On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Samrat Revagade
revagade.sam...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
How about providing more granularity to replication, by setting separate
values of replication parameters to each standby
for example:
standby1.wal_sender_timeout= 50s
standby2.wal_sender_timeout= 40s
Hello all
I am thinking so almost all is done
I fixed a help and appended a simple test
But it is a cosmetic changes.
Comments?
Regards
Pavel Stehule
2013/9/30 Gilles Darold gilles.dar...@dalibo.com
Le 30/09/2013 17:35, Peter Eisentraut a écrit :
Please remove the tabs from the SGML
Hello
When I did a review of \pset improvements, I found so not all possible
options are supported by autocomplete. Here is fix
Regards
Pavel Stehule
pset-autocomplete-fix.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Daniel Farina-5 [via PostgreSQL]
ml-node+s1045698n5772887...@n5.nabble.com wrote:
On Sep 30, 2013 4:39 AM, Sameer Thakur [hidden email] wrote:
Also, for onlookers, I have changed this patch around to do the
date-oriented stuff but want to look it over before
On 25 September 2013 12:49, Amit Khandekar
amit.khande...@enterprisedb.comwrote:
0003-Convert-object-names-to-**archive-encoding-before-matc.**patch
Use iconv(3) in pg_restore to do encoding conversion in the client. This
involves a lot of autoconf changes that I'm not 100% sure about, other
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:25 AM, David Johnston pol...@yahoo.com wrote:
Amit Kapila-2 wrote
While reading documentation for SET command, I observed that FROM
CURRENT syntax and its description is missing from SET command's
syntax page (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/sql-set.html).
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
You can almost create a bounding box opclass in the current implementation,
by mapping operator to contains and to not contains. But there's no
support for creating a new, larger, bounding box on insert. It
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
What's wrong with #1?
It seems confusing that a changeset stream in database #1 will contain
commits (without corresponding changes) from database #2. Seems like aaa
pola violation to me.
I don't really see the
On 2013-10-01 03:51:50 +0300, Ants Aasma wrote:
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:53 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
What confuses me is that pg_read_barrier() is just a compiler barrier on
x86[-64] in barrier.h. According to my knowledge it needs to be an
lfence or the full
On 2013-10-01 04:47:42 +0300, Ants Aasma wrote:
I still think we should have a macro for the volatile memory accesses.
As a rule, each one of those needs a memory barrier, and if we
consolidate them, or optimize them out, the considerations why this is
safe should be explained in a comment.
On 2013-10-01 06:20:20 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
What's wrong with #1?
It seems confusing that a changeset stream in database #1 will contain
commits (without corresponding changes) from database #2. Seems like
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Agreed. The wait free LW_SHARED thing[1] I posted recently had a simple
#define pg_atomic_read(atomic) (*(volatile uint32 *)(atomic))
That should be sufficient and easily greppable, right?
Looks good enough for me. I
On 2013-10-01 14:31:11 +0300, Ants Aasma wrote:
The correct way to think of this is
that StartupXLOG() does a bunch of state modifications and then
advertises the fact that it's done by setting
xlogctl-SharedRecoveryInProgress = false; The state modifications
should better be visible to
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
As for the specific patch being discussed here. The read barrier is in
the wrong place and with the wrong comment, and the write side is
assuming that SpinLockAcquire() is a write barrier, which it isn't
documented to
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Daniel Farina-5 [via PostgreSQL]
ml-node+s1045698n5772887...@n5.nabble.com wrote:
On Sep 30, 2013 4:39 AM, Sameer Thakur [hidden email] wrote:
Also, for onlookers, I have changed this patch around to do the
date-oriented stuff but want to look it over before
[oops, resent because stalled, wrong From!]
Hello Noah,
Thread create time seems to be expensive as well, maybe up 0.1
seconds under some conditions (?). Under --rate, this create delay
means that throttling is laging behind schedule by about that time,
so all the first transactions are
Amit Kapila-2 wrote
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:25 AM, David Johnston lt;
polobo@
gt; wrote:
Amit Kapila-2 wrote
While reading documentation for SET command, I observed that FROM
CURRENT syntax and its description is missing from SET command's
syntax page
Since back branches releases are getting closer, I would like to push
this to all supported branches. To avoid a compatibility nightmare in
case the new die-on-delayed-renegotiation behavior turns out not to be
so great, I think it would be OK to set the error level to WARNING in
all branches but
Hi,
isolation_main.c executes isolationtester with:
snprintf(psql_cmd + offset, sizeof(psql_cmd) - offset,
SYSTEMQUOTE \./isolationtester\ \dbname=%s\ \%s\ \%s\
That obviously fails if pg_isolation_tester is invoked when CWD is not
its build directory. That's rather annoying if one
Hello Noah,
Thread create time seems to be expensive as well, maybe up 0.1
seconds under some conditions (?). Under --rate, this create delay
means that throttling is laging behind schedule by about that time,
so all the first transactions are trying to catch up.
threadRun() already
Review comments on 0004:
- In heap_insert and heap_multi_insert, please rewrite the following
comment for clarity: add record for the buffer without actual content
thats removed if fpw is done for that buffer.
