Re: [HACKERS] The plan for FDW-based sharding

On 03/07/2016 04:28 AM, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: I've got to say that this is somewhat reminicient of the discussions around in-core pooling, where argument 1 is applied to justify excluding pooling from core/contrib. I don't have a strong positio

Re: [HACKERS] gzclose don't set properly the errno in pg_restore

Hello, At Sun, 6 Mar 2016 22:09:20 -0300, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote in > Hi all, > > I'm facing with a strange error message during a failed pg_restore: > > pg_restore: processing data for table "historicopesquisaitem" > pg_restore: [directory archiver] could not close data file: Success

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

> * Only 24 open source projects are listed as interoperable. > Open Source Projects Using PostgreSQL > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/OpenSource_Projects_Using_PostgreSQL It's pity that some very popular OSS projects do not care about PostgreSQL. WordPress is one of such OSS projects. Long time

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

Hi, Amit. At Mon, 7 Mar 2016 16:16:30 +0900, Amit Langote wrote in <56dd2ace.5050...@lab.ntt.co.jp> > > Horiguchi-san, > > Thanks a lot for taking a look! > > On 2016/03/07 13:02, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > At Sat, 5 Mar 2016 16:41:29 +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 4

Re: [HACKERS] Way to check whether a particular block is on the shared_buffer?

> -Original Message- > From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Robert Haas > Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2016 2:42 AM > To: Kaigai Kouhei(海外 浩平) > Cc: Jim Nasby; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Amit Langote > Subject: Re: [HACKERS]

[HACKERS] (pgaudit) Audit log is not output after the SET ROLE.

Hi. I am testing the pgaudit(https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/463/). (use "http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/56b0101b.6070...@pgmasters.net"; attached patch on 9.6-devel) I found strange thing. - After SET ROLE, part of the SQL is not the audit log output. - SQL comprising a relation is

Re: [HACKERS] extend pgbench expressions with functions

- 32-b: add double functions, including double variables - 32-c: remove \setrandom support (advice to use \set + random instead) Here is a rebased version after Tom's updates, 33-b & 33-c. I also extended the floating point syntax to signed accept signed exponents, and changed the regexpr st

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

Horiguchi-san, Thanks for a quick reply, :) On 2016/03/07 18:18, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Mon, 7 Mar 2016 16:16:30 +0900, Amit Langote wrote: >> On 2016/03/07 13:02, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: >>> The 0001-P.. adds the following interface functions. >>> >>> I don't like to treat the target ob

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

On 2016/03/07 19:11, Amit Langote wrote: > we should re-introduce[1] a fixed-size char st_progress_message[] field. Sorry, that [1] does not refer to anything, just a leftover from my draft. I thought I had a link handy for an email where some sort of justification was given as to why st_progress

Re: [HACKERS] Greeting for coming back, and where is PostgreSQL going

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 2:28 PM, MauMau wrote: > I'm relieved to know that community people use Emacs for editing SGML/XML. > My main editor on Linux is Emacs. Yes, I'm using emacs too for sgml editing. This proves to be quick handy at the end. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

On 03/07/2016 07:30 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Mark Kirkwood For cloud - in particular Openstack (which I am working with ATM), the biggest thing would be: - multi-master replication or failing

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup compression TODO item

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 7:36 PM, Euler Taveira wrote: > On 03-03-2016 14:44, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Andres Freund > > wrote: > > > > On 2016-03-03 18:31:03 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > I think we want it at protocol lev

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

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Shulgin, Oleksandr > wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera > > > wrote: > >> Shulgin, Oleksandr wrote: > >> > >> > Alright. I'm attaching the latest version of this patch split in two > >>

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

Hi, On Mon, 2016-03-07 at 12:17 +0100, Shulgin, Oleksandr wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Robert Haas > wrote: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Shulgin, Oleksandr > wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera > > > wrote: >

Re: [HACKERS] ExecGather() + nworkers

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > Now, you might wonder why it is that the leader cannot also sort runs, > just as a worker would. It's possible, but it isn't exactly > straightforward. You have to have special case

