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

Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Ashutosh Sharma > wrote: >> So, the question is should we allow the preprocessor option >> '_USE_32BIT_TIME_T' to be defined implicitly or not in postgresql >> provided we are using Visual C

Re: [HACKERS] Lazy hash table for XidInMVCCSnapshot (helps Zipfian a bit)

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Sokolov Yura wrote: > On 2017-07-31 18:56, Sokolov Yura wrote: > >> Good day, every one. >> >> In attempt to improve performance of YCSB on zipfian distribution, >> it were found that significant time is spent in XidInMVCCSnapshot in

Re: [HACKERS] Remove 1MB size limit in tsvector

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Ildus K > wrote: > > It's a workaround. DatumGetTSVector and > > DatumGetTSVectorCopy will upgrade tsvector on the fly if it > > has old format. > > Hmm,

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

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 8:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Ashutosh Sharma >> wrote: >>> So, the question is should we allow the preprocessor option >>> '_USE_32BIT_TIME_T' to be

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

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Yeah ... however, if that's there, then there's something wrong with > Ashutosh's explanation, because that means we *are* building with > _USE_32BIT_TIME_T in 32-bit builds. It's just getting there in a > roundabout way.

Re: [HACKERS] Remove 1MB size limit in tsvector

Alexander Korotkov writes: > ... > You have random mix of tabs and spaces here. It's worth running pgindent over your code before submitting. It should be pretty easy to set that up nowadays, see src/tools/pgindent/README. (If you find any portability problems while

Re: [HACKERS] Comment in snapbuild.c file

Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Hi all, > > In snapbuild.c file, there is a comment as follows. > >* NB: Because of that xmax can be lower than xmin, because we only >* increase xmax when a catalog modifying transaction commits. While odd >* looking, it's correct and actually more efficient

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

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: > So, the question is should we allow the preprocessor option > '_USE_32BIT_TIME_T' to be defined implicitly or not in postgresql > provided we are using Visual C compiler version > 8.0. I think this > should make

Re: [HACKERS] reload-through-the-top-parent switch the partition table

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:47 AM, Rushabh Lathia wrote: >> (1) seems like a pretty arbitrary restriction, so I don't like that >> option. (2) would hurt performance in some use cases. Do we have an >> option (3)? > > How about protecting option 2) with the

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

Ashutosh Sharma writes: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 8:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Yeah ... however, if that's there, then there's something wrong with >> Ashutosh's explanation, because that means we *are* building with >> _USE_32BIT_TIME_T in 32-bit

Re: [HACKERS] Funny WAL corruption issue

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Aleksander Alekseev < a.aleks...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > I just wanted to point out that a hardware issue or third party software > issues (bugs in FS, software RAID, ...) could not be fully excluded from > the list of suspects. According to the talk by

Re: [HACKERS] Funny WAL corruption issue

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Vladimir Rusinov wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Aleksander Alekseev < > a.aleks...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > >> I just wanted to point out that a hardware issue or third party software >> issues (bugs in FS, software RAID, ...)

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 5:43 AM, Thomas Munro wrote: >> Do you think we solving this problem is a prerequisite for >> partition-wise join? Or should we propose that patch as a separate >> enhancement? > > No, I'm not proposing anything yet. For now I just wanted to

Re: [HACKERS] [TRAP: FailedAssertion] causing server to crash

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > I think so - specifically, that it's a leftover from a revision where the > xid limit was advanced before clog truncation. > > I'll be finding time in the next couple of days to look more closely and > ensure that's all

Re: [HACKERS] [TRAP: FailedAssertion] causing server to crash

On 10 August 2017 at 23:25, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Craig Ringer > wrote: > > I think so - specifically, that it's a leftover from a revision where the > > xid limit was advanced before clog truncation. > > > > I'll be

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Failover Slots

On 9 August 2017 at 23:42, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 4:00 AM, Craig Ringer > wrote: > >> - When a standby connects to a master, it can optionally supply a list > >> of slot names that it cares about. > > > > Wouldn't that

Re: [HACKERS] Timing-sensitive case in src/test/recovery TAP tests

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Paquier writes: >> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Michael Paquier writes: I got the same thought, wondering as well