- In heap_delete, the assignment to need_tuple_data() need not
separately check
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2013-10-01 06:20:20 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
What's wrong with #1?
It seems confusing that a changeset stream in database #1 will
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 6:27 PM, David Johnston pol...@yahoo.com wrote:
Amit Kapila-2 wrote
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:25 AM, David Johnston
polobo@
wrote:
Amit Kapila-2 wrote
While reading documentation for SET command, I observed that FROM
CURRENT syntax and its description is missing
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Since back branches releases are getting closer, I would like to push
this to all supported branches. To avoid a compatibility nightmare in
case the new die-on-delayed-renegotiation behavior turns out not to be
so
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Since back branches releases are getting closer, I would like to push
this to all supported branches. To avoid a compatibility nightmare in
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
If we can't feel comfortable with an ERROR, let's not do it at all.
In principle, I agree.
However, if we want to do this as a temporary measure to judge impact,
we could do WARNING now and flip it to ERROR in the
Hi,
On 2013-10-01 10:07:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
- AssignTransactionId changes Mustn't to May not, which seems like
an entirely pointless change.
It was Musn't before ;). I am not sure why I changed it to May not
instead of Mustn't.
- Do none of the callers of IsSystemRelation() care
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
A better solution probably is to promote tuple-level locks if
they exist to a relation level one upon freezing I guess?
It would be sufficient to promote the tuple lock to a page lock.
It would be pretty easy to add a function to predicate.c which
On 2013-10-01 07:41:46 -0700, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
A better solution probably is to promote tuple-level locks if
they exist to a relation level one upon freezing I guess?
It would be sufficient to promote the tuple lock to a page lock.
It
David Johnston wrote
A paragraph cross-referencing where SET sub-commands exist has merit but
since the main SET command does not accept FROM CURRENT it (FC) should not
be included in its page directly.
It is strange that this actually does work - at least in 9.0 - given that
SET ... FROM
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I have no problem with caching the primary key in the relcache, or
with using that as the default key for logical decoding, but I'm
extremely uncomfortable with the fallback strategy when no primary key
exists.
I see a few cases of this code in src/backend/utils/adt/datetime.c:
else if ((fmask DTK_DATE_M) != DTK_DATE_M)
Wouldn't this be clearer as:
else if (fmask DTK_DATE_M)
--
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.ushttp://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB
On 2013-10-01 11:15:36 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I see a few cases of this code in src/backend/utils/adt/datetime.c:
else if ((fmask DTK_DATE_M) != DTK_DATE_M)
Wouldn't this be clearer as:
else if (fmask DTK_DATE_M)
That doesn't have the same meaning. The latter is trueif
Amit Kapila escribió:
While reading documentation for SET command, I observed that FROM
CURRENT syntax and its description is missing from SET command's
syntax page (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/sql-set.html).
Do you think that documentation should be updated for the same or
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 05:17:35PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-10-01 11:15:36 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I see a few cases of this code in src/backend/utils/adt/datetime.c:
else if ((fmask DTK_DATE_M) != DTK_DATE_M)
Wouldn't this be clearer as:
else if (fmask
On 2013-10-01 10:07:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
- It seems that HeapSatisfiesHOTandKeyUpdate is now
HeapSatisfiesHOTandKeyandCandidateKeyUpdate. Considering I think this
was merely HeapSatisfiesHOTUpdate a year ago, it's hard not to be
afraid that something unscalable is happening to this
-20131001-heikki-1.patch.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Heikki == Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
Heikki I've spent some time reviewing this patch - looks pretty
Heikki good! I'm not through yet, but I wanted to post an
Heikki update. Attached is a new version, with some modifications I
Heikki made. Notably:
Heikki I
On 09/30/2013 06:44 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
The series from friday was a bit too buggy - obviously I was too
tired. So here's a new one:
With this series I've also noticed
#2 0x007741a7 in ExceptionalCondition (
conditionName=conditionName@entry=0x7c2908 !(!(tuple-t_infomask
On 2013-10-01 10:27:14 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
If we can't feel comfortable with an ERROR, let's not do it at all.
