Re: [HACKERS] Multi column range partition table

On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 2:42 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote: > On 6 July 2017 at 22:43, Joe Conway wrote: >> I agree we should get this right the first time and I also agree with >> Dean's proposal, so I guess I'm a +2 > > On 7 July 2017 at 03:21, Amit

Re: [HACKERS] Subscription code improvements

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 5:19 AM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have done some review of subscription handling (well self-review) and >> here is the result of that (It's slightly

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM auth and Pgpool-II

On 07/13/17 21:54, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: >>> The comment in pg_hba.conf.sample seem to prefer md5 over clear text >>> password. >>> >>> # Note that "password" sends passwords in clear text; "md5" or >>> # "scram-sha-256" are preferred since they send encrypted passwords. >> >> Should that be

[HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] BUG #14634: On Windows pg_basebackup should write tar to stdout in binary mode

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 05/03/2017 07:32 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > >> [Adding -hackers mailing list] >> >> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 6:28 PM, wrote: >> >> The following bug has been logged on the website: >>>

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM auth and Pgpool-II

>> The comment in pg_hba.conf.sample seem to prefer md5 over clear text >> password. >> >> # Note that "password" sends passwords in clear text; "md5" or >> # "scram-sha-256" are preferred since they send encrypted passwords. > > Should that be reworded to eliminate "md5"? I'd consider

Re: [HACKERS] Inadequate infrastructure for NextValueExpr

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 9:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Somebody decided they could add a new primnode type without bothering to > build out very much infrastructure for it. Thus: > > regression=# create table foo (f1 int, f2 int generated always as identity); > CREATE TABLE >

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM auth and Pgpool-II

On 07/13/17 20:09, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > The comment in pg_hba.conf.sample seem to prefer md5 over clear text > password. > > # Note that "password" sends passwords in clear text; "md5" or > # "scram-sha-256" are preferred since they send encrypted passwords. Should that be reworded to

Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Claudio Freire wrote: > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Claudio Freire > wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Alexey Chernyshov >> wrote: >>> Thank you for the patch and

Re: [HACKERS] Update description of \d[S+] in \?

On 2017/07/13 19:57, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Amit Langote > wrote: >> The description of \d[S+] currently does not mention that it will list >> materialized views and foreign tables. Attached fixes that. >> > > I guess the same

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM auth and Pgpool-II

>> Using a clear text password would not be acceptable for users even >> through an encrypted connection, I think. > > Really, I don't think users who are concerned with security should be > using the md5 method either. The comment in pg_hba.conf.sample seem to prefer md5 over clear text

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stop_backup(wait_for_archive := true) on standby server

Michael, all, * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: > > Sorry, I missed lots of typo in the last patch. All comments from you > > are incorporated into the attached latest patch and I've checked it

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM auth and Pgpool-II

Greetings Tatsuo, * Tatsuo Ishii (is...@sraoss.co.jp) wrote: > > What I am suggesting here is that in order to handle properly SCRAM > > with channel binding, pgpool has to provide a different handling for > > client <-> pgpool and pgpool <-> Postgres. In short, I don't have a > > better answer

[HACKERS] Inadequate infrastructure for NextValueExpr

Somebody decided they could add a new primnode type without bothering to build out very much infrastructure for it. Thus: regression=# create table foo (f1 int, f2 int generated always as identity); CREATE TABLE regression=# insert into foo values(1); INSERT 0 1 regression=# explain verbose

Re: [HACKERS] CAST vs ::

"David G. Johnston" writes: > On Thursday, July 13, 2017, Tom Lane wrote: >> Maybe we can hack ruleutils to use >> the CAST syntax only in this specific context. > Given the lack of complaints, and ubiquity of ::, this would seem ideal > and

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Zipfian distribution in pgbench

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > To reiterate what I say above: > > The number of leaf pages with dead items is 20 with this most recent > run (128 clients, patched + unpatched). The leftmost internal page one > level up from the leaf level contains 289

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - Weak DH group

On 07/13/2017 10:13 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Heikki Linnakangas writes: I don't think this can be backpatched. It changes the default DH parameters from 1024 bits to 2048 bits. That's a good thing for

Re: [HACKERS] pl/perl extension fails on Windows

Re: Dave Page 2017-07-12 > > Well, we have various buildfarm machines running perls newer than that, > > eg, crake, with 5.24.1. So I'd say there is something busted about your > > perl installation. Perhaps leftover bits of

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Zipfian distribution in pgbench

