Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Catalin Iacob wrote: > On 2/9/16, Tom Lane wrote: > > FWIW, I think it would be a good thing if the NOTIFY statement syntax > were > > not remarkably different from the syntax used in the pg_notify() function > >

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

Another update - separated new internal function to satisfy opr_sanity.sql diff --git a/contrib/tcn/tcn.c b/contrib/tcn/tcn.c index 7352b29..3a6d4f5 100644 --- a/contrib/tcn/tcn.c +++ b/contrib/tcn/tcn.c @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ triggered_change_notification(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

Small update. I had to add one thing in /contrib/tcn/. diff --git a/contrib/tcn/tcn.c b/contrib/tcn/tcn.c index 7352b29..3a6d4f5 100644 --- a/contrib/tcn/tcn.c +++ b/contrib/tcn/tcn.c @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ triggered_change_notification(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS) strcpy_quoted(payload,

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > I wonder if the third argument > should be a boolean however. If we make it 'text, 'send mode', > instead, we could leave some room for more specialization of the > queuing behavior. > > For example, we've had a couple

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > Would it be correct to say that if ALL is specified then a message is queued > no matter what. If DISTINCT is specified then it is only queued if no > message with the same channel and argument is already queued for

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Vik Fearing <v...@2ndquadrant.fr> wrote: > On 02/07/2016 03:42 AM, Filip Rembiałkowski wrote: > You left the duplicate behavior with subtransactions, but didn't mention > it in the documentation. If I do NOTIFY DISTINCT chan, 'msg'; then

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Vik Fearing wrote: >>> There is also no mention in the documentation about what happens if I do: >>> >>> NOTIFY ALL chan, 'msg'; >>> NOTIFY ALL chan, 'msg'; >>> NOTIFY DISTINCT chan, 'msg'; >>> NOTIFY ALL chan, 'msg'; >>> >>>

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

+1 ... and a patch (only adding ALL keyword, no hash table implemented yet). On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Brendan Jurd wrote: > On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 at 12:50 Tom Lane wrote: >> >> Robert Haas writes: >> > I agree with what

[HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

- new GUC in "Statement Behaviour" section, notify_duplicate_removal (default true) Initial discussion in this thread: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAP_rwwmpzk9=sbjrztod05bdctyc43wnknu_m37dygvl4sa...@mail.gmail.com Rationale: for some legitimate use cases, duplicate removal is not

Re: [HACKERS] tiny doc patch

right. On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Filip Rembiałkowski > <filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > (include RLS option in CREATE USER doc) > > > > should go into HEAD and

[HACKERS] tiny doc patch

(include RLS option in CREATE USER doc) should go into HEAD and REL9_5_STABLE diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_user.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_user.sgml index 6c690b3..574604f 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_user.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_user.sgml @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ CREATE

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump LOCK TABLE ONLY question

Please take it as a very naive and basic approach :-) What could go wrong here? diff --git a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c index 36863df..57a50b5 100644 --- a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c +++ b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c @@ -5169,9 +5169,9 @@ getTables(Archive *fout,

[HACKERS] proposal: DROP DATABASE variant that kills active sessions

DROP DATABASE mydb CONCURRENTLY; That would perform forced shutdown 1) reject any new backends to mydb 2) terminate old backends 3) drop db 40 upvotes here http://dba.stackexchange.com/a/11895/3710 inspired me to propose this improvement. If you think it's a good idea please include it as a

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump LOCK TABLE ONLY question

Oct 2 2015 01:19 "Michael Paquier" <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Filip Rembiałkowski < filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I just want to understand why there is LOCK TABLE not LOCK TABLE ONLY. > > It seems

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump LOCK TABLE ONLY question

(sorry I lost the original thread somehow) tgl wrote: > Filip wrote: > > I'm running pg_dump constrained to one schema. It appears that pg_dump runs > > "LOCK TABLE %s IN ACCESS SHARE MODE" for each table. > > Naturally it makes sense, but... > > This schema has a table that serves as parent

[HACKERS] pg_dump LOCK TABLE ONLY question

Hi. I'm running pg_dump constrained to one schema. It appears that pg_dump runs "LOCK TABLE %s IN ACCESS SHARE MODE" for each table. Naturally it makes sense, but... This schema has a table that serves as parent for thousands of child tables (via INHERITS). So effectively, to dump this