Re: [HACKERS] The plan for FDW-based sharding

On 5 March 2016 at 23:41, Kevin Grittner wrote: > > > I'd be really interested in some ideas on how that information might be > > usefully accessed. If we could write info on when to apply commits to the > > xlog in serializable mode that'd be very handy, especially when looking > to > > the futu

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

On 7 March 2016 at 17:06, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > * Only 24 open source projects are listed as interoperable. > > Open Source Projects Using PostgreSQL > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/OpenSource_Projects_Using_PostgreSQL > > It's pity that some very popular OSS projects do not care about > P

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 9:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Perhaps it was intentional when written, but if Robert's advice is correct > > that the new upper-planner path nodes should copy up parallel_degree from > > their children, then it cann

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

On 6 March 2016 at 13:46, Mark Kirkwood wrote: > > For cloud - in particular Openstack (which I am working with ATM), the > biggest thing would be: > > - multi-master replication > Working on it ;) > or failing that: > > - self managing single master failover (voting/quorum etc) > I don't th

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

From: Craig Ringer -- We could help ORMs solve the N+1 SELECTs problem and help them avoid transferring vast join projections unnecessarily. That'd make PostgreSQL pretty compelling for exactly the users we're mostly too busy dismissing to consider

Re: [HACKERS] Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW

On 2016/03/05 5:45, Robert Haas wrote: Some comments on the latest version. I haven't reviewed the postgres_fdw changes in detail here, so this is just about the core changes. Thank you for taking the time to review the patch! I see that show_plan_tlist checks whether the operation is any of

Re: [HACKERS] Fix handling of invalid sockets returned by PQsocket()

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 2/17/16 10:52 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 1:58 AM, Alvaro Herrera >> > wrote: >> >> Michael Paquier wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >> >>> >> >>> After looking at Alvaro's message mentioning t

Re: [HACKERS] (pgaudit) Audit log is not output after the SET ROLE.

On 3/7/16 4:39 AM, Toshi Harada wrote: > > I am testing the pgaudit(https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/463/). > (use "http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/56b0101b.6070...@pgmasters.net"; > attached patch on 9.6-devel) > > I found strange thing. > > - After SET ROLE, part of the SQL is not the

Re: [HACKERS] VS 2015 support in src/tools/msvc

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 5:55 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 03/05/2016 01:31 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Andrew Dunstan >> wrote: >>> >>> Here is a translation into perl of the sed script, courtesy of the s2p >>> incarnation of psed: >>>

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

> The killer there was that the plugin could only alter queries used by > Wordpress core. Nobody just uses Wordpress core. The whole reason > Wordpress became popular is the vast collection of plugins, themes, etc. > 90% of which are written by three stoned monkeys who once saw a PHP 4 > manual in

[HACKERS] Splitting lengthy sgml files

There are very lengthy (over 10k lines, for example) SGML files in docs. While working on translating docs using GitHub, I noticed that sometimes diffs are not showed in pull requests due to the limitation of GitHub, which makes me pretty difficult to review PR. Any chance to split those lengthy SG

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

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Sat, 5 Mar 2016 16:41:29 +0900, Amit Langote > wrote in >> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >> > So, I took the Vinayak's latest patch and rewrote it a little >> ... >> > I broke it into two: >> > >> > 0001-Provi

Re: [HACKERS] Relation extension scalability

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:49 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > I think one thing which needs more thoughts about this approach is that we > need to maintain some number of slots so that group extend for different > relations can happen in parallel. Do we want to provide simultaneous > extension for 1, 2,

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

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-02-12 15:56:45 +0100, Andres Freund wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> On 2016-02-10 23:26:20 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> > I think the part about whacking around the FDW API is a little more >> > potentially objectionable to others, so I want to

Re: [HACKERS] Is there a way around function search_path killing SQL function inlining?