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > The number of leaf pages at the left hand side of the leaf level seems > to be ~50 less than the unpatched 128 client case was the first time > around, which seems like a significant difference. I wonder why. Maybe >

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and arrays and composites, oh my

"David G. Johnston" writes: > On Thursday, July 13, 2017, Tom Lane wrote: >> regression=# select * from fdc(); >> fdc >> --- >> (1,2) >> (1 row) > Select (fdc).* from fdc(); is considerably more intuitive that the cast. > Does that give the

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and arrays and composites, oh my

On Thursday, July 13, 2017, Tom Lane wrote: > > regression=# select * from fdc(); > fdc > --- > (1,2) > (1 row) > > Select (fdc).* from fdc(); is considerably more intuitive that the cast. Does that give the expected multi-column result? David J.

Re: [HACKERS] CAST vs ::

On Thursday, July 13, 2017, Tom Lane wrote: > Maybe we can hack ruleutils to use > the CAST syntax only in this specific context. > Given the lack of complaints, and ubiquity of ::, this would seem ideal and sufficient. While there is something to be said for using standard

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and arrays and composites, oh my

I wrote: > I started to look into allowing domains over composite types, which is > another never-implemented case that there's no very good reason not to > allow. Well, other than the argument that the SQL standard only allows > domains over "predefined" (built-in) types ... but we blew past

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - Weak DH group

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas writes: >> I don't think this can be backpatched. It changes the default DH >> parameters from 1024 bits to 2048 bits. That's a good thing for >> security, but older clients might not

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - Weak DH group

Heikki Linnakangas writes: > I don't think this can be backpatched. It changes the default DH > parameters from 1024 bits to 2048 bits. That's a good thing for > security, but older clients might not support it, and would refuse to > connect or would fall back to something

[HACKERS] CAST vs ::

In most places, you can write CAST(x AS t) and x::t interchangeably. But that doesn't work for function-in-FROM. This is OK: select * from cast(fdc() as complex); but this is not: select * from fdc()::complex; ERROR: syntax error at or near "::" I just realized that this is a problem for

Re: [HACKERS] Fixup some misusage of appendStringInfo and friends

On 04/27/2017 03:14 AM, David Rowley wrote: On 27 April 2017 at 06:41, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 4/19/17 08:42, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: I reviewed the patch. It compiles clean, make check-world passes. I do not see any issue with it. Looks reasonable. Let's

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - Weak DH group

On 07/13/2017 01:07 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 13 July 2017 at 16:32, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> (We dropped the ball back in October, continuing the discussion now) >> >> On 10/10/2016 06:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >>> >>> On 10/06/2016 10:26 PM, Christoph Berg wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - Weak DH group

On 07/13/2017 08:04 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Michael Paquier wrote: On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Objections to committing this now, instead of waiting for v11? But I am -1 for the sneak part. It is not the time to have a new feature in 10,

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - Weak DH group

Re: Alvaro Herrera 2017-07-13 <20170713170402.74uuoivrgd3c6tnw@alvherre.pgsql> > > > Objections to committing this now, instead of waiting for v11? > > > > But I am -1 for the sneak part. It is not the time to have a new > > feature in 10, the focus is to stabilize. > > But if we were treating

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

On 5 July 2017 at 15:12, Amit Khandekar wrote: > Like I mentioned upthread... in expand_inherited_rtentry(), if we > replace find_all_inheritors() with something else that returns oids in > canonical order, that will change the order in which children tables > get locked,

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - Weak DH group

On 13 July 2017 at 16:32, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > (We dropped the ball back in October, continuing the discussion now) > > On 10/10/2016 06:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> >> On 10/06/2016 10:26 PM, Christoph Berg wrote: >>> >>> Re: Heikki Linnakangas 2016-10-06 >>>

Re: [HACKERS] 10beta1 sequence regression failure on sparc64

Re: To Andres Freund 2017-05-24 <20170524170921.7pykzbt54dlfk...@msg.df7cb.de> > > > If we had a typo or something in that code, the build farm should have > > > caught it by now. > > > > > > I would try compiling with lower -O and see what happens. > > > > Trying -O0 now. > > Sorry for the

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - Weak DH group

Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > > Objections to committing this now, instead of waiting for v11? > > But I am -1 for the sneak part. It is not the time to have a new > feature in 10, the focus is to stabilize. But if we

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Zipfian distribution in pgbench

