Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com wrote:
Kevin Grittner kgri...@ymail.com wrote:
If you run `make installcheck` against a cluster with
default_transaction_isolation = 'repeatable read' you get one
failure:
+ ERROR:
On 7/22/15 6:58 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Not sure what Jim meant. Maybe he meant to be aware of when spilling to
disk happens? Obviously, things become slower, so maybe you need to
consider it for progress
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Attached is a patch that implements the vm scan for truncation. It
introduces a variable to hold the last blkno which was skipped during the
On 07/22/2015 11:18 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 10 July 2015 at 00:06, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes:
On 2015-07-06 11:49:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Rather than reverting cab9a0656c36739f, which would re-introduce a
different performance problem,
On 7/22/15 9:15 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
I'm not proposing this feature, I'm merely asking for it to be defined in a
way that makes it work for more than just VACUUM. Once we have a way of
reporting useful information, other processes can be made to follow that
mechanism, like REINDEX, ALTER TABLE
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 8:49 PM, Haribabu Kommi kommi.harib...@gmail.com wrote:
I ran some performance tests on a 16 core machine with large shared
buffers, so there is no IO involved.
With the default value of cpu_tuple_comm_cost, parallel plan is not
getting generated even if we are selecting
Hello,
I've performed some tests on pg_strom according to the wiki. But it seems that
queries run slower on GPU than CPU. Can someone shed a light on what's wrong
with my settings. My setup was Quadro K620 + CUDA 7.0 (For Ubuntu 14.10) +
Ubuntu 15.04. And the results was
with pg_strom
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Jolly Chen jo...@chenfamily.com wrote:
You have probably heard that Mike Stonebraker recently won the Turing award.
A recording of his award lecture is available at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbGeKi6T6QI
It is an entertaining talk overall. If you fast
On 07/22/2015 08:16 AM, YANG wrote:
Hello,
I've performed some tests on pg_strom according to the wiki. But it seems that
queries run slower on GPU than CPU. Can someone shed a light on what's wrong
with my settings. My setup was Quadro K620 + CUDA 7.0 (For Ubuntu 14.10) +
Ubuntu 15.04.
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
Volatilities of pg_xact_commit_timestamp() and pg_last_committed_xact()
are now STABLE. But ISTM that those functions can return different results
even within a single statement. So we should change the volatilities of
Hey everyone,
You have probably heard that Mike Stonebraker recently won the Turing award. A
recording of his award lecture is available at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbGeKi6T6QI
It is an entertaining talk overall. If you fast forward to about the 1:07 mark,
he makes some comments about
All:
Sounds like the overwhemling consensus is Alpha2 then. Will run with it.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
But I'm not going to complain too loudly if we don't do invalidation.
Not doing invalidation seems silly to me. But I don't want to bend
Paul too far around the axle, either.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB:
On 07/21/2015 10:25 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
Hello Josh,
Maybe -f file.sql:weight (yuk from my point of view, but it can be done
easily).
Maybe it's past time for pgbench to have a config file?
That is an idea. For simple usage, for backward compatibility and for
people like me who
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
Design considerations and consequences
Good write-up.
I'm not concerned about synchronized scans breaking my assumption of a
physical ordering of heaptuples being
Kevin Grittner wrote:
If you run `make installcheck` against a cluster with
default_transaction_isolation = 'repeatable read' you get one
failure:
So there's some code that's specifically intended to handle this case:
/*
* If
Hi
It looks like we have broken the ROW expression without explicit
ROW keyword in GROUP BY.
I mean, after Grouping sets merge, if we have (c1, c2) in group by,
we are treating it as ROW expression for grouping, but at the same
time we are allowing individual column in the target list.
However
On 3 July 2015 at 20:50, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Petr Korobeinikov pkorobeini...@gmail.com writes:
Fixed. Now both \ev and \sv numbering lines starting with 1. New version
attached.
Applied with a fair amount of mostly-cosmetic adjustment.
