Re: [HACKERS] Fix of doc for synchronous_standby_names.

I came to think that both of you are misunderstanding how synchronous standbys are choosed so I'd like to clarify the behavior. At Fri, 22 Apr 2016 11:09:28 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] kqueue

On 2016-04-21 14:25:06 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2016-04-21 14:15:53 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Thomas Munro > >> wrote: > >> > On the

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

Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 04/21/2016 05:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Do the other contrib modules all pass? I can't recall if seg was the >> only one we'd left like this. > Only seg fails. As a crosscheck, I put some code into fmgr_c_validator() to log a message when

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Gavin Flower wrote: > On 22/04/16 06:07, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> >>> Robert Haas writes: >>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Tom

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

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 4:56 AM, Christian Ullrich wrote: > * From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:and...@dunslane.net] > >> 4. The compiler complains about one of Microsoft's own header files - >> essentially it dislikes the=is construct: >> >> typedef enum { ... }; >> >> It

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Inline initial comparisons in TestForOldSnapshot()

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Kevin Grittner >> wrote: >>> Inline initial comparisons in TestForOldSnapshot() >>

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Inline initial comparisons in TestForOldSnapshot()

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Kevin Grittner > wrote: >> Inline initial comparisons in TestForOldSnapshot() > > This seems to have broken Windows builds. Is there something > special that

Re: [HACKERS] Description of ForeignPath

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 3:37 AM, Amit Langote wrote: >> I think it'd be better to match the comment with that for >> create_foreignscan_path(). So how about "ForeignPath represents a >> potential scan of a foreign table, foreign join, or foreign upper-relation >>

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Breakage with VACUUM ANALYSE + partitions

On 2016-04-15 13:42:34 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 1:39 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen > wrote: > > At 2016-04-12 09:00:57 -0400, robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > >> > > >> >

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: >> max_parallel_degree currently defaults to 0. I think we should enable >> it by default for at least the beta period. Otherwise we're primarily >> going to get reports back after

Re: [HACKERS] Description of ForeignPath

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:32 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 3:37 AM, Amit Langote wrote: >>> I think it'd be better to match the comment with that for >>> create_foreignscan_path(). So how about "ForeignPath represents a >>> potential scan of a foreign

Re: [HACKERS] Defaults for replication/backup

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > So what more do we need to just get going with this? Given feature freeze > we're perhaps too late to actually build the parameter feature for initdb, > but we could still change the defaults (and then we could add

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Andres Freund writes: >>> max_parallel_degree currently defaults to 0. I think we should enable >>> it by default for at least the beta period. Otherwise

Re: [HACKERS] Fix of doc for synchronous_standby_names.

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Amit Langote wrote: > ISTM, the sentence describes what happens in a *single instance* of > encountering duplicate (same name found in primary_conninfo of 2 or more > standbys). It's still one name but which of the standbys claims

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Move each SLRU's lwlocks to a separate tranche.

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 7:31 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > In the patch attached to > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160411051004.yvniqb2pkc7re...@alap3.anarazel.de > I did this instead by fixing up the actual shared memory allocation, > which seems a tiny bit cleaner.

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_activity crashes

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > At Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:14:16 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote > in <571780a8.4070...@2ndquadrant.com> >> I noticed sporadic segfaults when selecting from pg_stat_activity on >> current

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Ants Aasma wrote: > >> However, while checking out if my proof of concept patch actually >> works I hit another issue. I couldn't get my test for the feature to >>

Re: [HACKERS] checkpoint_flush_after documentation inconsistency

On 2016-04-18 14:33:28 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > The documentation says that the default value is 128Kb on Linux, but the > > code says it's 256Kb. > > > > Not sure which one is correct, but the other one should be

Re: [HACKERS] Wire protocol change

Tatsuo Ishii writes: > If we are going to change the wire protocol, it would be nice if parse > complete message includes an identification of the previous parse > message. Same thing can be said to bind complete, command complete and > close complete. > The identification

[HACKERS] Dead code in win32.h

src/include/port/win32.h contains (starting around line 270): /* * Supplement to . */ #undef EAGAIN #undef EINTR #define EINTR WSAEINTR #define EAGAIN WSAEWOULDBLOCK #undef EMSGSIZE #define EMSGSIZE WSAEMSGSIZE #undef EAFNOSUPPORT #define EAFNOSUPPORT WSAEAFNOSUPPORT #undef EWOULDBLOCK #define

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Inline initial comparisons in TestForOldSnapshot()

Kevin Grittner writes: > No joy with that shot in the dark. > Should I add PGDLLEXPORT to the declaration of > old_snapshot_threshold. That doesn't seem to be documented > anywhere, or have any useful comments; but it looks like it *might* > be the arcane incantation needed

