Re: [HACKERS] proposal: function parse_ident

2016-02-08 16:55 GMT+01:00 Teodor Sigaev : > rebased, messages changes per Tom's proposal >> > Cool feature and sometimes I needed it a lot. > > But, seems, there are some bugs in error processing. > I am looking on it Regards Pavel

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

2016-02-08 16:45 GMT+01:00 jflack : > On 02/08/2016 03:16 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > Only a owner of schema can edit functions inside schema > > Can't anyone granted CREATE on the schema do that? Would > that be changed by this proposal? > yes, anybody with necessary

[HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

Hi On Russian PgConf I had a talk with Oleg about missing features in PLpgSQL, that can complicates a migrations from Oracle to PostgreSQL. Currently I see only one blocker - missing protected session variables. PL/SQL has package variables with possible only package scope and session life cycle.

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

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:06 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 10:40 PM,

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

Hi >> I propose really basic functionality, that can be enhanced in future - >> step by step. This proposal doesn't contain any controversial feature or >> syntax, I hope. It is related to PLpgSQL only, but described feature can be >> used from any PL languages with implemented interface. >> > >

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

[resending because thunderbird helpfully defaulted my sender address to the one that -isn't- subscribed to -hackers, sorry] On 02/08/2016 03:16 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Only a owner of schema can edit functions inside schema Can't anyone granted CREATE on the schema do that? Would that be

Re: [HACKERS] [ADMIN] 9.5 new setting "cluster name" and logging

On 02/08/2016 06:24 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-01-29 22:19:45 -0800, Evan Rempel wrote: >> Now that there is a setting to give a cluster a "name", it would be nice to >> have an escape sequence in the log_line_prefix setting that could reference >> the cluster_name. > > I've argued[1][2]

Re: [HACKERS] Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid

Etsuro Fujita writes: > Here is a patch to use %u not %d to print umid and userid. Pushed, thanks. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

Re: [HACKERS] Add schema-qualified relnames in constraint error messages.

Shulgin, Oleksandr wrote: > Added to the Open commitfest: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/475/ Here's a review. Note that the patch tested and submitted is not the initial one in the thread, so it doesn't exactly match $subject now. What's tested here is a client-side approach,

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: function parse_ident

rebased, messages changes per Tom's proposal Cool feature and sometimes I needed it a lot. But, seems, there are some bugs in error processing. 1 Following query is okay: # select * from parse_ident(E'"Some \r Schema".someTable'); parse_ident -- {"Some \r

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw join pushdown (was Re: Custom/Foreign-Join-APIs)

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 5:45 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > Maybe my explanation was not correct, but I'm saying that the targertlist of > the above outer_plan should be set to the fdw_scan_tlist, to avoid > misbehavior. Yeah, I think you're right. So in this hunk: +

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

On 08/02/16 09:16, Pavel Stehule wrote: Usage = DROP SCHEMA IF EXISTS test_schema CASCADE; SET SCHEMA test_schema; CREATE SCHEMA VARIABLE local_counter AS int DEFAULT 0; CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION increment_counter() RETURNS void AS $$ BEGIN local_counter := local_counter + 1; END; $$

[HACKERS] backpatch for REL9_4_STABLE of commit 40482e606733675eb9e5b2f7221186cf81352da1

Hi, I think this fixed is also required for REL9_4_STABLE. Please confirm the attached patch. Thanks and best regards, Dang Minh Huong NEC Solution Innovators, Ltd. http://www.nec-solutioninnovators.co.jp/en/ ecpg.9.4.patch Description: ecpg.9.4.patch -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] Make PG's "NOT NULL"s and attnotnull ("is_nullable") conform to SQL-2011

On 2/7/16, Vitaly Burovoy wrote: > Hello, Hackers! > > TODO list has an entry "Move NOT NULL constraint information to > pg_constraint" with four links and without two with the newest > work[1][2]. > > I rebased the patch from [2] (in attachment). At least it applies >

[HACKERS] Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid

Here is a patch to use %u not %d to print umid and userid. Best regards, Etsuro Fujita *** a/contrib/postgres_fdw/connection.c --- b/contrib/postgres_fdw/connection.c *** *** 159,165 GetConnection(UserMapping *user, bool will_prep_stmt) entry->have_error = false;

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

On 08/02/16 13:17, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2016-02-08 13:03 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja : How does this function know which schema variables are visible? function see all schema variables from same schema as function's schema Personally I find that undesirable. I don't know what

