02.2017, 16:20 +0100 schrieb Magnus Hagander: > > On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 9:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Is there an argument for back-patching this? > > > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Partitioned tables and relfilenode

At Thu, 30 Mar 2017 20:58:35 +0900, Amit Langote wrote in > Thanks for the review. > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > At Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:24:16 +0900, Amit Langote

Re: [HACKERS] Allow interrupts on waiting standby

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: > I think you can call HandleStartupProcInterrupts() here, instead of checking > postmaster death. Oops, sorry for that, I quite mess up with this patch. The WaitLatch() call should still have

Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:13 AM, Michael Banck wrote: > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 03:11:50AM +0100, Andreas Karlsson wrote: >> Spotted one of my TODO comments there so I have attached a patch where I >> have cleaned up that function. I also fixed the the code to properly

Re: [HACKERS] Somebody has not thought through subscription locking considerations

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 30/03/17 07:25, Tom Lane wrote: >> I noticed this failure report: >> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=dangomushi=2017-03-29%2019%3A45%3A27 >> >> in which we find >> >> *** >>

<    1   2