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 4:38 AM, Alik Khilazhev wrote: > I am attaching results of test for 32 and 128 clients for original and > patched(_bt_doinsert) variants. Thanks. The number of leaf pages at the left hand side of the leaf level seems to be ~50 less than the

Re: [HACKERS] pl/perl extension fails on Windows

Andrew Dunstan writes: > It would be nice to get to the bottom of why we're getting a version > mismatch on Windows, since we're clearly not getting one on Linux. Yeah, that's what's bothering me: as long as that remains unexplained, I don't have any confidence

[HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] BUG #14634: On Windows pg_basebackup should write tar to stdout in binary mode

On 05/03/2017 07:32 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: [Adding -hackers mailing list] On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 6:28 PM, wrote: The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 14634 Logged by: Henry Boehlert Email address:

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - Weak DH group

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > I rebased the patch, did some other clean up of error reporting, and added a > GUC along those lines, as well as docs. How does this look? > > It's late in the release cycle, but it would be nice to sneak this into v10.

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

I was not convinced by the overall memory management around variables to begin with, and it is even less so with their new copy management. Maybe having a clean "Variables" data structure could help improve the situation. Ok! Note that there is something for psql (src/bin/psql/variable.c)

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

Hello, [...] I didn't make rollbacks to savepoints after the failure because they cannot help for serialization failures at all: after rollback to savepoint a new attempt will be always unsuccessful. Not necessarily? It depends on where the locks triggering the issue are set, if they are

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Zipfian distribution in pgbench

Hello Alik, A few comments about the patch v2. Patch applies and compiles. Documentation says that the closer theta is from 0 the flatter the distribution but the implementation requires at least 1, including strange error messages: zipfian parameter must be greater than 1.00 (not

Re: [HACKERS] pl/perl extension fails on Windows

On 07/13/2017 10:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan writes: >> On 07/13/2017 08:08 AM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: >>> -dVAR; dXSBOOTARGSAPIVERCHK; >>> +dVAR; dXSBOOTARGSNOVERCHK; >> Good job hunting this down! >> One suggestion I saw in a little googling

Re: [HACKERS] Function Volatility and Views Unexpected Behavior

Thanks for the reminder about explain verbose, that's helpful. But optimization does massively change the number of calls of a volatile function in a naive evaluation of a query: `explain analyze verbose select data1 from table1_silly_view where id >=10 and id <= 100;` does an index scan and

Re: [HACKERS] Replacing lfirst() with lfirst_node() appropriately in planner.c

Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > Happened to stumble across some instances of lfirst() which could use > lfirst_node() in planner.c. Here's patch which replaces calls to > lfirst() extracting node pointers by lfirst_node() in planner.c. Sounds good. > Are we carrying out such replacements in master or

Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - Weak DH group

(We dropped the ball back in October, continuing the discussion now) On 10/10/2016 06:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: On 10/06/2016 10:26 PM, Christoph Berg wrote: Re: Heikki Linnakangas 2016-10-06 I propose the attached patch. It gives up on

Re: [HACKERS] building libpq.a static library

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 4:58 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > You shouldn't ever need static libraries on Windows, though. Because it > searches the CWD first on its linker search path, you can just drop > libpq.dll in the same directory as your binary/library and link to the stub

Re: [HACKERS] pl/perl extension fails on Windows

Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 07/13/2017 08:08 AM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: >> -dVAR; dXSBOOTARGSAPIVERCHK; >> +dVAR; dXSBOOTARGSNOVERCHK; > Good job hunting this down! > One suggestion I saw in a little googling was that we add this to the XS > file after the

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

Hello hackers, From: Peter Geoghegan > Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:19:57 -0700 > Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #14722: Segfault in tuplesort_heap_siftup, 32 bit > overflow > On pgsql-b...@postgresql.org On 07/06/2017 12:19 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > In Postgres 10, tuplesort external

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

Another detail I forgot about this point: there may be a memory leak on variables copies, ISTM that the "variables" array is never freed. I was not convinced by the overall memory management around variables to begin with, and it is even less so with their new copy management. Maybe having a

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

Here are a round of comments on the current version of the patch: Thank you very much again! There is a latent issue about what is a transaction. For pgbench a transaction is a full script execution. For postgresql, it is a statement or a BEGIN/END block, several of which may appear in a

Re: [HACKERS] Race condition in GetOldestActiveTransactionId()

On 08/22/2016 01:46 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: While hacking on the CSN patch, I spotted a race condition between GetOldestActiveTransactionId() and GetNewTransactionId(). GetOldestActiveTransactionId() calculates the oldest XID that's still running, by doing: 1. Read nextXid, without a

