Re: [HACKERS] A GUC to prevent leader processes from running subplans?

On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Thomas Munro >> wrote: >> >> I don't think overloading force_parallel_mode is a good idea, but >> having some other GUC for this seems OK to me. Not sur

Re: [HACKERS] GatherMerge misses to push target list

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Rushabh Lathia > wrote: >>> In that case, can you please mark the patch [1] as ready for committer in >>> CF app >> >> Done. > > I think this patch is mostly correct, but I think the change to > planner.c isn't

Re: [HACKERS] possible encoding issues with libxml2 functions

2017-11-11 21:19 GMT+01:00 Noah Misch : > On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 06:10:04PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > Hi > > > > 2017-11-05 4:07 GMT+01:00 Noah Misch : > > > > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 06:06:40AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > > Please, if you can, try it write. I am little bit lost :)

Re: [HACKERS] A GUC to prevent leader processes from running subplans?

On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Thomas Munro > wrote: >> While testing parallelism work I've wanted to be able to prevent >> gather nodes from running the plan in the leader process, and I've >> heard others say the same. One way would be to

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench regression test failure

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, failed Implements feature: not tested Spec compliant: not tested Documentation:not tested This causes the pgbench tests to fail (consistently) with not ok 194 - p

Re: [HACKERS] Simplify ACL handling for large objects and removal of superuser() checks

> On Nov 10, 2017, at 3:58 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > Michael, Tom, > > * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Stephen Frost writes: I'm guessing no, which essentially means that *we* consider access to lo_impo

[HACKERS] BUG #14897: Segfault on statitics SQL request

Hi, Just to show comment from: gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/x86_64/abi/defines.h /* These defines control the building of the list of types to check. There    is a string identifying the type (with a comma after), a size of the type    (also with a comma and an integer for adding to the total a

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise aggregation/grouping

On 10/27/2017 02:01 PM, Jeevan Chalke wrote: Hi, Attached new patch-set here. Changes include: 1. Added separate patch for costing Append node as discussed up-front in the patch-set. 2. Since we now cost Append node, we don't need partition_wise_agg_cost_factor GUC. So removed that. The remaini

Re: [HACKERS] possible encoding issues with libxml2 functions

On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 06:10:04PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Hi > > 2017-11-05 4:07 GMT+01:00 Noah Misch : > > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 06:06:40AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > Please, if you can, try it write. I am little bit lost :) > > > > I'm attaching the patch I desired. Please re

Re: [HACKERS] Simplify ACL handling for large objects and removal of superuser() checks

Stephen Frost writes: > * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: >> Forcing an admin to give full superuser rights to one user willing to >> work only on LOs import and export is a wrong concept. > The problem I have with this is that 'full superuser rights' actually > are being grant

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] A hook for session start

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 12:49 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello > wrote: > > New version attached. > > Thanks. > > +++ b/src/test/modules/Makefile > test_extensions \ > + test_session_hooks \ > test_parser > Better

Re: [HACKERS] parallelize queries containing initplans

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 12:15 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> As mentioned, changed the status of the patch in CF app. > > I spent some time reviewing this patch today and found myself still > quite uncomfortable with the fact that it was adding exec

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Temporal query processing with range types

On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Mike Rylander wrote: > I've also been following this feature with great interest, and would > definitely throw whatever tiny weight I have, sitting out here in the > the peanut gallery, behind accepting the ALIGN and NORMALIZE syntax. > I estimate that about a third

Re: [HACKERS] GatherMerge misses to push target list

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Rushabh Lathia wrote: >> In that case, can you please mark the patch [1] as ready for committer in >> CF app > > Done. I think this patch is mostly correct, but I think the change to planner.c isn't quite right. ordered_rel->reltarget is just a dummy target list

Re: [HACKERS] [Patch] Log SSL certificate verification errors

On 11 Nov 2017, at 6:23 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Currently neither the server side nor the client side SSL certificate verify >> callback does anything, leading to potential hair-tearing-out moments. >> >> The following patch to master implements logging of all certificate >> verification

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] A hook for session start

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 12:49 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: > New version attached. Thanks. +++ b/src/test/modules/Makefile test_extensions \ + test_session_hooks \ test_parser Better if that's in alphabetical order. That's a nit though, so I am switching the pa