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 1:39 AM, Thomas Munro > wrote: >> On my computer it took ~1.5 seconds to plan a 1000 partition join, >> ~7.1 seconds to plan a 2000 partition join, and ~50

Re: [HACKERS] Server crash (FailedAssertion) due to catcache refcount mis-handling

Tom Lane writes: > I wonder if Andreas would be interested in trying the randomly-timed- > SIGTERM thing with sqlsmith. Will do. Won't miss this chance to try out discostu's extension pg_rage_terminator[1] :-) regards, Andreas Footnotes: [1] https://github.com/disco-stu/pg_rage_terminator

[HACKERS] Creating backup history files for backups taken from standbys

Hi all, In the recent thread related to a bug in pg_stop_backup when waiting for WAL segments to be archived, it has been mentioned that it would be nice to get backup history files generated as well on standbys:

Re: [HACKERS] reload-through-the-top-parent switch the partition table

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 1:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Rushabh Lathia > wrote: > > It seems like with we set the numParents and parents only for the > > dumpable objects (flagInhTables()). Current patch relies on the

Re: [HACKERS] Creating backup history files for backups taken from standbys

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hi all, > > In the recent thread related to a bug in pg_stop_backup when waiting > for WAL segments to be archived, it has been mentioned that it would > be nice to get backup history files generated as well on

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > Your patch didn't improve planning time without partition-wise join, > so it's something good to have along-with partition-wise join. Given > that Bitmapsets are used in other parts of code as well, the >

Re: [HACKERS] More race conditions in logical replication

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 8:14 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> wrote: >> > BTW, I noticed that the PG_WAIT_LOCK value that we're using for wait >> > event here (and in the

Re: [HACKERS] expanding inheritance in partition bound order

Hi Amit, On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/08/05 2:25, Robert Haas wrote: >> Concretely, my proposal is: >> >> P.S. While I haven't reviewed 0002 in detail, I think the concept of >> minimizing what needs to be built in

Re: [HACKERS] Creating backup history files for backups taken from standbys

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Thank you for the patch. Regarding to creating the backup history file > on stanbys, is there any difference from the patch posted on earlier > thread? That's a rebased version on top of what has been applied,

Re: [HACKERS] Creating backup history files for backups taken from standbys

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> Thank you for the patch. Regarding to creating the backup history file >> on stanbys, is there any difference from the patch

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recently added wait events

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:52 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > With a minimal maintenance effort we can be careful enough. I think > that a comment for example in pgstat.c about the usage uniqueness > would be an adapted answer. By the way, let's discuss that on a new

Re: [HACKERS] parallelize queries containing initplans

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 9:26 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> > > By the way, I tested the patch with by DML support for parallel patch to > check the returning of clause of insert, and all the

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

Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Yeah ... however, if that's there, then there's something wrong with >> Ashutosh's explanation, because that means we *are* building with >> _USE_32BIT_TIME_T in 32-bit builds.

Re: [HACKERS] Remove 1MB size limit in tsvector

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 7:37 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > The patch doesn't really conform to our coding standards, though, so > > you need to clean it up (or, if you're not sure what you

Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.

On 08/09/2017 10:49 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 8:19 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >>> This item appears under "decisions to recheck mid-beta". If anyone is going >>> to push for

Re: [HACKERS] pgsql 10: hash indexes testing

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 6:41 AM, AP wrote: > The index is 135GB rather than 900GB (from memory/give or take). Whoa. Big improvement. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] Server crash (FailedAssertion) due to catcache refcount mis-handling

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> In the meantime, I think my vote would be to remove AtEOXact_CatCache. > >> In all supported branches? > >

Re: [HACKERS] emergency outage requiring database restart

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:11 AM, Ants Aasma wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >>> Still getting checksum failures. Over the last 30 days, I see

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Failover Slots

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:38 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > Yep, so again, you're pushing slots "up" the tree, by name, with a 1:1 > correspondence, and using globally unique slot names to manage state. Yes, that's what I'm imagining. (Whether I should instead be imagining

Re: [HACKERS] dubious error message from partition.c

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:14 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >> That seems like overkill. I'm good with "greater than or equal to". > > Attached updated patch has "greater than or equal to". Committed, with one small change which I hope will be considered an improvement.