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Regina Obe wrote: > I think the answer to this question is NO, but thought I'd ask. > > A lot of folks in PostGIS land are suffering from restore issues, > materialized view issues etc. because we have functions such as > > ST_Intersects > > Which does _ST_Intersect

Re: [HACKERS] Splitting lengthy sgml files

Tatsuo Ishii writes: > There are very lengthy (over 10k lines, for example) SGML files in > docs. While working on translating docs using GitHub, I noticed that > sometimes diffs are not showed in pull requests due to the limitation > of GitHub, which makes me pretty difficult to review PR. Any ch

Re: [HACKERS] The plan for FDW-based sharding

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > If FDW-based sharding works, I'm happy enough, I have no horse in this race. > If it doesn't work I don't much care either. What I'm worried about is it if > works like partitioning using inheritance works - horribly badly, but just > well eno

Re: [HACKERS] The plan for FDW-based sharding

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 5 March 2016 at 23:41, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> The only place you *need* to vary from commit order for correctness >> is when there are overlapping SERIALIZABLE transactions, one >> modifies data and commits, and another reads the old ver

Re: [HACKERS] Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 7:22 AM, Dilip Kumar wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Dilip Kumar wrote: >> And this latest result (no regression) is on X86 but on my local machine. >> >> I did not exactly saw what this new version of patch is doing different, >> so I will test this version in ot

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Amit Kapila writes: >> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Is there some reason why hash and nestloop are safe but merge isn't? > >> I think it is because we consider to pushdown hash and nestloop to workers, >> but not merge jo

Re: [HACKERS] Badly designed error reporting code in controldata_utils.c

On 03/06/2016 07:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway writes: >> On 03/06/2016 05:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> That's much better, but is there a reason you're using exit(2) >>> and not exit(EXIT_FAILURE) ? > >> Only because I was trying to stick with what was originally in >> src/bin/pg_controldata

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

Robert Haas writes: > The currently-committed code generates paths where nested loops and > hash joins get pushed beneath the Gather node, but does not generate > paths where merge joins have been pushed beneath the Gather node. And > the reason I didn't try to generate those paths is because I b

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > The currently-committed code generates paths where nested loops and > hash joins get pushed beneath the Gather node, but does not generate > paths where merge joins have been pushed beneath the Gather node. And > the reason I didn't try to ge

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

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:17 AM, Shulgin, Oleksandr wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Shulgin, Oleksandr >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> > >> > wrote: >> >> Shulgin, Oleksandr wrote: >> >> >> >> > Al

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> The currently-committed code generates paths where nested loops and >> hash joins get pushed beneath the Gather node, but does not generate >> paths where merge joins have been pushed beneath the Gather node. And >> the re

Re: [HACKERS] psql completion for ids in multibyte string

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 11:24 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:30:17 -0500, Robert Haas wrote > in >> >>> I committed this and back-patched this but (1) I avoided changing the >> >>> other functions for now and (2) I gave both the byte length and the >> >>> character length n

Re: [HACKERS] Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 7:53 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > Another option to avoid such a hazard would be to remove the two changes > from ExecInitModifyTable and create ExecAuxRowMarks and junk filters even in > the pushdown case. I made the changes because we won't use ExecAuxRowMarks > in that cas

Re: [HACKERS] checkpointer continuous flushing - V16

On 2016-03-01 16:06:47 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote: > 1) HP DL380 G5 (old rack server) > - 2x Xeon E5450, 16GB RAM (8 cores) > - 4x 10k SAS drives in RAID-10 on H400 controller (with BBWC) > - RedHat 6 > - shared_buffers = 4GB > - min_wal_size = 2GB > - max_wal_size = 6GB > > 2) workstation with i5

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

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Jim Nasby writes: On 3/2/16 4:21 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > I think you should commit this. The chances of anyone other

Re: [HACKERS] checkpointer continuous flushing - V16

On 2016-03-07 09:41:51 -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > > Due to the difference in amount of RAM, each machine used different scales - > > the goal is to have small, ~50% RAM, >200% RAM sizes: > > > > 1) Xeon: 100, 400, 6000 > > 2) i5: 50, 200, 3000 > > > > The commits actually tested are > > > >