Re: [HACKERS] remove wal_level archive

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 1/26/16 10:56 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> Removing one of "archive" or "hot standby" will just cause confusion and >> breakage, so neither is a good choice for removal. >> >> What we should do is >> 1. Map "archive" and

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

On 08/02/16 13:41, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2016-02-08 13:22 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja : Personally I find that undesirable. I don't know what oracle does, but variables being visible without schema-qualifying them can introduce variable conflicts in PL/PgSQL. I'd prefer if you could

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Haribabu Kommi > wrote: >> [ new patch ] > > This patch contains a number of irrelevant hunks that really ought not > to be here and make the patch harder to

Re: [HACKERS] backpatch for REL9_4_STABLE of commit 40482e606733675eb9e5b2f7221186cf81352da1

On 2016-02-08 20:59:25 +1100, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Huong Dangminh > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I think this fixed is also required for REL9_4_STABLE. > > Please confirm the attached patch. > > Yes, this fix was missed for 9.4 stable

Re: [HACKERS] backpatch for REL9_4_STABLE of commit 40482e606733675eb9e5b2f7221186cf81352da1

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 09:20:46AM +, Huong Dangminh wrote: > I think this fixed is also required for REL9_4_STABLE. > Please confirm the attached patch. Sure thing, no idea where that cherry-pick got lost. Thanks. Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

2016-02-08 13:03 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja : > On 08/02/16 09:16, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> Usage >> = >> >> DROP SCHEMA IF EXISTS test_schema CASCADE; >> SET SCHEMA test_schema; >> >> CREATE SCHEMA VARIABLE local_counter AS int DEFAULT 0; >> >> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

2016-02-08 13:22 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja : > On 08/02/16 13:17, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> 2016-02-08 13:03 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja : >> >>> How does this function know which schema variables are visible? >>> >> >> function see all schema variables from same schema as

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

On 8 February 2016 at 09:37, Filip Rembiałkowski < filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Vik Fearing wrote: > > >>> There is also no mention in the documentation about what happens if I > do: > >>> > >>> NOTIFY ALL chan, 'msg'; > >>>

Re: [HACKERS] Development with Eclipse - Wrong error messages in IDE

On 05.02.2016 um 18:40 Jason Petersen wrote: On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:38 AM, Peter Moser wrote: Does anyone had similar problems? Do I have to configure Eclipse to understand the PG_RMGR macro or is there another possibility to teach Eclipse these macros? Hi, I just built

Re: [HACKERS] Performance degradation in commit ac1d794

Hello, I am one who wants waiting on many sockets at once. At Thu, 14 Jan 2016 18:55:51 +0100, Andres Freund wrote in <20160114175551.gm10...@awork2.anarazel.de> > On 2016-01-14 18:14:21 +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2016-01-14 12:07:23 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby

On 2016-02-08 15:58:49 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 2:49 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2016-02-06 22:03:15 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> The patch attached will apply on master, on 9.5 there is one minor > >> conflict. For older versions we

Re: [HACKERS] backpatch for REL9_4_STABLE of commit 40482e606733675eb9e5b2f7221186cf81352da1

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Huong Dangminh wrote: > Hi, > > I think this fixed is also required for REL9_4_STABLE. > Please confirm the attached patch. Yes, this fix was missed for 9.4 stable branch during back patch and it is available on all other supported

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw join pushdown (was Re: Custom/Foreign-Join-APIs)

On 2016/02/05 17:50, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: Btw, IIUC, I think the patch fails to adjust the targetlist of the top plan created that way, to output the fdw_scan_tlist, as discussed in [1] (ie, I think the attached patch is needed, which is created on top of your patch

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex

Hello, Robert. > So: do we have clear evidence that we need 128 partitions here, or > might, say, 16 work just fine? Yes, this number of partitions was chosen based on this benchmark (see "spinlock array" column): http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20151229184851.1bb7d1bd@fujitsu In fact we

Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-02-08 15:58:49 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 2:49 AM, Andres Freund wrote: >> /* >> + * XLogInsert >> + * >> + * A shorthand for XLogInsertExtended, to update the

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

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Hello, > > At Tue, 9 Feb 2016 00:48:57 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote > in >> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Michael

[HACKERS] [Proposal] Improvement of GiST page layout

Hi, hackers! I want to propose improvement of GiST page layout. GiST is optimized to reduce disk operations on search queries, for example, windows search queries in case of R-tree. I expect that more complicated page layout will help to tradeoff some of CPU efficiency for disk efficiency.

Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:24 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Michael Paquier < michael.paqu...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> > >> >> /* > >> >> +

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

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 12:16 PM, kharagesuraj wrote: > Hello, > > > > > > >> I agree with first version, and attached the updated *patch* which are > >> modified so that it supports simple multiple sync replication you > >>suggested. > >> (but test cases are not

Re: [HACKERS] WAL Re-Writes

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 8:16 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2016-02-08 10:38:55 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > I think deciding it automatically without user require to configure it, > > certainly has merits, but what about some cases where user can get > > benefits by

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

Hi Suraj, On 2016/02/09 12:16, kharagesuraj wrote: > Hello, > > >>> I agree with first version, and attached the updated patch which are >>> modified so that it supports simple multiple sync replication you >>> suggested. >>> (but test cases are not included yet.) > > I have tried for some

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

Hello, At Tue, 9 Feb 2016 00:48:57 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote in > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:06 PM, Michael Paquier

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench stats per script & other stuff

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 4:22 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: >> + /* compute total_weight */ >> + for (i = 0; i < num_scripts; i++) >> + { >> + total_weight += sql_script[i].weight; >> + >> + /* detect overflow... */ >> If let as int64,

Re: [HACKERS] Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid

Ashutosh Bapat writes: > Sorry to come to this late. > The userid being printed is from UserMapping. The new API > GetUserMappingById() allows an FDW to get user mapping by its OID. This API > is intended to be used by FDWs to fetch the user mapping inferred by

Re: [HACKERS] Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid

Sorry, I was wrong. For public user mapping userid is 0 (InvalidOid), which is returned as is in UserMapping object. I confused InvalidOid with -1. Sorry for the confusion. On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Ashutosh Bapat

Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Improvement of GiST page layout

On 09/02/16 07:15, Andrew Borodin wrote: Hi, hackers! I want to propose improvement of GiST page layout. GiST is optimized to reduce disk operations on search queries, for example, windows search queries in case of R-tree. I expect that more complicated page layout will help to tradeoff some

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql

Hi > I just rechecked the thread. In my reading, lots of people argued > whether it should be called \rotate or \pivot or \crosstab; it seems the > \crosstabview proposal was determined to be best. I can support that > decision. But once the details were discussed, it was only you and >

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench stats per script & other stuff

Hi Michaël, Attached 19-d and 19-e. +/* return builtin script "name", or fail if not found */ builtin does not sound like correct English to me, but built-in is. I notice that "man bash" uses "builtin" extensively, so I think it is okay like that, but I would be fine as well with

Re: [HACKERS] Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid

Sorry to come to this late. The userid being printed is from UserMapping. The new API GetUserMappingById() allows an FDW to get user mapping by its OID. This API is intended to be used by FDWs to fetch the user mapping inferred by the core for given join between foreign relations. In such user

Re: [HACKERS] Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > The userid being printed is from UserMapping. The new API > GetUserMappingById() allows an FDW to get user mapping by its OID. This API > is intended to be used by FDWs to fetch the user mapping inferred by

Re: [HACKERS] Existence check for suitable index in advance when concurrently refreshing.

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:33 PM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> In concurrently refreshing

Re: [HACKERS] Tracing down buildfarm "postmaster does not shut down" failures

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 02:15:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Of late, by far the majority of the random-noise failures we see in the > buildfarm have come from failure to shut down the postmaster in a > reasonable timeframe. > We've seen variants > on this theme on half a dozen machines just in

Re: [HACKERS] Tracing down buildfarm "postmaster does not shut down" failures

Noah Misch writes: > On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 02:15:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> We've seen variants >> on this theme on half a dozen machines just in the past week --- and it >> seems to mostly happen in 9.5 and HEAD, which is fishy. > It has been affecting only the four AIX

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

Hello, >> I agree with first version, and attached the updated patch which are >> modified so that it supports simple multiple sync replication you >>suggested. >> (but test cases are not included yet.) I have tried for some basic in-built test cases for multisync rep. I have created one patch

Re: [HACKERS] WAL Re-Writes

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 8:11 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:08 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > I think deciding it automatically without user require to configure it, > > certainly has merits, but what about some cases where user