Re: [HACKERS] Default Partition for Range

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 6:56 AM, Jeevan Ladhe wrote: >> This looks like a problem with the default list partitioning patch. I >> think "true" is what we expect to see here in both cases. > > In case of list partition if there is only default partition, then there

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 5:25 AM, Maksim Milyutin wrote: > Ok, thanks for the feedback. Then I'll use a new relkind for local > partitioned index in further development. Any update on this? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise

Re: [HACKERS] emergency outage requiring database restart

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Ants Aasma wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:11 AM, Ants Aasma wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Merlin Moncure

[HACKERS] Thoughts on unit testing?

Hi hackers, The current regression tests, isolation tests and TAP tests are very good (though I admit my experience with TAP is limited), but IMHO we are lacking support for C-level unit testing. Complicated, fiddly things with many states, interactions, edge cases etc can be hard to get full

Re: [HACKERS] Request more documentation for incompatibility of parallelism and plpgsql exec_run_select

> On Aug 10, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 12:14 AM, Mark Dilger wrote: >> I can understand this, but wonder if I could use something like >> >> FOR I TOTALLY PROMISE TO USE ALL ROWS rec IN EXECUTE sql LOOP >>

Re: [HACKERS] Thoughts on unit testing?

Hi, On 2017-08-11 09:53:23 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > The current regression tests, isolation tests and TAP tests are very > good(though I admit my experience with TAP is limited), but IMHO we > are lacking support for C-level unit testing. Complicated, fiddly > things with many states,

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 1:14 AM, Ashutosh Sharma > wrote: >> Okay, attached is the patch which first detects the platform type and >> runs the uconv commands accordingly from the corresponding

Re: [HACKERS] Server crash (FailedAssertion) due to catcache refcount mis-handling

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Andreas Seltenreich > wrote: >> Will do. Won't miss this chance to try out discostu's extension >> pg_rage_terminator[1] :-) >> [1]

Re: [HACKERS] Thoughts on unit testing?

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-08-11 09:53:23 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: >> One idea that keeps coming back to me is that we could probably extend >> our existing regression tests to cover C tests with automatic >> discovery/minimal

Re: [HACKERS] Thoughts on unit testing?

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Thomas Munro wrote: > Just create a .test.c file and type "TEST(my_math, > factorial) { EXPECT_EQ(6, factorial(3)); }" ... Of course that would really need to #include "something/test_macros.h" and "something/factorial.h", and

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 1:14 AM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: > Okay, attached is the patch which first detects the platform type and > runs the uconv commands accordingly from the corresponding icu bin > path. Please have a look and let me know for any issues. Thanks. Should

Re: [HACKERS] Request more documentation for incompatibility of parallelism and plpgsql exec_run_select

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 12:14 AM, Mark Dilger wrote: > I can understand this, but wonder if I could use something like > > FOR I TOTALLY PROMISE TO USE ALL ROWS rec IN EXECUTE sql LOOP > ... > END LOOP; Actually, what you'd need is: FOR I TOTALLY PROMISE TO USE ALL ROWS

Re: [HACKERS] Server crash (FailedAssertion) due to catcache refcount mis-handling

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Andreas Seltenreich wrote: > Will do. Won't miss this chance to try out discostu's extension > pg_rage_terminator[1] :-) > [1] https://github.com/disco-stu/pg_rage_terminator Oh, that's *awesome*. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB:

[HACKERS] Funny WAL corruption issue

Hi; I ran into a funny situation today regarding PostgreSQL replication and wal corruption and wanted to go over what I think happened and what I wonder about as a possible solution. Basic information is custom-build PostgreSQL 9.6.3 on Gentoo, on a ~5TB database with variable load. Master

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:13 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Ashutosh Bapat > wrote: >> Your patch didn't improve planning time without partition-wise join, >> so it's something good to have along-with

Re: [HACKERS] Comment typo in plannodes.h

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > Here is a small patch for fixing a comment typo in plannodes.h: s/all the > partitioned table/all the partitioned tables/. Committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise

Re: [HACKERS] parallel documentation improvements

On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > In commit 054637d2e08cda6a096f48cc99696136a06f4ef5, I updated the > parallel query documentation to reflect recently-committed parallel > query features. However, a few more things got committed after that. > Most of the

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Failover Slots

On 11 August 2017 at 01:02, Robert Haas wrote: > Well, > anybody's welcome to write code without discussion and drop it to the > list, but if people don't like it, that's the risk you took by not > discussing it first. > Agreed, patches materializing doesn't mean they

Re: [HACKERS] dubious error message from partition.c

(Sorry Robert for the duplicate message, I mistakenly didn't hit Reply All) On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 2:54 Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:14 PM, Amit Langote > wrote: > >> That seems like overkill. I'm good with "greater than

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Replication to Postgres 10 on Windows is broken

On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 07:25:37PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 8/7/17 21:06, Noah Misch wrote: > >> That would fit. Until v10 (commit 1e8a850), PQconnectStart() had no > >> in-tree > >> callers outside of libpq itself. > > [Action required within three days. This is a generic

Re: [HACKERS] pgsql 10: hash indexes testing

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 01:12:25PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 6:41 AM, AP wrote: > > The index is 135GB rather than 900GB (from memory/give or take). > > Whoa. Big improvement. Not a good direct comparison in general but it fits my workload. The 900GB

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Replication to Postgres 10 on Windows is broken

On 2017-08-10 18:51:07 -0700, Noah Misch wrote: > On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 07:25:37PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 8/7/17 21:06, Noah Misch wrote: > > >> That would fit. Until v10 (commit 1e8a850), PQconnectStart() had no > > >> in-tree > > >> callers outside of libpq itself. > > >

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Replication to Postgres 10 on Windows is broken

I am in an effort to create independent build environment on Windows to test the patch from Andres. I shall come back with result possibly in another 24 hours. -Jobin On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 7:25 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-08-10 18:51:07 -0700, Noah Misch wrote: > >

[HACKERS] SCRAM protocol documentation

The SCRAM protocol documentation (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/sasl-authentication.html) states "To avoid confusion, the client should use pg_same_as_startup_message as the username in the client-first-message." However, the client implementation in libpq doesn't actually do

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Replication to Postgres 10 on Windows is broken

Noah Misch writes: > On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 07:25:37PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> I don't think I can usefully contribute to this. Could someone else >> take it? > If nobody volunteers, you could always resolve this by reverting 1e8a850 and > successors. I think

Re: [HACKERS] pgsql 10: hash indexes testing

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 4:11 PM, AP wrote: > On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 04:32:29PM +1000, AP wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 04:41:24PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: >> > > (On another note, I committed these patches.) >> > >> > Thanks. >> >> Seconded. :) >> >> Now uploading data with

Re: [HACKERS] pgsql 10: hash indexes testing

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 5:01 AM, AP wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 01:12:25PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 6:41 AM, AP wrote: >> > The index is 135GB rather than 900GB (from memory/give or take). >> >> Whoa. Big improvement. > > > As

Re: [HACKERS] intermittent failures in Cygwin from select_parallel tests

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 10:45:50AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > > postmaster algorithms rely on the PG_SETMASK() calls preventing that. > > Without > > such protection, duplicate bgworkers are an understandable result. I

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 1:14 AM, Ashutosh Sharma >> wrote: >>> Okay, attached is the patch which first detects the

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

On 8/10/17 22:21, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 1:14 AM, Ashutosh Sharma >>> wrote: Okay,

Re: [HACKERS] Thoughts on unit testing?