In principle, I agree.
However, if we want to do this as a temporary measure to judge impact,
Michael Paquier escribió:
Btw, taking the problem from another viewpoint... This feature has now
3 patches, the 2 first patches doing only code refactoring. Could it
be possible to have a look at those ones first? Straight-forward
things should go first, simplifying the core feature
Cédric Villemain wrote:
Andres, I was answering your question.
Short and re-phrased:
* we should not abuse make USE_PGXS to test the contrib build
* I believe your patch is correct to issue an error when trying to build
pg_xlogdump with PGXS, it is not possible, dot.
There being no
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 5:32 AM, Sameer Thakur samthaku...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Daniel Farina-5 [via PostgreSQL]
[hidden email] wrote:
On Sep 30, 2013 4:39 AM, Sameer Thakur [hidden email] wrote:
Also, for onlookers, I have changed this patch around to do the
MauMau escribió:
AbortStartTime 0 is also necessary to avoid sending SIGKILL
repeatedly. I sent the attached patch during the original
discussion. The below fragment is relevant:
Can you please send a fixup patch to what's already committed?
--
Álvaro Herrera
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On Fri, 2013-07-12 at 12:30 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Given that, I'm fine with just bumping the version on borka to that
version. Any objections?
Add file cloning as an alternative data transfer method to pg_upgrade.
Currently only btrfs is supported, but copy-on-write cloning is also
available on at least ZFS. Cloning must be requested explicitly and if
it isn't supported by the operating system or filesystem a fatal error
is thrown.
Hackers,
I was trying to figure out why a query was not doing an index-only scan on a
partial index, when Josh Berkus pointed to this issue, reported by Merlin
Moncure:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHyXU0x1OGao48WajAfUsbXqkUDLf=_6ho6hlmb8dsfkwda...@mail.gmail.com
In short, the
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 5:35 PM, David E. Wheeler da...@justatheory.com wrote:
Hackers,
I was trying to figure out why a query was not doing an index-only scan on a
partial index, when Josh Berkus pointed to this issue, reported by Merlin
Moncure:
On Oct 1, 2013, at 3:56 PM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think it has anything to do with the conditional index -- it's
the functional based. For some reason postgres always wants to post
filter (note the filter step below):
postgres=# create index on
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 10:42:17AM +, Haribabu kommi wrote:
If the changes are very high to deal all scenarios,
I feel it is better do it only in scenarios where the use cases needs it,
until
it is not confusing users.
The rest can be documented.
Any other opinions/suggestions
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 10:58 PM, Daniel Farina dan...@fdr.io wrote:
I remember hacking that out for testing sake.
I can only justify it as a foot-gun to prevent someone from being
stuck restarting the database to get a reasonable number in there.
Let's CC Peter; maybe he can remember some
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 22:40 +0200, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
Please find attached to this email three patches covering the missing PL
support for Event Triggers: pltcl, plperl and plpython.
For plperl, the previous reviews mostly apply analogously. In addition,
I have these specific points:
-
On Wed, 2013-09-25 at 14:26 +0530, Jeevan Chalke wrote:
So no issues from my side.
However, do we still need this in close_pl() ?
#ifdef NOT_USED
if (FPeq(line-A, -1.0) FPzero(line-B))
{/* vertical */
}
#endif
No, that can be removed.
Also
On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 20:13 +0530, Amit Khandekar wrote:
What's the reason behind calling pg_has_role(proowner, 'USAGE') before
calling pg_get_function_arg_default() ? :
CASE WHEN pg_has_role(proowner, 'USAGE')
THEN pg_get_function_arg_default(p_oid, (ss.x).n)
ELSE NULL END
On Sun, 2013-09-15 at 18:27 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
I think the reasoning behind this patch is sound. However, I would like
to raise a couple of small questions:
1) Is there a reason for the fmt string not being const char*? You
changed it for pg_log_v(), but not for pg_log() and
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Huchev hugochevr...@gmail.com wrote:
How come any compressor which could put some competition to pglz is
systematically pushed out of the field on the ground of unverifiable legal
risks ?
Because pglz has been around for a while and has not caused patent
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 05:54:04PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I don't want to be too dogmatic in opposing this; I accept that we
should, from time to time, refactor things. If we don't, superflouous
dependencies will probably proliferate over time. But personally, I'd
rather do these
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Personally, I'm not particularly in favor of these kinds of changes.
+1. Experience has shown this kind of effort to be a tarpit. It turns
out that refactoring away compiler dependencies has this kind of
fractal
58 matches
Mail list logo