Re: [HACKERS] Dead code in win32.h

I wrote: > Perhaps I'm missing something, but if so, in what way is the > "#if _MSC_VER >= 1600" stanza not totally useless given the > immediately preceding macro redefinitions? Some rummaging in the git history says that that stanza did something when it was added (in 63876d3ba), but the later

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Andres Freund writes: max_parallel_degree currently defaults to 0. I think we

Re: [HACKERS] kqueue

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On the WaitEventSet thread I posted a small patch to add kqueue > support[1]. Since then I peeked at how some other software[2] > interacts with kqueue and discovered that there are platforms > including NetBSD

Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the size of BufferTag & remodeling forks

On 2016-04-19 15:44:36 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Andres Freund wrote: > > > I've actually changed course a bit and I'm trying something different: A > > two level structure. One hashtable that maps (RelFileNode, ForkNumber) > > to a 'open relation' data structure, and from there a radix tree

Re: [HACKERS] kqueue

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-04-21 14:15:53 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Thomas Munro >> wrote: >> > On the WaitEventSet thread I posted a small patch to add kqueue >> >

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add trigonometric functions that work in degrees.

On 04/19/2016 04:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Pushed. Peter, what results do you get from these tests on your > problematic machine? acosd(x), acosd(x) IN (0,60,90,120,180) AS acosd_exact FROM (VALUES (-1), (-0.5), (0), (0.5), (1)) AS t(x); - x | asind | asind_exact | acosd |

Re: [HACKERS] kqueue

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >> > On 2016-04-21 14:15:53 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Thomas Munro >> >>

Re: [HACKERS] kqueue

Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2016-04-21 14:15:53 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Thomas Munro > >> wrote: > >> > On the WaitEventSet thread I posted a small

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

On 04/11/2016 03:47 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: Now, I have produced two patches: - 0001-Support-for-VS-2015-locale-hack.patch, which makes use of __crt_locale_data_public in ucrt/corecrt.h. This is definitely

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_activity crashes

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: >> At Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:14:16 +0200, Petr Jelinek >> wrote in <571780a8.4070...@2ndquadrant.com>

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Breakage with VACUUM ANALYSE + partitions

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Andres Freund wrote: >> My attempts to test things were also singularly unrewarding. Even >> after messing with the filesystem in various ways, I couldn't figure >> out exactly how this makes a difference. > > What do you mean by this? You

Re: [HACKERS] kqueue

On 2016-04-21 14:15:53 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Thomas Munro > wrote: > > On the WaitEventSet thread I posted a small patch to add kqueue > > support[1]. Since then I peeked at how some other software[2] > > interacts with kqueue

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

* From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:and...@dunslane.net] > 4. The compiler complains about one of Microsoft's own header files - > essentially it dislikes the=is construct: > > typedef enum { ... }; > > It would be nice to make it shut up about it. I doubt that's possible; the declaration *is*

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

On 22/04/16 06:07, Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Robert Haas writes: On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Andres Freund writes: max_parallel_degree

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

Andrew Dunstan writes: > 5. most importantly, on my Release/X64 build, I am getting a regression > failure on contrib/seg. regression diffs attached. Until that's fixed > this isn't going anywhere. I'll bet a nickel that this means MSVC has broken the ABI rules that

Re: [HACKERS] Should XLogInsert() be done only inside a critical section?

Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Anyway, I went through our tree and added START/END_CRIT_SECTION calls > > around all XLogInsert calls that could currently be reached without one; > > see attached. Since this potentially breaks

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Ants Aasma wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> Could you provide enough to make that a self-contained >> reproducible test case [?] > [provided] Thanks! I have your test case running, and

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Gavin Flower > wrote: >> Why not 4? As most processors now have at least 4 physical cores, & surely >> it be more likely to flush out race conditions. > Because if we did that, then

[HACKERS] Incomplete description for \t in psql documentation - should mention caption

​​http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/interactive/app-psql.html """ \t Toggles the display of output column name headings and row count footer. This command is equivalent to \pset tuples_only and is provided for convenience. """ Experience says that a table caption (i.e., \C) is also suppressed

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Gavin Flower wrote: > On 22/04/16 06:07, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> >>> Robert Haas writes: On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:28 PM,

Re: [HACKERS] Fix of doc for synchronous_standby_names.

I'm not so confident on me but, please let me continue on this a bit more for my understanding. At Thu, 21 Apr 2016 13:33:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote in > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Amit Langote >

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

On 2016/04/22 9:22, Michael Paquier wrote: On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:53 PM, Robert Haas wrote: I have committed this patch. Thanks for working on this. Sorry for the delay. Thanks for the push. open_item--; Thank you, Robert and Michael. Best regards, Etsuro

Re: [HACKERS] Should XLogInsert() be done only inside a critical section?