Re: [HACKERS] checkpointer continuous flushing - V18

On 2016-02-22 20:44:35 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > >>Random updates on 16 tables which total to 1.1GB of data, so this is in > >>buffer, no significant "read" traffic. > >> > >>(1) with 16 tablespaces (1 per table) on 1 disk : 680.0 tps > >>per second avg, stddev [ min q1 median d3 max ] <

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

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Attached latest version optimisation patch. > I'm still consider regarding pg_upgrade regression test code, so I > will submit that patch later. I was thinking more about this today and I think that we don't actually need the PD_ALL_FROZEN

Re: [HACKERS] ExecGather() + nworkers

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:04 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > Your point is genuine, but OTOH let us say if max_parallel_degree = 1 means > parallelism is disabled then when somebody sets max_parallel_degree = 2, > then it looks somewhat odd to me that, it will mean that 1 worker process > can be used for

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

From: Craig Ringer -- * Make a directory of software/services that can be used with PostgreSQL on the community web site (wiki.postgresql.org or www.postgresql.org). Software/services vendors and PostgreSQL developers/users can edit this directory.

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

On 03/07/2016 11:31 AM, MauMau wrote: Why don't we enrich the catalog? I'd like to hear ideas on how to enrich the catalog efficiently. It's ideal for software vendors and users to voluntarily add to the catalog. I think the product/software directory has vastly outlived its purpose. We are

Re: [HACKERS] ExecGather() + nworkers

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:04 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> Your point is genuine, but OTOH let us say if max_parallel_degree = 1 means >> parallelism is disabled then when somebody sets max_parallel_degree = 2, >> then it looks somewhat odd to m

Re: [HACKERS] checkpointer continuous flushing - V18

Hello Andres, (1) with 16 tablespaces (1 per table) on 1 disk : 680.0 tps per second avg, stddev [ min q1 median d3 max ] <=300tps 679.6 ± 750.4 [0.0, 317.0, 371.0, 438.5, 2724.0] 19.5% (2) with 1 tablespace on 1 disk : 956.0 tps per second avg, stddev [ min q1 median d3 max ] <=300tp

[HACKERS] Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

THE ISSUE: In JDBC there is a flag called RETURN_GENERATED_KEYS -- https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/sql/Statement.html#RETURN_GENERATED_KEYS Which is left quite ambiguous, but in general it is used to return the "generated" Primary Key on INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE -- which is mostly

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

On 03/07/2016 12:32 PM, Igal @ Lucee.org wrote: The problem is that we do not always know in advance what the Primary Key is, and therefore a solution that was implemented in the pgjdbc I agree that the problem is that you don't always know what the primary key is. I would argue the solutio

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

On 3/7/2016 12:45 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: I agree that the problem is that you don't always know what the primary key is. I would argue the solution is to check before you write the query. Sure, that would be great, but perhaps I should have give some more context: We have an applicatio

Re: [HACKERS] unexpected result from to_tsvector

2016-02-23 20:53 GMT+03:00 Artur Zakirov : > Hello, > > Here is a little patch. It fixes this issue > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160217080048.26357.49...@wrigleys.postgresql.org > > Without patch we get wrong result for the second email 't...@123-reg.ro': > > => SELECT * FROM ts_debug(

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

I wrote: >> Attached is a version that addresses today's concerns, and also finishes >> filling in the loose ends I'd left before, such as documentation and >> outfuncs.c support. I think this is in a committable state now, though >> I plan to read through the whole thing again. The extra read-th

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Upper planner pathification

On 8 March 2016 at 10:01, Tom Lane wrote: > I've pushed it now; we'll soon see if the buildfarm finds any problems. Fantastic! I'm looking forward to all the future optimisation opportunities that this opens up. Thanks for making this happen. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQua

