Dean Rasheed wrote:
> Note that I might also want to pass additional sort options, such as
> "ORDER BY name NULLS LAST", which the existing syntax doesn't allow.
> In the new syntax, such sort options could be trivially supported in
> both the server- and client-side sorts:
Note that NULL
On вторник, 29 сентября 2015 г. 19:02:59 MSK, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
I went through all headers in src/include and checked for macros
containing [^&]&[^&] and checked whether they have this hazard. Found a
fair number.
That patch also changes !! tests into != 0 style.
I d
Dean Rasheed wrote:
> I don't think we should allow sorting colV values client-side,
> overriding a server-side ORDER BY clause in the query.
I shared that opinion until (IIRC) the v8 or v9 of the patch.
Most of the evolution of this patch has been to go
from no client-side sorting option
On 02/08/2016 10:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
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
Sandro Santilli writes:
> On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 10:33:42AM +0100, Sandro Santilli wrote:
>> https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/3450#comment:23
>>
>> Basically I'm getting:
>> ERROR: cannot drop function pgis_twkb_accum_finalfn(internal) because other
>> objects depend on it
>> DETAIL: ext
2016-02-09 15:32 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja :
> On 08/02/16 14:16, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>> 2016-02-08 13:53 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja :
>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, and that's exactly what I don't want, because that means that
>>> CREATE
>>> SCHEMA VARIABLE suddenly breaks existing code.
>>>
>>>
>> theoretical
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Also, what about the business of putting "x" if there's no third column?
> Three months from now some Czech psql hacker will say "we should use
> Unicode chars for this" and we will be forever stuck with \pset
> unicode_crosstab_marker to change the character to a ☑
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 08:16:28PM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> On [1] I suggested an idea to make improvements to the planner around the
> Equivalence Class code. Later in [2] Tom raised concerns with this adding
> too many planning cycles for a perhaps not common enough situation. I
> don't want
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> While I understand that you may think that "silence is consent",
> what I am afraid of is that some committer will look at this two
> months from now and say "I hate this Hcol+ stuff, -1 from me" and
> send the patch back for syntax rework. IMO it's better to have
On 08/02/16 14:16, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2016-02-08 13:53 GMT+01:00 Marko Tiikkaja :
Yeah, and that's exactly what I don't want, because that means that CREATE
SCHEMA VARIABLE suddenly breaks existing code.
theoretically yes, but this conflict can be 100% detected - so no quiet bug
is possibl
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> So please can we have that wiki page so that the syntax can be hammered
> out a bit more.
Sure, I'm on it.
> I'm closing this as returned-with-feedback for now.
Well, the feedback it got during months was incorporated into
the patch in the form of significant im
On 7 January 2016 at 05:24, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 1:16 AM, Amit Kapila
>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Here procArrayGroupXid sounds like Xid at group level, how about
>> >> > procArrayGroupMemberXid?
>> >> > Find the pat
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Amit Kapila
wrote:
> > Do you see any benefit in allowing checkpoints for such cases
considering
> > bgwriter will anyway take care of logging standby snapshot for such
> > cases?
>
> Well, the idea is to i
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 7:33 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Also, to be frank, I think we ought to be putting more effort into
> another patch in this same area, specifically Thomas Munro's causal
> reads patch. I think a lot of people today are trying to use
> synchronous replication to build load-balan
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 3:17 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>
> I think we ought to move the buffer mapping, lock manager, and
> predicate lock manager locks into their own tranches also, perhaps
> using this new named-tranche facility.
>
Makes sense and attached patch implements it using new named
tran
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Do you see any benefit in allowing checkpoints for such cases considering
> bgwriter will anyway take care of logging standby snapshot for such
> cases?
Well, the idea is to improve the system responsiveness. Imagine that
the call to GetProgres
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Daniel Verite
wrote:
> 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
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Thanks for updating the patch!
> Attached is the updated version of the patch.
> I removed unnecessary assertion check and change of source code
> that you added, and improved the source comment.
> Barring objection, I'll commit this patch.
So,
On 9 February 2016 at 11:06, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> + respect SQL clauses ordering, allows pretty complex ORDER BY clause
That, to me is the key point. SQL already allows very powerful
sorting, so psql should not just throw away the query's sort order and
replace it with something much more bas
Hi,
I have reviewed the patch and it looks good to me.
make/make install/make check is fine (when done without -Wall -Werror).
Here are few comments:
1.
With -Wall -Werror, I see couple of warnings:
postgres_fdw.c: In function ‘estimate_path_cost_size’:
postgres_fdw.c:2248:13: error: ‘run_cost’
> >
> > SELECT name, to_char(date, 'mon') AS month, extract(month from date) AS
> > month_order, sum(amount) AS amount FROM invoices GROUP BY 1,2,3;
> >
> > and crosstabview command (per Daniel proposal)
> >
> > \crosstabview +name +month:month_order amount
> >
> > But if I don't need column heade
On 9 February 2016 at 10:09, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> The sorting on client side is necessary - minimally in one direction,
> because you cannot to create perfect sorting for both dimensions.
> Possibility to order in second dimension is just pretty comfortable -
> because you don't need to think tw
On February 9, 2016 10:46:34 AM GMT+01:00, 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
Hi
Looking at this patch, I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand
> I really like the look of the output, and I can see that the non-fixed
> nature of the output columns makes this hard to achieve server-side.
>
> But on the other hand, this seems to be going way beyond the normal
> level
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.
Ok, so the patch would only onclude the checkpointer stuff.
I'll look at this
On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 10:33:42AM +0100, Sandro Santilli wrote:
> https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/3450#comment:23
>
> Basically I'm getting:
>
> ERROR: cannot drop function pgis_twkb_accum_finalfn(internal) because other
> objects depend on it
> DETAIL: extension postgis depends on f
I'm seeing an issue with ALTER EXTENSION DROP FUNCTION
not fully unregistering the dependency of the function
on the extension. Commands to reproduce described here:
https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/3450#comment:23
Basically I'm getting:
ERROR: cannot drop function pgis_twkb_accum_finalfn(
On 9 February 2016 at 05:24, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> I have not a feeling so we did some with Daniel privately. All work was
> public (I checked my mailbox) - but what is unhappy - in more mailing list
> threads (not sure how it is possible, because subjects looks same). The
> discus about the desi
101 - 128 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
