Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: > So you disagree with only third version that I proposed, i.e., > adding some hooks for sync replication? If yes and you're OK > with the first and second versions, ISTM that we almost reached > consensus on the direction

Re: [HACKERS] pglogical - logical replication contrib module

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, failed Implements feature: tested, failed Spec compliant: not tested Documentation:tested, failed Here is some more review +-

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Auditing

​So, Noah's excellent response has been ignored (from what my threaded Gmail view tells me) at this point...​ On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Curtis Ruck < curtis.ruck+pgsql.hack...@gmail.com> wrote: > Robert, > > This isn't wrong. I don't see anyone else trying to submit anything in >

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] better systemd integration

I've committed this. Thanks for checking. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Add links to commit fests to patch summary page

On 2/2/16 9:46 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: I'm not entirely sure what I'd use that for myself, but that's trivial to implement. Thus, done and published. FWIW, my use case was actually to go from https://commitfest.postgresql.org/8/353/ to https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/353/, which I

Re: [HACKERS] Fuzzy substring searching with the pg_trgm extension

On 01.02.2016 20:12, Artur Zakirov wrote: I have changed the patch: 1 - trgm2.data was corrected, duplicates were deleted. 2 - I have added operators <<-> and <->> with GiST index supporting. A regression test will pass only with the patch

Re: [HACKERS] Freeze avoidance of very large table.

This patch has gotten its fair share of feedback in this fest. I moved it to the next commitfest. Please do keep working on it and reviewers that have additional comments are welcome. -- Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA,

Re: [HACKERS] Add links to commit fests to patch summary page

Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 2:46 AM, Jim Nasby wrote: > > > On 2/1/16 6:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > >> Jim Nasby wrote: > >> > >>> It would be nice if the patch summary page (ie, [1]) had links to the > >>> relevant entry in that CF. The

Re: [HACKERS]WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

31.01.2016 11:04, David Rowley: On 27 January 2016 at 03:35, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote: including_columns_3.0 is the latest version of patch. And changes regarding the previous version are attached in a separate patch. Just to ease the review and debug. Hi,

Re: [HACKERS]WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

Anastasia Lubennikova wrote: > I just write here to say that I do not disappear and I do remember about the > issue. > But I'm very very busy this week. I'll send an updated patch next week as > soon as possible. That's great to know, thanks. I moved your patch to the next commitfest. Please

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Phrase search ported to 9.6

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > > Which seems to indicate it has received a fair amount of testing and is > quite > > stable. > > Hopefully it integrates into the 9.6 codebase without too much risk. > > Yes, yes,

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > Fixed. This patch doesn't build: ./xfunc.sgml:int lwlock_count = 0; Tabs appear in SGML/XML files The #define NUM_LWLOCKS 1 just seems totally unnecessary, as does int lwlock_count =

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches

Robert Haas wrote: > Overall, I think this is on the right track, but it still needs some > work to make it cleaner. We've committed a large number of patches in this item this cycle. I think it's fair to mark it as Committed. Can somebody submit a new one to the next commitfest? -- Álvaro

Re: [HACKERS] Fwd: Core dump with nested CREATE TEMP TABLE

On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Noah Misch writes: >> On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 04:28:47PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >>> I think I've >>> pretty much said what I have to say about this; if nothing I wrote up >>> until now swayed you, it's

Re: [HACKERS] RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Amit Kapila > wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Amit Kapila >> wrote: >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:12 AM,

<    1   2