As I've already noticed that
Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com writes:
On 3 July 2015 at 20:50, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Oh? If that were true, pg_dump wouldn't work on such views. It is kind
of a PITA for this purpose that it doesn't include the CREATE text for
you, but we're surely not changing that
If so, I would vote for:
-f script1.bench:3 -f script2.bench:1
over:
-f script1.bench -w 3 -f script2.bench -w 1
Ok, I'll take that into consideration. Any other opinion out there? The
current v3 version is:
-w 3 -f script1.bench -w 1 -f script2.bench
With provision to generate
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not concerned about synchronized scans breaking my assumption of a
physical ordering of heaptuples being fed to tuplesort.c. I think that
it is unlikely to ever be worth seriously considering this case.
Why not?
I don't think there's any line near pg_dumpall. That tool seems to
have grown out of desperation without much actual design. I think it
makes more sense to plan around that's the best pg_dump behavior for the
various use cases.
Ok.
I like Noah's proposal of having pg_dump --create
On 2015-07-22 14:55:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Just to be clear here: the case we are concerned about is, given that
we have determined that function X is or is not a member of one of the
extensions marked shippable for a given connection, is it likely that
that status will change (while the
On 2015-07-22 10:54:14 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
Making command-line options order-dependant breaks a lot of system call
libraries in various languages, as well as being easy to mess up.
What?
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
But I'm not going to complain too loudly if we don't do invalidation.
Not doing invalidation seems silly to me. But I don't want to bend
Paul too far around the axle, either.
On July 22, 2015 at 12:15:14 PM, Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
It doesn't seem that unlikely that somebody does an ALTER SERVER OPTIONS
SET .. to add an extension to be shippable while connections are already
using the fdw. It'll be confusing if some clients are fast and some
others
Why is this message logged by default in a fresh installation? The
technicality of that message doesn't seem to match the kinds of messages
that we normally print at startup.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Adam Brightwell
adam.brightw...@crunchydatasolutions.com wrote:
[...]
Also, I think this would potentially conflict with what Fabrízio is
doing with CURRENT_DATABASE on COMMENT, though, I think it might be a
preferable solution.
On 2015/07/10 21:59, David Rowley wrote:
On 10 July 2015 at 21:40, Etsuro Fujita fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp
mailto:fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote:
To save cycles, I modified create_foreignscan_plan so that it detects
whether any system columns are requested if scanning a base
On 2015-07-21 21:37:41 +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 02:24:47PM -0400, Todd A. Cook wrote:
Hi,
This thread seemed to trail off without a resolution. Was anything done?
Not that I can tell.
Heikki and I had some in-person conversation about it at a
Hi,
The latest foreign-join pushdown patch allows fdw_scan_tlist to be set
to a targetlist even for simple foreign table scans. However, since I
think we assume that the test tuple of a foreign table for an EPQ
testing, whether it may be copied from the whole-row var or returned by
the
On 22/07 02.29, Noah Misch wrote:
I ran this program on Solaris 9 U5 (September 2006) on Sparc and got:
I appreciate your testing. A few sources give December 2003 as the month for
Solaris 9 Update 5; would you verify the vintage you used?
Sorry I was mis-parsing the /etc/release. 9/05 is
On 21 July 2015 at 21:24, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Yes, I suggest just a single column on pg_stat_activity called
pct_complete
trace_completion_interval = 5s (default)
Every interval, we report
Fujita-san,
Sorry for my late response.
The latest foreign-join pushdown patch allows fdw_scan_tlist to be set
to a targetlist even for simple foreign table scans. However, since I
think we assume that the test tuple of a foreign table for an EPQ
testing, whether it may be copied from the
On 10 July 2015 at 00:06, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes:
On 2015-07-06 11:49:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Rather than reverting cab9a0656c36739f, which would re-introduce a
different performance problem, perhaps we could have COPY create a new
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:10 PM
To: robertmh...@gmail.com
Cc: hlinn...@iki.fi; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS]
On 2015/07/21 1:38, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I ran into a typo in a comment in setrefs.c. Patch attached.
Fixed by Heikki in 7845db2aa.
Thank you for letting me know about that, Alvaro! And thanks Heikki for
picking this up!
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
--
Sent via
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 8:48 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 9:18 PM, Alexander Korotkov
a.korot...@postgrespro.ru wrote:
attached patch allows pg_rewind to work when target timeline was
switched.
