On 26 June 2013 20:57, Szymon Guz mabew...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 June 2013 20:55, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
On 06/26/2013 12:29 AM, Szymon Guz wrote:
OK, so I think this patch can be committed, I will change the status.
Can we have a full review before you mark it ready for
Hello
remastered version
Regards
Pavel
2013/6/26 Jeevan Chalke jeevan.cha...@enterprisedb.com:
Hi Pavel
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello Tom
you did comment
! * Non-null argument had better be an array.
The parser
On Mon, 2013-06-24 at 20:34 -0400, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
This patch is in the current CommitFest, does it still need to be
reviewed? If so, I notice that the version in pgfoundry's CVS is
rather different than the version the patch seems to have been built
against (presumably the
I was intending to suggest that much of what Robins has submitted
doesn't belong in the core regression tests, but could usefully be put
into an optional set of big regression tests. We already have a
numeric_big test in that spirit. What seems to be lacking is an
organizational principle for
Is it enough to provide the description in the commitfest app, or is that
better to send an email and provide link in commitfest?
Better to do it here, on the list.
This is a patch only with regression tests, is that enough to write
something like: This patch applies cleanly on trunk code.
On 06/26/2013 12:02 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
See the entry for foreign key locks:
Prevent non-key-field row updates from locking foreign key rows (Álvaro
Herrera, Noah Misch, Andres Freund, Alexander Shulgin, Marti Raudsepp)
I am the author of most of the code, yet I chose to add Noah
On 06/26/2013 12:08 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
I have been suggesting something upon that line in some of the reviews
I've posted about Robins non regression tests, if they were to be
rejected on the basis that they add a few seconds for checks. They are
well made to test corner cases quite
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:01 AM, k...@rice.edu k...@rice.edu wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 03:47:43PM +0200, Markus Wanner wrote:
On 06/25/2013 11:52 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
At least until we have parallel
query execution. At *that* point this all changes.
Can you elaborate on
On 26 June 2013 21:10, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Is it enough to provide the description in the commitfest app, or is that
better to send an email and provide link in commitfest?
Better to do it here, on the list.
This is a patch only with regression tests, is that enough to
On 6/26/13 7:03 AM, Szymon Guz wrote:
I've checked the patch, everything looks great.
I've attached it to this email with changed name, just for consistent
naming in commitfest app.
Could the setup of the decimal.Decimal constructor be moved into
PLyDecimal_FromNumeric() and kept in a static
On 26 June 2013 19:32, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:34:52AM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
I've been playing around with the idea of an aggregate that computes
the sum of the md5 hashes of each of its inputs, which I've called
md5_total() for now, although I'm not
On 26 June 2013 21:59, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 6/26/13 7:03 AM, Szymon Guz wrote:
I've checked the patch, everything looks great.
I've attached it to this email with changed name, just for consistent
naming in commitfest app.
Could the setup of the decimal.Decimal
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 2:45 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 23 June 2013 03:16, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Will think on it more.
Some other thoughts related to this...
* Why are we building a special kind of hash table? Why don't we just
use the hash table
On 6/26/13 4:04 PM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
A quick google search reveals several people asking for something like
this, and people recommending md5(string_agg(...)) or
md5(string_agg(md5(...))) based solutions, which are doomed to failure
on larger tables.
The thread discussed several other
On 26 June 2013 22:08, Szymon Guz mabew...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 June 2013 21:59, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 6/26/13 7:03 AM, Szymon Guz wrote:
I've checked the patch, everything looks great.
I've attached it to this email with changed name, just for consistent
naming in
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
How should reviewers get credited in the release notes?
Without getting into how we do this, I thought it might be helpful to
share the reasons why I believe recognizing and expressing gratitude
to reviewers is a helpful,
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 09:04:34PM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
On 26 June 2013 19:32, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:34:52AM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
md5_agg() is well-defined and not cryptographically novel, and your use case
is credible. However, not
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
Jeff's patch seems to somewhat alleviate the huge fall in performance I'm
otherwise seeing without the nonlocked-test patch. With the nonlocked-test
patch, if you squint you can see a miniscule benefit.
I
Jeff Janes escribió:
I see in the commitfest app it is set to Waiting on Author (but I don't
know who maiku41 is).
Yeah, that guy is misterious. I'm guessing the Mike Blackwell person
Josh mentioned in his week 1 report.
--
Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
Well, one of the other prizes which occurred to me today would be a
pgCon lottery. That is, each review posted by a non-committer would go
in a hat, and in February we would
On 06/26/2013 02:49 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
I see in the commitfest app it is set to Waiting on Author (but I don't
know who maiku41 is).
Mike Blackwell, who's helping track patches for the CommitFest.