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench stats per script & other stuff

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: >> Something is wrong with patch d. I noticed two things, >> 1. the total_weight stuff can overflow, > > It can generate an error on overflow by checking the total_weight while it > is being computed. I've switched

Re: [HACKERS] remove wal_level archive

On 2/7/16 4:47 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 1/26/16 10:56 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: >> Removing one of "archive" or "hot standby" will just cause confusion and >> breakage, so neither is a good choice for removal. >> >> What we should do is >> 1. Map "archive" and "hot_standby" to one level with

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 5:39 AM, Aleksander Alekseev wrote: >> So: do we have clear evidence that we need 128 partitions here, or >> might, say, 16 work just fine? > > Yes, this number of partitions was chosen based on this benchmark (see > "spinlock array" column): > >

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql

Hi! Interesting feature, but it's not very obvious how to use it. I'd like to see some example(s) in documentation. And I see an implementation of AVL tree in psql source code (src/bin/psql/crosstabview.c). Postgres already has a Red-Black tree implementation in src/include/lib/rbtree.h and

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Make timestamptz_out less slow.

On 7/02/2016 4:14 am, "Tom Lane" wrote: > > David Rowley writes: > [ timestamp_out_speedup_2015-11-05.patch ] > > Pushed with a bunch of cosmetic tweaks. Great. Thanks for pushing this. David

Re: [HACKERS] [ADMIN] 9.5 new setting "cluster name" and logging

Hi, (x-posting to -hackers, more relevant audience) On 2016-01-29 22:19:45 -0800, Evan Rempel wrote: > Now that there is a setting to give a cluster a "name", it would be nice to > have an escape sequence in the log_line_prefix setting that could reference > the cluster_name. I've argued[1][2]

Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > > > >> /* > >> + * Fetch the progress position before taking any WAL insert lock. This > >> + * is normally an operation that does not take long, but leaving this > >> + * lookup out of the

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

On 02/08/2016 03:16 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: Hi On Russian PgConf I had a talk with Oleg about missing features in PLpgSQL, that can complicates a migrations from Oracle to PostgreSQL. Currently I see only one blocker - missing protected session variables. PL/SQL has package variables with

Re: CustomScan in a larger structure (RE: [HACKERS] CustomScan support on readfuncs.c)

On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Kouhei Kaigai wrote: > The new callbacks of T_ExtensibleNode will replace the necessity to > form and deform process of private values, like as: > https://github.com/pg-strom/devel/blob/master/src/gpujoin.c#L114 Yeah. > It transforms a

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema PL session variables

2016-02-08 13:53 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja : > On 08/02/16 13:41, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> 2016-02-08 13:22 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja : >> >>> Personally I find that undesirable. I don't know what oracle does, but >>> variables being visible without schema-qualifying

Re: [HACKERS] WAL Re-Writes

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:08 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > I think deciding it automatically without user require to configure it, > certainly has merits, but what about some cases where user can get > benefits by configuring themselves like the cases where we use >

Re: [HACKERS] WAL Re-Writes

On 2016-02-08 10:38:55 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > I think deciding it automatically without user require to configure it, > certainly has merits, but what about some cases where user can get > benefits by configuring themselves like the cases where we use > PG_O_DIRECT flag for WAL (with

Re: [HACKERS] checkpointer continuous flushing - V16

Hi Fabien, On 2016-02-04 16:54:58 +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > I don't want to post a full series right now, but my working state is > available on > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=users/andresfreund/postgres.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/checkpoint-flush >

Re: [HACKERS] More stable query plans via more predictable column statistics

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Shulgin, Oleksandr < oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de> wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Tomas Vondra < tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> >> >> Overall, I think this is really about deciding when to cut-off the MCV, so that it does not grow needlessly

[HACKERS] process type escape for log_line_prefix

Hi, Frequently when reading postgres logs to do some post mortem analysis I'm left wondering what process emitted an error/log message. After the fact it's often hard to know wether an error message was emitted by a user backend or by something internal, say the checkpointer or autovacuum.