Actually, this patch fixes TODO from pg_rewind
On 07/11/2015 12:19 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2015-07-10 18:43 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
An example of what would presumably happen if we adopted this sort of rule
(I've not checked whether the patch as written does this, but it would
logically follow) is that appending a float to
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 04:45:21PM +0200, Bjorn Munch wrote:
On 27/06 12.51, Noah Misch wrote:
PostgreSQL 9.5 adds a strxfrm() call in bttext_abbrev_convert(), which does
not account for the Solaris bug. I wish to determine whether that bug is
still relevant today. If you have access
Hello,
At Tue, 21 Jul 2015 14:28:25 +0300, Ildus Kurbangaliev
i.kurbangal...@postgrespro.ru wrote in 55ae2cd9.4050...@postgrespro.ru
On 07/21/2015 01:18 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-07-21 13:11:36 +0300, Ildus Kurbangaliev wrote:
/*
* Top-level transactions are identified by
On 21 July 2015 at 22:01, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
My question for Hackers is: should this be Alpha2 or Beta 1?
Alpha2
--
Simon Riggshttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
http://www.2ndquadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training Services
While working on the issue Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual, I
happened to notice odd behaviors of late row locking in FDWs. An
example will be shown below using the attached postgres_fdw patch, which
is basically the same as [1], but I changed its isolation level to READ
COMMITTED and
Hi KaiGai-san,
On 2015/07/22 16:44, Kouhei Kaigai wrote:
The latest foreign-join pushdown patch allows fdw_scan_tlist to be set
to a targetlist even for simple foreign table scans. However, since I
think we assume that the test tuple of a foreign table for an EPQ
testing, whether it may be
Hello,
I think it'd be better to combine both numbers into one report:
It'd also be good to standardize on where the * 100 is happening.
Done
can be replaced by
(itemptr-ipblkid != vacrelstats-last_scanned_page)
Get compiler error : invalid operands to binary != (have ‘BlockIdData’ and
Thakur, Sameer wrote:
Hello,
I think it'd be better to combine both numbers into one report:
It'd also be good to standardize on where the * 100 is happening.
Done
can be replaced by
(itemptr-ipblkid != vacrelstats-last_scanned_page)
Get compiler error : invalid operands to binary != (have
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Not sure what Jim meant. Maybe he meant to be aware of when spilling to
disk happens? Obviously, things become slower, so maybe you need to
consider it for progress reporting purposes.
Perhaps the m_w_m
-Original Message-
From: Etsuro Fujita [mailto:fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp]
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 7:05 PM
To: Kaigai Kouhei(海外 浩平)
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] fdw_scan_tlist for foreign table scans breaks EPQ
testing,
doesn't it?
Hi
Hi!
Following discussion at https://commitfest.postgresql.org/5/190/ patch, I found
(at seems to me) a way to stringify MAKE_SQLSTATE(), the idea is to use char
array as string:
#include stdio.h
#define MAKE_SQLSTATE(ch1,ch2,ch3,ch4,ch5) \
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Attached is a patch that implements the vm scan for truncation. It
introduces a variable to hold the last blkno which was skipped during the
forward portion. Any blocks after both this blkno and after the last
inspected
Teodor Sigaev teo...@sigaev.ru writes:
Following discussion at https://commitfest.postgresql.org/5/190/ patch, I
found
(at seems to me) a way to stringify MAKE_SQLSTATE(), the idea is to use char
array as string:
#define MAKE_SQLSTATE(ch1,ch2,ch3,ch4,ch5) \
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
After a certain amount of time without anything happening, I would
recommend just adding it to a CF to have it get attention. I imagine
that it is one of the reasons why there is as well a category Bug
Fix.
+1.
On 2015/07/22 12:40, Noah Misch wrote:
I vote for alpha2. Comparing the Open Issues and resolved after 9.5alpha1
sections of https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.5_Open_Items, we've
not transitioned to a qualitatively different level of API stability.
+1 for alpha2.
I'd like to
Hello, thank you for the comment.