Re: [HACKERS] pl/perl extension fails on Windows

On 07/13/2017 08:08 AM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: > > After doing some study, I could understand that Util.c is generated > from Util.xs by xsubpp compiler at build time. This is being done in > Mkvcbuild.pm file in postgres. If I manually replace > 'dXSBOOTARGSAPIVERCHK' macro with

Re: [HACKERS] Bug in ExecModifyTable function and trigger issues for foreign tables

On 2017/06/30 18:44, Etsuro Fujita wrote: On 2017/06/16 21:29, Etsuro Fujita wrote: I'll have second thought about this, so I'll mark this as waiting on author. I spent quite a bit of time on this and came up with a solution for addressing the concern mentioned by Ashutosh [1]. The basic

Re: [HACKERS] pl/perl extension fails on Windows

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 07/12/2017 11:49 AM, Dave Page wrote: >> >> >> Well crake is a Fedora box - and we have no problems on Linux, only on >> Windows. >> >> > > > Yeah, I have this on one of my Windows boxes, and haven't had

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stop_backup(wait_for_archive := true) on standby server

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Sorry, I missed lots of typo in the last patch. All comments from you > are incorporated into the attached latest patch and I've checked it > whether there is other typos. Please review it. Thanks for providing a

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Zipfian distribution in pgbench

On 13 Jul 2017, at 00:20, Peter Geoghegan wrote:Actually, I mean that I wonder how much of a difference it would makeif this entire block was commented out within _bt_doinsert():if (checkUnique != UNIQUE_CHECK_NO){    …}I am attaching results of test for 32 and 128 clients for

Re: [HACKERS] PgFDW connection invalidation by ALTER SERVER/ALTER USER MAPPING

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Hello, moved to pgsql-hackers. > > This is the revased and revised version of the previous patch. > > At Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:42:49 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI >

Re: [HACKERS] Update description of \d[S+] in \?

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > The description of \d[S+] currently does not mention that it will list > materialized views and foreign tables. Attached fixes that. > I guess the same change is applicable to the description of \d[S+] NAME

Re: [HACKERS] Row Level Security Documentation

Hello Rod, This version of the table attempts to stipulate which section of the process the rule applies to. A few comments about this patch. It applies cleanly, make html is ok. It adds a summary table which shows for each case what happens. Although the information can be guessed/infered

Re: [HACKERS] New partitioning - some feedback

On 2017/07/13 7:23, Dean Rasheed wrote: > On 12 July 2017 at 15:58, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> Amit Langote wrote: >>> On 2017/07/11 13:34, Alvaro Herrera wrote: However, the "list tables" command \dt should definitely IMO not list partitions. >>> >>> Do you mean

[HACKERS] PgFDW connection invalidation by ALTER SERVER/ALTER USER MAPPING

Hello, moved to pgsql-hackers. This is the revased and revised version of the previous patch. At Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:42:49 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote in <20170713.134249.97825982.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> > At Tue, 11 Jul 2017

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM auth and Pgpool-II

> What I am suggesting here is that in order to handle properly SCRAM > with channel binding, pgpool has to provide a different handling for > client <-> pgpool and pgpool <-> Postgres. In short, I don't have a > better answer than having pgpool impersonate the server and request > for a password

Re: [HACKERS] Multi column range partition table

On 12 July 2017 at 10:46, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Dean Rasheed > wrote: >> On 11 July 2017 at 13:29, Ashutosh Bapat >>> The description in this paragraph seems to be attaching intuitive >>> meaning of

[HACKERS] More flexible LDAP auth search filters?

Hi hackers, A customer asked how to use pg_hba.conf LDAP search+bind authentication to restrict logins to users in one of a small number of groups. ldapsearchattribute only lets you make filters like "(foo=username)", so it couldn't be done. Is there any reason we should allow a more general

[HACKERS] Fix a typo in pg_upgrade/info.c

Hi, Attached patch for $subject. s/reporing/reporting/g Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center fix_typo_in_info_c.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make

[HACKERS] Update description of \d[S+] in \?

The description of \d[S+] currently does not mention that it will list materialized views and foreign tables. Attached fixes that. Thanks, Amit diff --git a/src/bin/psql/help.c b/src/bin/psql/help.c index b3dbb5946e..66fd8b36f9 100644 --- a/src/bin/psql/help.c +++ b/src/bin/psql/help.c @@ -219,7