On Sat, Mar 07, 2015 at 12:46:42AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch writes:
> > On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 03:28:12PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
> >> I was thinking the simpler route of just repalloc'ing... the memcpy would
> >> suck, but much less so than the extra index pass. 64M gets us 11M tuples
Noah Misch writes:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 03:28:12PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> I was thinking the simpler route of just repalloc'ing... the memcpy would
>> suck, but much less so than the extra index pass. 64M gets us 11M tuples,
>> which probably isn't very common.
> +1. Start far below 64
On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 03:28:12PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 3/4/15 9:10 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> >>Could the large allocation[2] for the dead tuple array in lazy_space_alloc
> >>cause problems with linux OOM? [1] and some other things I've r
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 12/29/14 7:16 PM, Adam Brightwell wrote:
>> Given this discussion, I have attached a patch that removes CATUPDATE
>> for review/discussion.
> committed this version
Hmm .. I'm not sure that summarily removing usecatupd from those three
system views was well thought
On 12/29/14 7:16 PM, Adam Brightwell wrote:
> Given this discussion, I have attached a patch that removes CATUPDATE
> for review/discussion.
committed this version
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 12:50:14PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > On 03/06/2015 08:19 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > Well, server-side, we already have that- have pgbouncer run on the
> > > database server (something which I'm typically in favor of anyway)
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:15:55AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 05:56:25PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > > > So, are we more worried about attackers getting a copy of pg_authid, or
I wrote:
> Hm, the problem evidently is that we get a default selectivity estimate
> for the ON condition. I think a proper fix for this would involve
> teaching eqjoinsel (and ideally other join selectivity functions) how
> to drill down into appendrels and combine estimates for the child
> relat
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 12:50:14PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 03/06/2015 08:19 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> >> Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> Sure. I was thinking we would have some mechanism to authenticate the
> >> connection as coming from a p
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:15:55AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 05:56:25PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > > So, are we more worried about attackers getting a copy of pg_authid, or
> > > sniffing the hash on the wire?
> >
> > Bot
There is something odd here going on:
alvherre=# alter group test add user current_user;
ERROR: role "test" is a member of role "(null)"
Surely (null) is not the right name to be reporting there ...
Attached is a rebased patch, which also has some incomplete doc changes.
With this patch applie
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > BTW one solution to the merge problem is to have unique separators for
> > each entry. For instance, instead of
> Speaking from entirely too much experience, that's not nearly enough.
> git only needs 3 lines of c
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> >> You can add tests in src/test/modules/dummy_seclabel.
> >
> > Patch attached to test sec label there, in addition to the other more
> > standard checks in event_trigger.
>
> These tests seem worthwhile to me.
Pushed
This is extracted from the DDL deparse series. These patches add
get_object_address support for the following object types:
- user mappings
- default ACLs
- operators and functions of operator families
In each case I had to create a new value in ObjectType. These object
types can not be created
Tom Lane writes:
> Stephen Frost writes:
>> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>>> BTW, is that JOIN (VALUES(...)) thing common in applications, or did you
>>> just use it to make a compact example? If it were something worth
>>> optimizing, it seems like we could teach the planner to "pull
On 03/06/2015 08:19 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
>> Stephen Frost wrote:
>> Sure. I was thinking we would have some mechanism to authenticate the
>> connection as coming from a pooler that has been previously authorized;
>> something simple as a new
This patch extends pgbench expression with functions. Currently only one
"abs" function is added. The point is rather to bootstrap the infrastructure
for other functions (such as hash, random variants...) to be added later.
Here is a small v2 update:
- with better error messages on non exist
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 10:50:27AM +0300, Vladimir Borodin wrote:
> What I have done is to update the pg_upgrade instructions to add this
> required step. Updated doc patch attached. (I also added the --delete
> flag to rsync.) Thanks so much for your detailed report.
>
>
> It seem
I wrote:
> I chewed on this for awhile and decided that there'd be no real harm in
> taking identification of the unique expressions out of
> create_unique_path() and doing it earlier, in initsplan.c; we'd need a
> couple more fields in SpecialJoinInfo but that doesn't seem like a
> problem. Howe
Stephen Frost writes:
> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> BTW, is that JOIN (VALUES(...)) thing common in applications, or did you
>> just use it to make a compact example? If it were something worth
>> optimizing, it seems like we could teach the planner to "pull up VALUES"
>> in the sam
* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> > > Perhaps one of the requirements of a new auth method should be to allow
> > > middlemen such as connection poolers. It's been over two years since I
> > > had a lo
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Gabriele Bartolini
wrote:
> I believe the main point is to look at a user interface point of view.
> If/When we switch to a block level incremental support, this will be
> completely transparent to the end user, even if we start with a file-level
> approach with LSN
Stephen Frost wrote:
> Alvaro,
>
> * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> > Perhaps one of the requirements of a new auth method should be to allow
> > middlemen such as connection poolers. It's been over two years since I
> > had a look, but IIRC pgbouncer had the very ugly requir
All,
Thanks for all the feedback and review.
