Hi all
While working on BDR, I've run into a situation that I think highlights
a limitation of the dynamic bgworker API that should be fixed.
Specifically, when the postmaster crashes and restarts shared memory
gets cleared but dynamic bgworkers don't get unregistered, and that's a
mess.
I have
On 12/12/2014 06:02 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Speaking as the originator of commitfests, they were *always* intended
to be a temporary measure, a step on the way to something else like
continuous integration.
I'd really like to see the project revisit some of the underlying
assumptions that're
Re: Alvaro Herrera 2014-12-12 20141212203700.gb1...@alvh.no-ip.org
Pardon me for not knowing much about Debian packages, but how would
that work exactly? Is it possible to do make install-client, then
package the installed files, then rm -rf the install tree, then
repeat for
On 12/12/2014 06:01 AM, David G Johnston wrote:
The patch list concept should be formalized, and should include a
targeted release concept.
IMO, the patch list concept should be discarded in favour of a
working tree list.
At this point, given the challenges the CF process faces, I can't say
Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
is not specified. If those tables do not exist, pgbench fails. To
prevent this, -n must be specified. For me this behavior seems insane
because -f does not
Hi
a Orafce package on pgFoundry is obsolete - we migrated to github few years
ago. Please, can somebody modify a description about this migration? Or
drop this project there.
Regards
Pavel
On 10/28/2014 01:33 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
ALTER TRIGGER is not bad; like you say, change pg_get_triggerdef_worker() the
way commit e5550d5 changed pg_get_constraintdef_worker(). DROP TRIGGER is
more difficult. pg_constraint.tgqual of a dropped trigger may reference other
dropped objects, which
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 8 December 2014 at 11:46, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
wrote:
I don't really like those new names, but I'd prefer
On 12 December 2014 at 21:40, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
What I don't understand is why we aren't working on double buffering,
since that cost would be paid in a background process and would be
evenly
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
With the high-priority questions out of the way, time to tackle the
rest:
Tom My single biggest complaint is about the introduction of struct
Tom GroupedVar. If we stick with that, we're going to have to teach
Tom an extremely large number of
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 11:50 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 07:40:46PM +0530, Rahila Syed wrote:
The tests ran for around 30 mins.Manual checkpoint was run before each
In commit 2c03216d831160bedd72d45f712601b6f7d03f1c, the
following define occurs twice in src/include/access/xlogrecord.h:
#define SizeOfXLogRecordDataHeaderLong (sizeof(uint8) + sizeof(uint32))
It is no big deal, as the definitions don't contradict each other. We
could probably live with just
Hi all,
This week, we heard about a user willing to use a custom timestamp
format across a set of services to improve the debugability of the
whole set, Postgres being one of them. Unfortunately datestyle does
not take into account the logs. Would it be worth adding a new GUC
able to control the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 18/11/2014 08:36, Michael Paquier a écrit :
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:50 AM, Brightwell, Adam
adam.brightw...@crunchydatasolutions.com wrote:
Though, I would think that the general desire would be to keep
the patch relevant ONLY to the
Hi all,
Looking at the CF app as of today, there is the following status for
pending patches:
- Needs Review: 18
- Waiting on Author: 1
- Ready for Committer: 8
And the next coming fest that should begin on Monday has this status:
- Needs Review: 34
- Waiting on Author: 3
- Ready for Committer:
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Julien Rouhaud
julien.rouh...@dalibo.com wrote:
I agree with you about the problems of the v2 patch I originally sent.
I think this v3 is the right way of keeping track of .ready files, so
it's ok for me. The v3 also still applies well on current head.
Simon
On 12/13/2014 10:00 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
Hi all,
Looking at the CF app as of today, there is the following status for
pending patches:
- Needs Review: 18
- Waiting on Author: 1
- Ready for Committer: 8
And the next coming fest that should begin on Monday has this status:
- Needs Review:
Andrew Gierth and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk writes:
Just got a report on IRC of a bug in the array version of
percentile_cont; if two of the requested percentiles were between the
same pair of input rows, the result could be wrong or an error would
be generated.
Oooh, good catch.
Proposed
Tatsuo Ishii is...@postgresql.org writes:
Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
is not specified. If those tables do not exist, pgbench fails. To
prevent this, -n must be specified. For me this
On 11/08/2014 12:37 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:31 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I thought the consensus was that the SQL-callable function
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
On 11/08/2014 12:37 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
Well, yes :) I missed that. Note that I am leaning to Robert's
direction as well to do a clear separation... Now if the final
consensus is different, then let's use the patch attached that puts
the SQL
On 11/20/2014 02:27 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com mailto:alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Right, but they provide same
On 11/24/2014 07:26 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 09/25/2014 05:10 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr
wrote:
Sigh.
How to transform a trivial 10 lines patch into a probably 500+ lines
project
involving flex bison some non trivial
On 12/13/2014 04:45 PM, Mark Dilger wrote:
In commit 2c03216d831160bedd72d45f712601b6f7d03f1c, the
following define occurs twice in src/include/access/xlogrecord.h:
#define SizeOfXLogRecordDataHeaderLong (sizeof(uint8) + sizeof(uint32))
It is no big deal, as the definitions don't contradict
On 12/12/2014 05:43 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
[snip]
In case of what we would have called a 'LIST' partition, this could look like
... FOR VALUES (val1, val2, val3, ...)