At Fri, 17 Jul 2015 14:34:53 -0400, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote
in ca+tgmoaijk1svzw_gkfu+zssxcijkfelqu2aomvuphpsfw4...@mail.gmail.com
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
At a quick glance, I think this has all
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 3:02 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
For me, the user workflow looks like these
Worried: Task X is taking ages? When is it expected to finish?
Ops: 13:50
sometime later, about 14:00
Worried: Task X is still running? But I thought its ETA was 13:50?
On 22 July 2015 at 13:00, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 3:02 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
For me, the user workflow looks like these
Worried: Task X is taking ages? When is it expected to finish?
Ops: 13:50
sometime later, about
On 06/13/2015 05:02 AM, Thomas Munro wrote:
Since the multixact equivalent of this problem[1] fell through the
cracks on the multixact mega-thread, here is an updated patch that
addresses this problem for both pg_subtrans and pg_multixact/offsets
using the same approach: always step back one
Hello,
At Wed, 22 Jul 2015 17:50:35 +0300, Ildus Kurbangaliev
i.kurbangal...@postgrespro.ru wrote in 55afadbb.9090...@postgrespro.ru
On 07/22/2015 09:10 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
Hello,
At Tue, 21 Jul 2015 14:28:25 +0300, Ildus Kurbangaliev
i.kurbangal...@postgrespro.ru wrote in
Hi,
On 2015-07-22 23:53:26 +0530, Jeevan Chalke wrote:
It looks like we have broken the ROW expression without explicit
ROW keyword in GROUP BY.
That was intentional, and is actually standards required
behaviour. GROUP BY (a, b) is the same as GROUP BY a,b. It'd otherwise
be pretty confusing
Hello,
Let me ask an elemental question.
If we have ParallelAppend node that kicks a background worker process for
each underlying child node in parallel, does ForeignScan need to do something
special?
Although I don't see the point of the background worker in your
story but at least for
Hi All,
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
On 7/13/15 3:39 PM, dinesh kumar wrote:
Ah. It's' my bad interpretation. Let me work on it, and will send a new
patch as a wrapper sql function for ereport.
You might
Hi Yang,
I've performed some tests on pg_strom according to the wiki. But it seems that
queries run slower on GPU than CPU. Can someone shed a light on what's wrong
with my settings. My setup was Quadro K620 + CUDA 7.0 (For Ubuntu 14.10) +
Ubuntu 15.04. And the results was
:
,
After few failed attempt to propose Autonomous transaction earlier. I along
with Simon Riggs would like to propose again but completely different in
approach.
We also had discussion about this feature in last PGCon2015 Unconference Day,
those who missed this discussion, please refer
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Dean Rasheed dean.a.rash...@gmail.com wrote:
There's another issue here though -- just adding filters to the
pg_stats view won't prevent a determined user from seeing the contents
of the underlying table. For that, the view needs to have the
security_barrier
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Andreas Karlsson andr...@proxel.se wrote:
On 07/02/2015 06:13 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I think this would be a useful feature, and the implementation looks
sound. But I don't like how the reload is organized. Reinitializing
the context in the sighup
Hello,
2015-07-19 20:54 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com:
I am sending updated version. It implements new long option
--strict-names. If this option is used, then for any entered name
(without any wildcard char) must be found least one object. This option has
not impact
Hi, I forgot to mention a significant point.
At Wed, 22 Jul 2015 17:50:35 +0300, Ildus Kurbangaliev
i.kurbangal...@postgrespro.ru wrote in 55afadbb.9090...@postgrespro.ru
On 07/22/2015 09:10 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
Hello,
At Tue, 21 Jul 2015 14:28:25 +0300, Ildus Kurbangaliev
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 10:56 AM, dinesh kumar dineshkuma...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
On 7/13/15 3:39 PM, dinesh kumar wrote:
Ah. It's' my bad interpretation. Let me work on it,
Hi All,
Would like to propose PERMISSIVE mode for the COPY created out files.
I mean, at this moment, if do COPY as postgres instance owner, i can able
to read the file as non instance user as well, and would like to restrict
this to
instance owner WITH PERMISSIVE option.