Re: [HACKERS] checkpointer continuous flushing - V18

On 2016-03-07 21:10:19 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote: > Now I cannot see how having one context per table space would have a > significant negative performance impact. The 'dirty data' etc. limits are global, not per block device. By having several contexts with unflushed dirty data the total amount

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

"Igal @ Lucee.org" writes: > On 3/7/2016 12:45 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> I agree that the problem is that you don't always know what the >> primary key is. >> I would argue the solution is to check before you write the query. Yeah. I'm rather suspicious of this proposal; I do not think it's

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

On 07/03/16 11:54, José Luis Tallón wrote: On 03/07/2016 07:30 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Mark Kirkwood For cloud - in particular Openstack (which I am working with ATM), the biggest thing wou

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

On 3/7/2016 1:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Yeah. I'm rather suspicious of this proposal; I do not think it's actually very useful to return a primary-key value without any indication of what the primary key is. There are also corner cases where it seems pretty ill-defined. For example, suppose you

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

MauMau, Crossing this over to pgsql-advocacy list where it really belongs. That's what that list is *for*. Especially since the discussion on -hackers has focused on new PostgreSQL Features, which while also good don't address the general question. On 03/05/2016 09:29 PM, MauMau wrote: > Hello,

[HACKERS] New competition from Microsoft?

All, http://blogs.microsoft.com/?p=67248 Once SQL Server is available on Linux, we're going to see more people using it as an alternative to PostgreSQL. Especially since they're picking up a lot of our better features, like R support. -- -- Josh Berkus Red Hat OSAS (any opinions are my own)

[HACKERS] Minor bug affecting ON CONFLICT lock wait log messages

Attached patch fixes a bug reported privately by Stephen this morning. He complained about deadlocking ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING statements. There were no exclusion constraints involved, and yet they were incorrectly indicated as being involved in log messages that related to these deadlocks. -- Pet

Re: [HACKERS] unexpected result from to_tsvector

Hello, On 07.03.2016 23:55, Dmitrii Golub wrote: Hello, Should we added tests for this case? I think we should. I have added tests for teo...@123-stack.net and 1...@stack.net emails. 123_reg.ro is not valid domain name, bacause of symbol "_" https://tools.ietf.org/

Re: [HACKERS] New competition from Microsoft?

On 03/07/2016 01:43 PM, Josh berkus wrote: > http://blogs.microsoft.com/?p=67248 > > Once SQL Server is available on Linux, we're going to see more people > using it as an alternative to PostgreSQL. Especially since they're > picking up a lot of our better features, like R support. IANAL, but I

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Aggregate

On 5 March 2016 at 07:25, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:00 PM, David Rowley >> 3. The code never attempts to mix and match Grouping Agg and Hash Agg >> plans. e.g it could be an idea to perform Partial Hash Aggregate -> >> Gather -> Sort -> Finalize Group Aggregate, or hash as in

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

On 03/07/2016 01:37 PM, Josh berkus wrote: > MauMau, > > Crossing this over to pgsql-advocacy list where it really belongs. > That's what that list is *for*. > > Especially since the discussion on -hackers has focused on new > PostgreSQL Features, which while also good don't address the general >

Re: [HACKERS] New competition from Microsoft?

* Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote: > On 03/07/2016 01:43 PM, Josh berkus wrote: > > http://blogs.microsoft.com/?p=67248 > > > > Once SQL Server is available on Linux, we're going to see more people > > using it as an alternative to PostgreSQL. Especially since they're > > picking up a lot o

Re: [HACKERS] New competition from Microsoft?

On 03/07/2016 01:43 PM, Josh berkus wrote: All, http://blogs.microsoft.com/?p=67248 Once SQL Server is available on Linux, we're going to see more people using it as an alternative to PostgreSQL. Especially since they're picking up a lot of our better features, like R support. Yes but: 1.

Re: [HACKERS] New competition from Microsoft?

On 03/07/2016 02:26 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote: >> On 03/07/2016 01:43 PM, Josh berkus wrote: >>> http://blogs.microsoft.com/?p=67248 >>> >>> Once SQL Server is available on Linux, we're going to see more people >>> using it as an alternative to PostgreSQL.