[HACKERS] improving \dt++ in psql

Hi I tried to start writing a patch to add Total Size column to \dt++ output. in src/bin/psql/describe.c we have this listTables( const char *tabtypes, const char *pattern, bool verbose, bool showSystem) I was (as a long time Pg user) dead sure that psql really sometimes cares about the

Re: [HACKERS] Fwd: question on foreign key lock

head gives me 2 fails/133 tests regardless of this change. regards, Filip On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Filip Rembiałkowski filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com wrote: maybe this is a better group for this question

[HACKERS] Fwd: question on foreign key lock

open TODO item or suboptimal behavior of postgres. Thanks -- Forwarded message -- From: Filip Rembiałkowski filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com Date: Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:33 PM Subject: question on foreign key lock To: pgsql-general list pgsql-gene...@postgresql.org Hello. Why adding

Re: [HACKERS] Problems with autovacuum and vacuum

2010/12/30 JotaComm jota.c...@gmail.com Hello, Last week I had a serious problem with my PostgreSQL database. My autovacuum is OFF, but in September it started to prevent the transaction wraparoud; however last week the following message appeared continuously in my log: WARNING: database

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] pg.dropped

(continued from -general) W dniu 7 stycznia 2010 22:31 użytkownik Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.comnapisał: Filip Rembiałkowski wrote: After dropping a column from table, there is still entry in pg_attribute fi...@la_dev=# select * from pg_attribute where attrelid = (select oid from

Re: [HACKERS] Distinguish view and table problem

W dniu 19 grudnia 2009 03:20 użytkownik suzhiyang suzhiy...@gmail.comnapisał: Sorry, I've not describe my problem precisely. I mean that I want to get relkind or something from a systable by the programm but not by sql. I don't understand how you can get data from table without using SQL.

Re: [HACKERS] Distinguish view and table problem

question can relate to such hard task. even Oracle and other big players do not have an ideal solution for this... good luck suzhiyang! -- Filip Rembiałkowski JID,mailto:filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com http://filip.rembialkowski.net/

Re: [HACKERS] Distinguish view and table problem

' and n.nspname = 'theschema' -- Filip Rembiałkowski JID,mailto:filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com http://filip.rembialkowski.net/

Re: [HACKERS] strange segfault with 8.3.8

W dniu 7 grudnia 2009 17:43 użytkownik Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.comnapisał: Filip Rembiałkowski wrote: Dec 7 07:24:45 nsXX kernel: postgres[22481]: segfault at 7fda5e1d5000 ip 7fda604553c3 sp 7fffe41faf28 error 4 in libc-2.9.so [7fda603d1000+168000] Dec 7 07:24:45 nsXX

[HACKERS] strange segfault with 8.3.8

(*ERROR: compressed data is corrupt* ). any clues / directions welcome. -- Filip Rembiałkowski JID,mailto:filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com http://filip.rembialkowski.net/

Re: [HACKERS] facing problem with createdb.

to connect without password. Please post such basic questions to pgsql-general mailing list. You should REALLY read some manual pages, especially these: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/reference-client.html good luck! -- Filip Rembiałkowski JID,mailto:filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump restore time and Foreign Keys

subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers -- Filip Rembiałkowski

Re: [HACKERS] URGENT HELP about 'duration' stats

? -- Filip Rembiałkowski ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match

Re: [HACKERS] URGENT HELP about 'duration' stats

2007/10/27, Camilo Porto [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The parallelism happens even if my PC has only one processor? PostgreSQL creates a separate process for each client connection - whether you have one CPU or more. Each query is executed in a separeted Thread? No threads, at least on Unix. Regular

Re: [HACKERS] [FEATURE REQUEST] Streaming Onlinebackup (Maybe OFFTOPIC)

---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org -- Filip Rembiałkowski ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our

Re: [HACKERS] left outer join vs subplan

use b.id = ? as an index condition to retrieve the rows. That's exactly the point... But if we all can see it, maybe it's possible to code it? Cheers, Filip Rembiałkowski ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please