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> > Anyway, I went through our tree and added START/END_CRIT_SECTION calls >> > around all XLogInsert calls that

Re: [HACKERS] more parallel query documentation

On 2016/04/15 12:02, Robert Haas wrote: > As previously threatened, I have written some user documentation for > parallel query. I put it up here: > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Parallel_Query > > This is not totally comprehensive and I can think of a few more > details that could be

Re: [HACKERS] Disallow unique index on system columns

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 9:24 PM Tom Lane wrote: > > SELECT FROM table WHERE my_func('table', ctid) ==> 'index condition' > > Um, why's the ctid important here, or perhaps more directly, what is > it you're really trying to do? > This function is defined as

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_activity crashes

At Thu, 21 Apr 2016 14:05:28 -0400, Robert Haas wrote in > >>> Here is PoC patch which fixes the problem. I am wondering if we should > >>> raise warning in the pg_stat_get_backend_wait_event_type() and >

Re: [HACKERS] Parser extensions (maybe for 10?)

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-04-19 15:32:07 +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote: >> > As Tom says, we can't easily break it down into multiple co-operating >> > pieces, so lets forget that as unworkable. >> >> I'm sorry but didn't I just

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

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:53 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Etsuro Fujita >> wrote: >>> Attached is an updated version of the

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add trigonometric functions that work in degrees.

Peter Eisentraut writes: > On 04/19/2016 04:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Pushed. Peter, what results do you get from these tests on your >> problematic machine? > acosd(x), > acosd(x) IN (0,60,90,120,180) AS acosd_exact > FROM (VALUES (-1), (-0.5), (0), (0.5),

Re: [HACKERS] EXPLAIN VERBOSE with parallel Aggregate

On 21 April 2016 at 17:14, Tom Lane wrote: > David Rowley writes: >> I'd like to admit that I'm a bit confused as to why >> generate_function_name(), when it already knows the funcid, bothers to >> call func_get_detail(), which performs a search

Re: [HACKERS] Dead code in win32.h

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 4:52 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: >> Perhaps I'm missing something, but if so, in what way is the >> "#if _MSC_VER >= 1600" stanza not totally useless given the >> immediately preceding macro redefinitions? > > Some rummaging in the git history says

[HACKERS] Missing lookup in msvcr120 for pgwin32_putenv

Hi all, While looking at e545281 I bumped into the following thing that has visibly been forgotten since VS2013 support has been added: --- a/src/port/win32env.c +++ b/src/port/win32env.c @@ -67,6 +67,9 @@ pgwin32_putenv(const char *envval) "msvcr110", 0, NULL },

[HACKERS] New 9.6 external sort guidance around temp_tablespaces and maintenance_work_mem

Postgres 9.6 saw the performance characteristics of sorting significantly altered. While almost every external sort will see a benefit without any change in configuration, there is a new scope for DBAs to tune the system to better take advantage of the improved implementation of external sorting.

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

On 04/21/2016 05:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote: IIRC, we had intentionally left contrib/seg using mostly V0 calling convention as a canary to let us know when that broke. It's a bit astonishing that it lasted this long, maybe. But it looks like we're going to have to convert at least the

Re: [HACKERS] Wire protocol compression

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Aleksander Alekseev < a.aleks...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > > Does it make sense to you guys to discuss compression outside of TLS? > > There are potentially huge bandwidth savings which could benefit both > > WAN and non-WAN scenarios, and decoupling this problem

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

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > Attached is an updated version of the patch, which modified Michael's > version of the patch, as I proposed in [1] (see "Other changes:"). I > modified comments for pgfdw_get_result/pgfdw_exec_query also, mainly

Re: [HACKERS] Timeline following for logical slots

Noah Misch wrote: > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. Alvaro, > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open > item. If that responsibility lies elsewhere, please let us know whose > responsibility it is to fix this. Since new

Re: [HACKERS] Wire protocol compression

> I guess since the usual answer for compression was "use what SSL > provides you for free", it's rather unlikely that someone bothered to > make a proxy just for that purpose, and really, a proxy is just > another moving part in your setup: not everyone will be thrilled to > add that. It just

Re: [HACKERS] Wire protocol compression

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Aleksander Alekseev < a.aleks...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > > > or on Linux TCP/IP stack level. > > > > > > > Yes, but if you want to have both compression and encryption it is > > crucial to apply compression *before* encryption and I don't see how > > this can

Re: [HACKERS] Wire protocol compression

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Aleksander Alekseev < a.aleks...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > > I guess since the usual answer for compression was "use what SSL > > provides you for free", it's rather unlikely that someone bothered to > > make a proxy just for that purpose, and really, a proxy is