Re: [HACKERS] New competition from Microsoft?

Microsoft is only trying to raise some awareness for their new ASP.NET 5 multi-platform, which works closely with MSSQL. I don't believe they are honestly interested in the *NIX user. They extend their userbase in the hope to get them onto Azure. -Original Message- From: pgsql-hackers-o

Re: [HACKERS] New competition from Microsoft?

On 07/03/16 23:32, Joshua D. Drake wrote: On 03/07/2016 01:43 PM, Josh berkus wrote: All, http://blogs.microsoft.com/?p=67248 Once SQL Server is available on Linux, we're going to see more people using it as an alternative to PostgreSQL. Especially since they're picking up a lot of our bett

Re: [HACKERS] Splitting lengthy sgml files

> Surely that's a github bug that you should be complaining to them about? No, it's a known limitation: https://help.github.com/articles/what-are-the-limits-for-viewing-content-and-diffs-in-my-repository/ > I'm disinclined to split existing files because (a) it would complicate > back-patching an

Re: [HACKERS] New competition from Microsoft?

On 03/07/2016 01:43 PM, Josh berkus wrote: All, http://blogs.microsoft.com/?p=67248 Once SQL Server is available on Linux, we're going to see more people using it as an alternative to PostgreSQL. Especially since they're picking up a lot of our better features, like R support. Sorry, that w

[HACKERS] Fix misspelling of "parallel"

The attached fixes a small spelling error in a comment. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services parallel_spelling_fix.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgres

[HACKERS] Typo in logicaldecoding docs

The attached fixes a small error in the logicaldecoding docs. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services logicaldecoding_docs_typo_fix.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-ha

Re: [HACKERS] Badly designed error reporting code in controldata_utils.c

On 03/07/2016 08:02 AM, Joe Conway wrote: > On 03/06/2016 07:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Joe Conway writes: >>> On 03/06/2016 05:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote: That's much better, but is there a reason you're using exit(2) and not exit(EXIT_FAILURE) ? >> >>> Only because I was trying to stick with

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

Hi On 08/03/16 05:32, Igal @ Lucee.org wrote: > THE ISSUE: > > In JDBC there is a flag called RETURN_GENERATED_KEYS -- > https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/sql/Statement.html#RETURN_GENERATED_KEYS > (...) > THE PROPOSAL: > > The proposal is to allow something like RETURNING primary

Re: [HACKERS] Is there a way around function search_path killing SQL function inlining?

>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Regina Obe > wrote: >> I think the answer to this question is NO, but thought I'd ask. >> >> A lot of folks in PostGIS land are suffering from restore issues, >> materialized view issues etc. because we have functions such as >> >> ST_Intersects >> >> Which does

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

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> I actually think end-users might well want to use it. Also, I created >> it by hacking up pg_freespacemap, so it may make sense to have it in >> the same place. >> I would also be tempted to add an additional C functions that scan the >> e

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

Ian, On 3/7/2016 4:17 PM, Ian Barwick wrote: FYI something similar has been proposed before: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/53953efb.8070...@2ndquadrant.com The linked thread might provide more insights into the issues surrounding this proposal. It's funny how I've encountered the

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

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > Here's an updated patch with an API that I think is much more > reasonable to expose to users, and documentation! It assumes that the > patch I posted a few hours ago to remove PD_ALL_FROZEN will be > accepted; if that falls apart for some reas

Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning

Hi Corey, Sorry for replying so late. On 2016/02/25 3:31, Corey Huinker wrote: > [ ... ] > So I would assume that we'd use a syntax that presumed the columns were in > a composite range type. > > Which means your creates would look like (following Robert Haas's implied > suggestion that we l

Re: [HACKERS] [PATH] Jsonb, insert a new value into an array at arbitrary position