Re: [HACKERS] a raft of parallelism-related bug fixes

On 2016-02-02 15:41:45 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > group-locking-v1.patch is a vastly improved version of the group > locking patch that we discussed, uh, extensively last year. I realize > that there was a lot of doubt about this approach, but I still believe > it's the right approach, I have

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql

Teodor Sigaev wrote: > Interesting feature, but it's not very obvious how to use it. I'd like to > see some example(s) in documentation. I'm thinking of making a wiki page, because examples pretty much require showing resultsets, and I'm not sure this would fly with our current psql

Re: [HACKERS] a raft of parallelism-related bug fixes

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-02-02 15:41:45 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> group-locking-v1.patch is a vastly improved version of the group >> locking patch that we discussed, uh, extensively last year. I realize >> that there was a lot of

Re: [HACKERS] checkpointer continuous flushing - V16

Hello Andres, Any comments before I spend more time polishing this? I'm running tests on various settings, I'll send a report when it is done. Up to now the performance seems as good as with the previous version. I'm currently updating docs and comments to actually describe the current

Re: [HACKERS] a raft of parallelism-related bug fixes

On 02/08/2016 10:45 AM, Robert Haas wrote: On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Andres Freund wrote: On 2016-02-02 15:41:45 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: I realize that this stuff has all been brewing long, and that there's still a lot to do. So you gotta keep moving. And I'm

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: SET ROLE hook

Joe Conway wrote: > On 01/06/2016 10:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > I think a design that was actually somewhat robust would require two > > hooks, one at check_role and one at assign_role, wherein the first one > > would do any potentially-failing work and package all required info into > > a blob

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

On 02/08/2016 09:33 PM, Filip Rembiałkowski wrote: > Here is my next try, after suggestions from -perf and -hackers list: > > * no GUC > > * small addition to NOTIFY grammar: NOTIFY ALL/DISTINCT > > * corresponding, 3-argument version of pg_notify(text,text,bool) > > * updated the docs to

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: function parse_ident

Pavel Stehule wrote: > I am looking on it Thanks, closing as returned-with-feedback. -- Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To

Re: [HACKERS] enable parallel query by default?

On 02/08/2016 01:07 PM, Robert Haas wrote: Hi, One of the questions I have about parallel query is whether it should be enabled by default. That is, should we make the default value of max_parallel_degree to a value higher than 0? Perhaps 1, say? O.k. after some googling where I found your

Re: [HACKERS] count_nulls(VARIADIC "any")

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Thomas Munro writes: >> Would num_values be a better name than num_nonnulls? > > If "value" is a term that excludes null values, it's news to me. Ah, right, I was thinking of null as the absence

Re: [HACKERS] a raft of parallelism-related bug fixes

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > All that I wanted to do was look at EXPLAIN ANALYZE output that showed > a parallel seq scan on my laptop, simply because I wanted to see a > cool thing happen. I had to complain about it [1] to get clarification > from you

Re: [HACKERS] Tracing down buildfarm "postmaster does not shut down" failures

On 02/08/2016 02:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Of late, by far the majority of the random-noise failures we see in the buildfarm have come from failure to shut down the postmaster in a reasonable timeframe. An example is this current failure on hornet:

Re: [HACKERS] a raft of parallelism-related bug fixes

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > So, there may be a person who knows how to do all of that > work and get it done in a reasonable time frame and also knows how to > make sure that everybody has the opportunity to be as involved in the > process as they

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql

Hi > FWIW I think the general idea of this feature (client-side resultset > "pivoting") is a good one, but I don't really have an opinion regarding > your specific proposal. I think you should first seek some more > consensus about the proposed design; in your original thread [1] several >

Re: [HACKERS] enable parallel query by default?

Hi, On 2016-02-08 16:07:05 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > One of the questions I have about parallel query is whether it should > be enabled by default. That is, should we make the default value of > max_parallel_degree to a value higher than 0? Perhaps 1, say? > > There are some good reasons why

Re: [HACKERS] enable parallel query by default?

Robert Haas writes: > One of the questions I have about parallel query is whether it should > be enabled by default. That is, should we make the default value of > max_parallel_degree to a value higher than 0? Perhaps 1, say? I'm not sure I'm on board with that as a

Re: [HACKERS] enable parallel query by default?

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > I think that's an argument to enable it till at least beta1. Let's > change the default, and add an item to the open items list to reconsider > then. +1. Reminds me of what happened with the num_xloginsert_locks GUC (it

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql

Pavel Stehule wrote: > > FWIW I think the general idea of this feature (client-side resultset > > "pivoting") is a good one, but I don't really have an opinion regarding > > your specific proposal. I think you should first seek some more > > consensus about the proposed design; in your original

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-01 Commitfest

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Hi everybody, > > I just closed the last few remaining items in the commitfest. This is > the final summary: > > Committed: 32. > Moved to next CF: 32. > Rejected: 2. > Returned with Feedback: 33. > Total:

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.