Let me know your
On 23 June 2015 at 05:37, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
When a PostgreSQL system wedges, or when it becomes dreadfully slow
for some reason, I often find myself relying on tools like strace,
gdb, or perf to figure out what is happening. This doesn't tend to
instill customers with
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 8:56 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 10:56 AM, dinesh kumar dineshkuma...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi All,
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com writes:
On
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Josh Berkus
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 2:49 AM
To: YANG; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; KaiGai Kohei
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Queries runs slow on GPU with PG-Strom
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
Thank you for the review.
+ /* skipp if the name already exists and if_not_exists is true */
s/skipp/skip.
Except that this looks in good shape to me (see attached for a version
fixing the typo) so switched to Ready for
Sorry for the bogus on bogus.
At Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:22:59 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote in
20150723.142259.200902861.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp
Hello,
2015-07-19 20:54 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com:
I am
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
But I'm not going to complain too loudly if we don't do invalidation.
Not doing invalidation seems silly to
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
Why is this message logged by default in a fresh installation? The
technicality of that message doesn't seem to match the kinds of messages
that we normally print at startup.
It seems nobody likes that message.
I did it
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Notice that the collation specifier is gone. Oops.
As
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
rhaas=# create unique index on foo (a collate C);
CREATE INDEX
rhaas=# alter table foo add primary key using index foo_a_idx;
ALTER TABLE
Now dump and restore this database. Then:
Notice that the collation
I wrote:
We could alternatively provide two scan-initialization callbacks,
one that analyzes the parameters before we do heap_beginscan,
and another that can do additional setup afterwards. Actually,
that second call would really not be meaningfully different from
the ReScan call, so another
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
wrote:
I had a look at this patch, and here are some minor comments:
1) In alter_table.sgml, you need a space here:
[ IF NOT EXISTS ]replaceable
Fixed.
2)
+ check_for_column_name_collision(targetrelation,
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 5:47 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Robert Haas
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Robert Haas
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:19 PM
To: Kaigai Kouhei(海外 浩平)
Cc: Etsuro Fujita; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] fdw_scan_tlist for
On 07/22/2015 09:10 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
Hello,
At Tue, 21 Jul 2015 14:28:25 +0300, Ildus Kurbangaliev
i.kurbangal...@postgrespro.ru wrote in 55ae2cd9.4050...@postgrespro.ru
On 07/21/2015 01:18 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-07-21 13:11:36 +0300, Ildus Kurbangaliev wrote:
/*
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
* An estimate of the estimated time of completion - I liked your view that
this prediction may be costly to request
I'm saying it may be massively unreliable, not that it may be costly.
(Someone else may have said that it
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Kouhei Kaigai kai...@ak.jp.nec.com wrote:
No, what I'm concerned about is the case when scanrelid 0.
Hmm. if scanrelid 0, then fdw_scan_tlist should be NIL.
I want to put Assert(scanrelid==0 || fdw_scan_tlist == NIL) just after
the GetForeignPlan() in
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
+1. I would recommend adding it to the CF *immediately* to have it
get attention. The CF app is basically our patch tracker.
Thanks, I have done so now: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/6/313/
Regards,
Marti
--
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 15 July 2015 at 16:44, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-07-15 16:36:12 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 15 July 2015 at 16:28, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
I think that's generally a fair
#define MAKE_SQLSTATE(ch1,ch2,ch3,ch4,ch5) \
((char[]){(char)(ch1),(char)(ch2),(char)(ch3),(char)(ch4),(char)(ch5),(char)'\0'})
I'm pretty sure that's a gcc-ism, not standard C.
Hmm, after some digging: the feature is called compound literals and it was
introduced in c99 although gcc has
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 2:50 AM, Etsuro Fujita
fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote:
On 2015/07/22 12:40, Noah Misch wrote:
I vote for alpha2. Comparing the Open Issues and resolved after
9.5alpha1
sections of https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.5_Open_Items,
we've
not transitioned
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Notice that the collation specifier is gone. Oops.
As it is not possible to specify directly a constraint for a PRIMARY
KEY expression,
90 matches
Mail list logo