On 11 August 2017 at 07:13, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andres Freund > wrote: > > On 2017-08-11 09:53:23 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > >> One idea that keeps coming back to me is that we could probably extend > >>

Re: [HACKERS] Default Partition for Range

Hi Robert, Beena, On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 5:53 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi > wrote: > > --difference in the description of default partition in case of list vs > > range > > > >

Re: [HACKERS] pgsql 10: hash indexes testing

On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 04:32:29PM +1000, AP wrote: > On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 04:41:24PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > (On another note, I committed these patches.) > > > > Thanks. > > Seconded. :) > > Now uploading data with fillfactor of 90. I'll know in 2-3 days > if the new patches are

Re: [HACKERS] Walsender timeouts and large transactions

On 2017-08-09 16:23, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 02/08/17 19:35, Yura Sokolov wrote: The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: not tested Spec compliant: not tested Documentation:

[HACKERS] Fix number skipping in to_number

Prevents an issue where numbers can be skipped in the to_number() function when the format mask contains a "G" or a "," but the input string doesn't contain a separator. This resolves the TODO item "Fix to_number() handling for values not matching the format string". == Change == Currently, if

Re: [HACKERS] Funny WAL corruption issue

Hi, Chris. > 10 авг. 2017 г., в 15:09, Chris Travers написал(а): > > Hi; > > I ran into a funny situation today regarding PostgreSQL replication and wal > corruption and wanted to go over what I think happened and what I wonder > about as a possible solution. > >

[HACKERS] Comment typo in plannodes.h

Hi, Here is a small patch for fixing a comment typo in plannodes.h: s/all the partitioned table/all the partitioned tables/. Best regards, Etsuro Fujita diff --git a/src/include/nodes/plannodes.h b/src/include/nodes/plannodes.h index f1a1b24..7c51e7f 100644 --- a/src/include/nodes/plannodes.h

Re: [HACKERS] Funny WAL corruption issue

Sorry, meant to reply all. On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Vladimir Borodin wrote: > Hi, Chris. > > 10 авг. 2017 г., в 15:09, Chris Travers > написал(а): > > Hi; > > I ran into a funny situation today regarding PostgreSQL replication and > wal

Re: [HACKERS] Lazy hash table for XidInMVCCSnapshot (helps Zipfian a bit)

On 2017-07-31 18:56, Sokolov Yura wrote: Good day, every one. In attempt to improve performance of YCSB on zipfian distribution, it were found that significant time is spent in XidInMVCCSnapshot in scanning snapshot->xip array. While overall CPU time is not too noticable, it has measurable

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

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 1:55 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Sandeep Thakkar > wrote: >> I copied and pasted that portion of the build log into file build.log >> (attached) for Windows 32bit and Windows 64bit. > >

Re: [HACKERS] Funny WAL corruption issue

> Yes. Exactly the same output until a certain point where pg_xlogdump dies > with an error. That is the same LSN where PostgreSQL died with an error on > restart. > One other thing that is possibly relevant after reading through the last bug report is the error pgxlogdumo gives: pg_xlogdump:

Re: [HACKERS] Funny WAL corruption issue

Hi Chris, > I ran into a funny situation today regarding PostgreSQL replication and > wal corruption and wanted to go over what I think happened and what I > wonder about as a possible solution. Sad story. Unfortunately I have no idea what could be a reason nor can I suggest a good way to find

Re: [HACKERS] Fix performance degradation of contended LWLock on NUMA

On 2017-07-18 20:20, Sokolov Yura wrote: On 2017-06-05 16:22, Sokolov Yura wrote: Good day, everyone. This patch improves performance of contended LWLock. Patch makes lock acquiring in single CAS loop: 1. LWLock->state is read, and ability for lock acquiring is detected. If there is

[HACKERS] Foreign tables privileges not shown in information_schema.table_privileges

Hello, The information_schema.table_privileges view filters on regular tables and views. Foreign tables are not shown in this view but they are in other views of the information_schema like tables or column_privileges. Is it intentional? A patch is attached if not. Thanks -- Nicolas Thauvin

[HACKERS] coverage analysis improvements

Here is a patch series with some significant reworking and adjusting of how the coverage analysis tools are run. The result should be that the "make coverage" runs are faster and more robust, the results are more accurate, and the code is simpler. Please see the individual patches for details.

Re: [HACKERS] Page Scan Mode in Hash Index

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: > > 7. > _hash_kill_items(IndexScanDesc scan) > { > .. > + /* > + * If page LSN differs it means that the page was modified since the > + *

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table

10.08.17 23:01, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 5:25 AM, Maksim Milyutin wrote: Ok, thanks for the feedback. Then I'll use a new relkind for local partitioned index in further development. Any update on this? I'll continue to work soon. Sorry for so