It's been our practice since the 9.3 cycle that patches which are still
under contentious
On 27/06/13 07:12, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 06/26/2013 12:02 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
See the entry for foreign key locks:
Prevent non-key-field row updates from locking foreign key rows (Álvaro
Herrera, Noah Misch, Andres Freund, Alexander Shulgin, Marti Raudsepp)
I am the author of most
Folks,
Wanted to give you the below testing emails from DHAVAL JAISWAL. He's
been testing 9.3's streaming-only cascading replication, and so far it
works as advertised. What he found in his tests was:
a) he could not remaster to a former replica which was behind the relica
he was trying to
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
A memory chunk allocated through the existing palloc.h interfaces is
limited
to MaxAllocSize (~1 GiB). This is best for most callers; SET_VARSIZE()
need
not check its own 1 GiB limit, and algorithms that grow a buffer by
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2013-06-26 12:07:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
... I wonder whether it's safe to remove the case altogether. Could
anyone research the situation for non-blocking connect() on Windows?
Perhaps on Windows we shouldn't test for EINPROGRESS at all?
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Brendan Jurd dire...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 June 2013 03:17, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
How should reviewers get credited in the release notes?
a) not at all
b) in a single block titled Reviewers for this version at the bottom.
c) on the patch
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Amit Langote escribió:
The segfault in question happens at line 1141:
off = att_align_pointer(off, thisatt-attalign, -1, tp + off);
char *tp; /* ptr to tuple data */
long
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 01:41:51PM +, Albe Laurenz wrote:
Noah Misch wrote:
If fixing the behaviour is undesirable, at least the documentation
should be fixed.
A brief documentation mention sounds fine. Perhaps add a paragraph on
constant folding in general and reference that from
On Sun, 2013-06-23 at 12:24 +0800, rui hua wrote:
Regression tests are all succeed, but several problems have be found while
ding some simple test. The updated document said that the points used in
the output are not necessarily the points used on input. I understand that
as long as they are
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Hari Babu haribabu.ko...@huawei.com wrote:
On June 26, 2013 5:02 AM Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
Thanks for the feedback. Attached is a rebased version of the patch with
the two small issues
Hello Fevien,
Thank you for your fast work and reply. I try to test your new patch until next
week.
(2013/06/26 20:16), Fabien COELHO wrote:
Here is a v4 that takes into account most of your points: The report is
performed
for all threads by thread 0, however --progress is not supported
Andrew Gierth and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk writes:
Possibly significant in this context is that there is a proof-of-concept
patch in development for another part of T612, namely inverse
distribution functions (e.g. percentile_disc and percentile_cont) which
should be available by the next CF,
On 06/26/2013 04:47 PM, Szymon Guz wrote:
Attached patch has all changes against trunk code.
There is added a function for conversion from Postgres numeric to
Python Decimal. The Decimal type is taken from cdecimal.Decimal, if it
is available. It is an external library, quite fast, but
Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com writes:
On Mon, 2013-06-24 at 20:34 -0400, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
This patch is in the current CommitFest, does it still need to be
reviewed? If so, I notice that the version in pgfoundry's CVS is
rather different than the version the patch seems to have been
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
On 06/26/2013 12:08 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
I have been suggesting something upon that line in some of the reviews
I've posted about Robins non regression tests, if they were to be
rejected on the basis that they add a few seconds for checks. They are
(2013/06/26 20:15), Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 26.06.2013 11:37, KONDO Mitsumasa wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
Hmm, so the write patch doesn't do much, but the fsync patch makes
the response
times somewhat smoother. I'd suggest that we drop the write patch
for
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
TBH, I've always been annoyed that pg_filedump is GPL and so there's no
way for us to just ship it in contrib. (That stems from Red Hat
corporate policy of a dozen years ago, but the conflict is real anyway.)
If somebody is
Hi,
I just realized that in the original incarnation of lock_timeout,
I used ERRCODE_LOCK_NOT_AVAILABLE (to be consistent with NOWAIT)
but the patch that was accepted into 9.3 contained ERRCODE_QUERY_CANCELED
which is the same as for statement_timeout.
Which would be more correct?
Thanks in
Dear Mitsumasa,
As I know, famous NoSQL benchmark program which was called YCSB is display
latency measure. I think that TPS indicates system performance for system
administrator, and latency indicates service performance for end user, in
custom benchmarks.
Sure. I agree that both
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 10:19 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kap...@huawei.com
wrote:
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 4:40 PM Andres Freund wrote:
Hi Amit,
On 2013-06-26 16:22:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:20 PM
On 2013-06-27 11:16:25 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 10:19 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kap...@huawei.com
One more use case for which this utility was done is as below:
It will be used to decide that on new-standby
101 - 141 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