Assuming we only support partition key to contain only one column in such a
case.
Hmmm….
[...] PARTITION BY LIST(col1 [,
On 12/13/2014 03:09 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
[snip]
Arbitrary SQL expressions (including functions) are not the thing to use
for partitioning -- at least that's how I understand this whole
discussion. I don't think you want to do proofs as such -- they are
expensive.
Yup. Plus, it looks like
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:19:08AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hi
a Orafce package on pgFoundry is obsolete - we migrated to github few years
ago. Please, can somebody modify a description about this migration? Or
drop this project there.
Pavel,
I've removed pgFoundry references from the
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
On 11/20/2014 02:27 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
Now the part where I would like to receive feedback before revising the
patch is on the coding style. It seems to me from Tom's comments that
he is not happy with the code, now I am not sure which part of
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 10:06:32AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com writes:
I'd like to include pg_rewind in contrib.
I don't object to adding the tool as such, but let's wait to see
what happens with Peter's proposal to move contrib command-line
tools into
On 12/12/14, 3:48 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com wrote:
Sure. Mind you, I'm not proposing that the syntax I just mooted is
actually for the best. What I'm saying is that we need to talk about
it.
Frankly, if we're going to require
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:03:12AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
Yeah, range and list partition definitions are very similar, but
hash partition definitions are a different kettle of fish. I don't
think we really need hash partitioning for anything right away -
it's pretty useless unless you've
As it doesn't have documentation, I'm inclined to say we should mark this as
Waiting on Author or Returned with Feedback.
I'm planing to have a detailed look at Robert's patch before the end of
the year. I could update pgbench documentation while doing that.
--
Fabien.
--
Sent via
On 12/13/2014 01:19 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
As it doesn't have documentation, I'm inclined to say we should mark
this as Waiting on Author or Returned with Feedback.
I'm planing to have a detailed look at Robert's patch before the end
of the year. I could update pgbench documentation
On 12/13/2014 05:57 PM, José Luis Tallón wrote:
On 12/13/2014 03:09 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
[snip]
Arbitrary SQL expressions (including functions) are not the thing to use
for partitioning -- at least that's how I understand this whole
discussion. I don't think you want to do proofs as such
On 11/03/2014 07:35 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 3:12 AM, Rushabh Lathia
rushabh.lat...@gmail.com mailto:rushabh.lat...@gmail.com wrote:
Patch looks good, assigning to committer.
Thanks for your review!
Committed.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers
On 12/12/14 20:43, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 12/12/2014 11:35 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Uh, really? Last I looked at the numbers from SPI treasurer reports,
they are not impressive enough to hire a full-time engineer, let alone a
senior one.
The Linux Foundation has managed to pay for Linus
On 13 December 2014 at 14:36, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Something to be aware of btw is that this patch introduces an
additional 8 bytes per block image in WAL as it contains additional
information to control the compression. In this case this is the
uint16 compress_len
Hi,
I have attached a patch with the current status of my work on reducing
the lock level of trigger and foreign key related DDL.
This commit reduces the lock level of the following commands from ACCESS
EXCLUSIVE to SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE, plus that it does the same for the
referred table of
On 14 December 2014 at 04:39, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Tatsuo Ishii is...@postgresql.org writes:
Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
is not specified. If those tables do not exist,
Em sábado, 13 de dezembro de 2014, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net
escreveu:
On 11/03/2014 07:35 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 3:12 AM, Rushabh Lathia rushabh.lat...@gmail.com
mailto:rushabh.lat...@gmail.com wrote:
Patch looks good, assigning to committer.
On 12/12/14, 7:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
I'd say that array_eq (and probably _cmp) just needs to be taught to fall back
to what oper() does, but this part of the commit message gives me pause:
Change the operator search algorithms to look for
On 14 December 2014 at 04:39, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Tatsuo Ishii is...@postgresql.org writes:
Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
is not specified. If those tables do not exist,
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 1:57 AM, José Luis Tallón
jltal...@adv-solutions.net wrote:
On 12/13/2014 03:09 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
[snip]
Arbitrary SQL expressions (including functions) are not the thing to use
for partitioning -- at least that's how I understand this whole
discussion. I
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 1:40 AM, José Luis Tallón
jltal...@adv-solutions.net wrote:
On 12/12/2014 05:43 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
Amit: mind if I add the DB2 syntax for partitioning to the wiki, too?
This might as well help with deciding the final form of partitioning
(and define the first
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
On 11/08/2014 12:37 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
Well, yes :) I missed that. Note that I am leaning to Robert's
direction as well to do a clear separation... Now if the final
consensus
On 12/13/14, 6:17 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
Problem with -f implies -n approach is, it breaks backward
compatibility. There are use cases using custom script*and* pgbench_*
tables. For example the particular user wants to use the standard
pgbench tables and is not satisfied with the built in
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 13 December 2014 at 14:36, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
wrote:
Something to be aware of btw is that this patch introduces an
additional 8 bytes per block image in WAL as it contains additional
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 10:48 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
On 11/20/2014 02:27 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
Now the part where I would like to receive feedback before revising the
patch is on the coding style. It seems to me from Tom's
48 matches
Mail list logo