Since things are clearly still moving here, I closed it as returned-with-feedback. Please submit to the next CF so that we don't lose it. -- Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench stats per script & other stuff

Hello Michaël, + /* compute total_weight */ + for (i = 0; i < num_scripts; i++) + { + total_weight += sql_script[i].weight; + + /* detect overflow... */ If let as int64, you may want to remove this overflow check, or keep it as int32. I'd rather

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex

I've closed this as returned-with-feedback. Please resubmit once you have found answers to the questions posed; from the submitted benchmark numbers this looks very exciting, but it needs a bit more work. You don't necessarily have to agree with everything Robert says, but you need to have well

Re: [HACKERS] extend pgbench expressions with functions

Hello, v23 attached, which does not change the message but does the other fixes. This doesn't apply anymore Indeed, but the latest version was really v25. -- please rebase and submit to the next CF. I already provided it as v25 on Feb 1st. I closed it here as returned with feedback.

Re: [HACKERS] checkpointer continuous flushing - V16

On 2016-02-08 19:52:30 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote: > I think I would appreciate comments to understand why/how the ringbuffer is > used, and more comments in general, so it is fine if you improve this part. I'd suggest to leave out the ringbuffer/new bgwriter parts. I think they'd be committed

Re: [HACKERS] [ADMIN] 9.5 new setting "cluster name" and logging

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 5:30 AM, Joe Conway wrote: > On 02/08/2016 06:24 AM, Andres Freund wrote: >> On 2016-01-29 22:19:45 -0800, Evan Rempel wrote: >>> Now that there is a setting to give a cluster a "name", it would be nice to >>> have an escape sequence in the

Re: [HACKERS] Tracing down buildfarm "postmaster does not shut down" failures

Tom Lane wrote: > Of late, by far the majority of the random-noise failures we see in the > buildfarm have come from failure to shut down the postmaster in a > reasonable timeframe. I noticed that. > An example is this current failure on hornet: > >

Re: [HACKERS] [ADMIN] 9.5 new setting "cluster name" and logging

Thomas, * Thomas Munro (thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com) wrote: > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 5:30 AM, Joe Conway wrote: > > On 02/08/2016 06:24 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > >> On 2016-01-29 22:19:45 -0800, Evan Rempel wrote: > >>> Now that there is a setting to give a cluster a

Re: [HACKERS] Tracing down buildfarm "postmaster does not shut down" failures

Alvaro Herrera writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> What I'd like to do to investigate this is put in a temporary HEAD-only >> patch that makes ShutdownXLOG() and its subroutines much chattier about >> how far they've gotten and what time it is, and also makes pg_ctl print >>

Re: [HACKERS] a raft of parallelism-related bug fixes

On 02/08/2016 01:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Robert Haas wrote: I accept that this might have been a somewhat isolated incident (that I couldn't easily get *at least* a little instant gratification), but it still should be avoided.

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > Would it be correct to say that if ALL is specified then a message is queued > no matter what. If DISTINCT is specified then it is only queued if no > message with the same channel and argument is already queued for

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql

Daniel Verite wrote: > Teodor Sigaev wrote: > > > Interesting feature, but it's not very obvious how to use it. I'd like to > > see some example(s) in documentation. > > I'm thinking of making a wiki page, because examples pretty much > require showing resultsets, and I'm not sure this

[HACKERS] enable parallel query by default?

Hi, One of the questions I have about parallel query is whether it should be enabled by default. That is, should we make the default value of max_parallel_degree to a value higher than 0? Perhaps 1, say? There are some good reasons why this might be a bad idea, such as: - As discussed on a

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-01 Commitfest

Hi everybody, I just closed the last few remaining items in the commitfest. This is the final summary: Committed: 32. Moved to next CF: 32. Rejected: 2. Returned with Feedback: 33. Total: 99. I think we did a fairly decent job this time around: we only passed a third of the patches to the

Re: [HACKERS] a raft of parallelism-related bug fixes

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > If I am off base, please feel free to yell Latin at me again but isn't this > exactly what different trees are for in Git? Would it be possible to say: > > Robert says, "Hey pull XYZ, run ABC tests. They are what the

  1   2   >