Re: [HACKERS] Wire protocol compression

> > or on Linux TCP/IP stack level. > > > > Yes, but if you want to have both compression and encryption it is > crucial to apply compression *before* encryption and I don't see how > this can happen with this approach. If I'm not mistaken IPSec gives you both compression and encryption. Just as

Re: [HACKERS] Wire protocol compression

On 21 April 2016 at 14:19, Shay Rojansky wrote: > Does it make sense to you guys to discuss compression outside of TLS? > Yes. > There are potentially huge bandwidth savings which could benefit both WAN > and non-WAN scenarios, and decoupling this problem from TLS would make

[HACKERS] Wire protocol compression

I know this has been discussed before ( http://postgresql.nabble.com/Compression-on-SSL-links-td2261205.html, http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/BANLkTi=Ba1ZCmBuwwn7M1wvPFioT=6n...@mail.gmail.com), but it seems to make sense to revisit this in 2016. Since CRIME in 2012, AFAIK compression with

Re: [HACKERS] snapshot too old, configured by time

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > In case anyone notices some code left at the bottom of bufmgr.h > related to inline functions, that was left on purpose, because I am > pretty sure that the fix for the performance regression observed > when the

Re: [HACKERS] Wire protocol compression

Craig Ringer writes: > On 21 April 2016 at 14:19, Shay Rojansky wrote: >> There are potentially huge bandwidth savings which could benefit both WAN >> and non-WAN scenarios, and decoupling this problem from TLS would make it >> both accessible to everyone

Re: [HACKERS] Wire protocol compression

On 04/21/2016 03:04 PM, Aleksander Alekseev wrote: I guess since the usual answer for compression was "use what SSL provides you for free", it's rather unlikely that someone bothered to make a proxy just for that purpose, and really, a proxy is just another moving part in your setup: not

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Ants Aasma wrote: > However, while checking out if my proof of concept patch actually > works I hit another issue. I couldn't get my test for the feature to > actually work. The test script I used is attached. Could you provide enough to

Re: [HACKERS] Why doesn't src/backend/port/win32/socket.c implement bind()?

I wrote: > Michael Paquier writes: >> And this gives the patch attached, just took the time to hack it. > I think this is a good idea, but (1) I'm inclined not to restrict it to > Windows, and (2) I think we should hold off applying it until we've seen > a failure or

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

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Etsuro Fujita > wrote: >> Attached is an updated version of the patch, which modified Michael's >> version of the patch, as I proposed in [1] (see

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

There are some previously unnoticed errors in docs (master branch), this patch fixes them. -- Dmitry Ivanov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com Russian Postgres Companydiff --git a/doc/src/sgml/textsearch.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/textsearch.sgml index 930c8f0..78eaf74 100644 ---

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Inline initial comparisons in TestForOldSnapshot()

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Inline initial comparisons in TestForOldSnapshot() This seems to have broken Windows builds. Is there something special that needs to be done if a function referenced from a contrib module changes to an inline

[HACKERS] Query Procedures

Hello, i'm a developer from italy and i need to make a query to get the list of stored procedures with its signature. Basically I would like to get the same list pgAdmin shows under the node functions of the database tree on left panel. with the query : p.oid AS SELECT oid , p.proname AS name ,

[HACKERS] Wire protocol change

If we are going to change the wire protocol, it would be nice if parse complete message includes an identification of the previous parse message. Same thing can be said to bind complete, command complete and close complete. The identification could be an either sequence number assigned to the

Re: [HACKERS] Query Procedures

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Andrea Adami wrote: > > Hello, i'm a developer from italy and i need to make a query to get the > list of stored procedures with its signature. > Basically I would like to get the same list pgAdmin shows under the node > functions of the database

Re: [HACKERS] Wire protocol compression

> Does it make sense to you guys to discuss compression outside of TLS? > There are potentially huge bandwidth savings which could benefit both > WAN and non-WAN scenarios, and decoupling this problem from TLS would > make it both accessible to everyone (assuming PostgreSQL clients > follow). It

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

On 2016/04/19 14:25, Etsuro Fujita wrote: On 2016/04/19 13:59, Michael Paquier wrote: But huge objection to that because this fragilizes the current logic postgres_fdw is based on: PQexec returns the last result to caller, I'd rather not break that logic for 9.6 stability's sake. IIUC, I

Re: [HACKERS] "parallel= " information is not coming in pg_dumpall for create aggregate

On 04/21/2016 08:36 AM, Robert Haas wrote: Nice catch, Tushar. Thanks for the patch, Fabrízio. Committed. Thanks, Verified against the latest sources of PG9.6 - issue has been fixed now. -- regards,tushar -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make