> I think I vote for (1). I do not like (2) because of the argument I made
> > upthread that write access on system catalogs is far more dangerous than
> > a naive DBA might think. (0) has some attraction but really CATUPDATE
> > is one more concept
Alvaro,
* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Josh Berkus (j...@agliodbs.com) wrote:
>
> > > > 3) Using the user name for the MD5 storage salt allows the MD5 stored
> > > > hash to be used on a different cluster if the user used the same
> > > > password
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> BTW, is that JOIN (VALUES(...)) thing common in applications, or did you
> just use it to make a compact example? If it were something worth
> optimizing, it seems like we could teach the planner to "pull up VALUES"
> in the same way that it flattens sub-se
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI writes:
> Hello, I had a report that a query gets wired estimated row
> numbers and it makes subsequent plans wrong.
> Although the detailed explanation is shown later in this mail,
> the problem here was that a query like following makes the path
> with apparently wrong row num
Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Josh Berkus (j...@agliodbs.com) wrote:
> > > 3) Using the user name for the MD5 storage salt allows the MD5 stored
> > > hash to be used on a different cluster if the user used the same
> > > password.
> >
> > This is a feature as well as a bug. For example, pgBouncer r
Hi
I am checking this patch, but it is broken still
Regards
Pavel
2015-02-13 8:14 GMT+01:00 Michael Paquier :
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Michael Paquier <
> michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Peter Eisentraut
>> wrote:
>> > fixed
>> This pa
Hi Robert,
2015-03-06 3:10 GMT+11:00 Robert Haas :
> But I agree with Fujii to the extent that I see little value in
> committing this patch in the form proposed. Being smart enough to use
> the LSN to identify changed blocks, but then sending the entirety of
> every file anyway because you don'
Noah Misch writes:
> Comparing argument type names sounds fine. Comparing argument type OID does
> not offer enough to justify the loss of cross-cluster sort equivalence.
Fair enough.
> So as to stably compare f(nsp0.t) to f(nsp1.t), this should also compare the
> dobj.namespace name.
Ah, good
* Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On 26 February 2015 at 09:50, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> > On 26 February 2015 at 05:43, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> I wonder if there are some documentation updates which need to be done
> >> for this also? I'm planning to look as I vauguely recall me
Greg,
* Greg Stark (st...@mit.edu) wrote:
> Locked accounts are a terrible terrible idea. All they do is hand attackers
> an easy DOS vulnerability. They're pure security theatre if your
> authentication isn't vulnerable to brute force attacks and an unreliable
> band-aid if they are.
For starter
* Albe Laurenz (laurenz.a...@wien.gv.at) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Yes, it certainly was. I think Bruce was thinking that we could simply
> > hash what goes on to disk with an additional salt that's stored, but
> > that wouldn't actually work without requiring a change to the wireline
> >
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:01 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Today, while testing parallel_seqscan patch, I encountered one
> intermittent issue (it hangs in below function) and I have question
> related to below function.
>
> +void
> +WaitForParallelWorkersToFinish(ParallelContext *pcxt)
> +{
> ..
> + fo
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:22 AM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 3:59 AM, Robert Haas
wrote:
> >>
> >> We're not seeing eye to eye here yet, since I don't accept your
> >> example scenario and you don't accept mine. L
Locked accounts are a terrible terrible idea. All they do is hand attackers
an easy DOS vulnerability. They're pure security theatre if your
authentication isn't vulnerable to brute force attacks and an unreliable
band-aid if they are.
Having dealt with mechanisms for locking accounts in other dat
Hi Kaigai-san, Hanada-san,
Attached please find a patch to print the column names prefixed by the
relation names. I haven't tested the patch fully. The same changes will be
needed for CustomPlan node specific code.
Now I am able to make sense out of the Output information
postgres=# explain verbo
This patch extends pgbench expression with functions. Currently only one
"abs" function is added. The point is rather to bootstrap the
infrastructure for other functions (such as hash, random variants...) to
be added later.
--
Fabien.diff --git a/contrib/pgbench/exprparse.y b/contrib/pgbench
Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian writes:
>>> Let me update my list of possible improvements:
>>
>>> 1) MD5 makes users feel uneasy (though our usage is mostly safe)
>>
>>> 2) The per-session salt sent to the client is only 32-bits, meaning
>>> that i
On 26 February 2015 at 09:50, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On 26 February 2015 at 05:43, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I wonder if there are some documentation updates which need to be done
>> for this also? I'm planning to look as I vauguely recall mentioning the
>> ordering of operations somewhere along th
Hello, I had a report that a query gets wired estimated row
numbers and it makes subsequent plans wrong.
Although the detailed explanation is shown later in this mail,
the problem here was that a query like following makes the path
with apparently wrong row number.
EXPLAIN SELECT a FROM (SELECT a
On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 07:28:33PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> In bug #12832 Marko Tiikkaja points out that commit
> 7b583b20b1c95acb621c71251150beef958bb603 created a rather unnecessary
> dump failure hazard, since it applies pg_get_function_identity_arguments()
> to every function in the database, e
On 2015-03-06 01:28, Tom Lane wrote:
In bug #12832 Marko Tiikkaja points out that commit
7b583b20b1c95acb621c71251150beef958bb603 created a rather unnecessary
dump failure hazard, since it applies pg_get_function_identity_arguments()
to every function in the database, even those that won't get du
44 matches
Mail list logo