On 2016-02-29 17:19+00, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote: On 2016-02-24 19:37+00, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> Also this patch needs documentation. > I've added new version in attachments, thanks. Hello! The first pass of a review is below. 1. Rename the "flag" variable to something more me

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:25 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > pg_rewind will help a lot there if it proves robust enough - FWIW, some of my colleagues are doing a lot of QE/QA on a HA solution based on pg_rewind, and it is proving to be quite stable for the moment, they are having a hard time breaking it

Re: [HACKERS] Fix misspelling of "parallel"

David Rowley writes: > The attached fixes a small spelling error in a comment. "grep" found another one. Pushed, thanks! regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql

[HACKERS] Allowing to run a buildfarm animal under valgrind

Hi, I'm setting up a buildfarm animal that runs under valgrind. Unfortunately there's not really any good solution to force make check et al. to start postgres wrapped in valgrind. For now I've resorted to adding something like sub replace_postgres { my $srcdir=$use_vpath ? "../pgsql/" : "."

Re: [HACKERS] Typo in logicaldecoding docs

David Rowley writes: > The attached fixes a small error in the logicaldecoding docs. Pushed, thanks. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-h

Re: [HACKERS] silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-03-05 19:54:05 -0800, Andres Freund wrote: >> I started working on this; delayed by taking longer than planned on the >> logical decoding stuff (quite a bit complicated by >> e1a11d93111ff3fba7a91f3f2ac0b0aca16909a8). I'm not very hap

Re: [HACKERS] Badly designed error reporting code in controldata_utils.c

Joe Conway writes: > Committed/pushed with exit(EXIT_FAILURE) Thanks! I lit off a new run on gaur/pademelon to confirm. Should have results in six hours or so... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes t

Re: [HACKERS] silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions

Hi, On 2016-03-08 12:01:18 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > I have spent a couple of hours looking at that in details, and the > patch is neat. Cool. Doing some more polishing right now. Will be back with an updated version soonish. Did you do some testing? > + * This routine ensures that, after

Re: [HACKERS] silent data loss with ext4 / all current versions

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-03-08 12:01:18 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> I have spent a couple of hours looking at that in details, and the >> patch is neat. > > Cool. Doing some more polishing right now. Will be back with an updated > version soonish. > > Di

Re: [HACKERS] The plan for FDW-based sharding

On 7 March 2016 at 23:02, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Craig Ringer > wrote: > > If FDW-based sharding works, I'm happy enough, I have no horse in this > race. > > If it doesn't work I don't much care either. What I'm worried about is > it if > > works like partitioning

Re: [HACKERS] Optimizer questions

Konstantin Knizhnik writes: > Attached please find improved version of the optimizer patch for LIMIT clause. This patch isn't anywhere close to working after 3fc6e2d7f5b652b4. (TBH, the reason I was negative about this upthread is that I had that one in the oven and knew it would conflict spectac

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

On 8 March 2016 at 08:56, Igal @ Lucee.org wrote: > > I'm not sure why it was not accepted at the end? The biggest issue, though it might not be clear from that thread, is that what exactly it means to "return generated keys" is poorly defined by JDBC, and not necessarily the same thing as "re

Re: [HACKERS] How can we expand PostgreSQL ecosystem?

On 7 March 2016 at 20:55, MauMau wrote: > From: Craig Ringer > -- > We could help ORMs solve the N+1 SELECTs problem and help them avoid > transferring vast join projections unnecessarily. That'd make PostgreSQL > pretty compelling for exactly the u

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

Craig Ringer writes: > On 8 March 2016 at 08:56, Igal @ Lucee.org wrote: >> I'm not sure why it was not accepted at the end? > The biggest issue, though it might not be clear from that thread, is that > what exactly it means to "return generated keys" is poorly defined by JDBC, > and not necessa

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

Hello, thank you for updating this tool. At Mon, 7 Mar 2016 14:03:08 -0500, Robert Haas wrote in > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: > > Attached latest version optimisation patch. > > I'm still consider regarding pg_upgrade regression test code, so I > > will submit t

  1   2   >