Re: [HACKERS] sync process names between ps and pg_stat_activity

From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Peter Eisentraut > > Personally, I prefer "wal writer", "wal sender" and "wal receiver" > > that separate words as other process names. But I don't mind leaving > > them as they are now. > > If we

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 9/19/17 17:55, Jeff Janes wrote: >> I guess I'm late to the party, but I don't see why this is needed at >> all. We encourage people to use any and all new features which are >> appropriate to

[HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make new crash restart test a bit more robust.

On 2017-09-19 18:06:29 -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-09-19 16:46:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Have we forgotten an fflush() or something? > > After hacking a fix for my previous theory, I started adding strace into > the mix, to verify this. Takes longer to reproduce, but after filtering

Re: [HACKERS] Boom filters for hash joins (was: A design for amcheck heapam verification)

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:25 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > I haven't thought about it from that point of view. Can you elaborate > why that would be the case? Sorry if this was explained earlier in this > thread (I don't see it in the history, though). > > I can't quite

Re: [HACKERS] sync process names between ps and pg_stat_activity

Michael Paquier writes: > On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 5:33 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Peter Eisentraut writes: >>> As an aside, is there a reason why the archiver process is not included >>> in pg_stat_activity? >> It's

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

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 8:33 AM, David Steele wrote: >> On 9/18/17 7:26 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 8:14 AM, David Steele wrote: On 8/31/17

Re: [HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

On 20 September 2017 at 06:36, David Steele wrote: > > I just use: > > $SIG{__DIE__} = sub {Carp::confess @_}; > That's what I patched into my TestLib.pm too, until I learned of Carp::Always. I'd rather have Carp::Always, but it's definitely an OK fallback. -- Craig

Re: [HACKERS] Create replication slot in pg_basebackup if requested and not yet present

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 9/12/17 16:39, Michael Banck wrote: > > We could split up the logic here and create the optional physical > > replication slot in the main connection and the temporary one in the WAL > > streamer

Re: [HACKERS] Re: issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list

"David G. Johnston" writes: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Notice the parens/comma positioning. It's only because text is such >> a lax datatype that you didn't notice the problem. > I saw exactly what you described - that

Re: [HACKERS] Commits don't block for synchronous replication

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 7:50 AM, Xin Zhang wrote: >> If primary crashed at that moment, and failover to standby, the foo table is >> lost, even though the replication is synced according to >>

Re: [HACKERS] sync process names between ps and pg_stat_activity

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 5:33 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut writes: >> As an aside, is there a reason why the archiver process is not included >> in pg_stat_activity? > > It's not connected to shared memory. Do you think that

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/subscription/t/002_types.pl hanging on particular environment

On 19 September 2017 at 18:04, Petr Jelinek wrote: > > If you are asking why they are not identified by the > BackgroundWorkerHandle, then it's because it's private struct and can't > be shared with other processes so there is no way to link the logical > worker

Re: [HACKERS] Page Scan Mode in Hash Index

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Jesper Pedersen > wrote: >> Based on the feedback in this thread, I have moved the patch to "Ready for >> Committer". > > Reviewing 0001: > > _hash_readpage

Re: [HACKERS] sync process names between ps and pg_stat_activity

On 9/18/17 02:07, MauMau wrote: > (1) > In the following comment, it's better to change "wal sender process" > to "walsender" to follow the modified name. > > - * postgres: wal sender process > + * postgres: walsender > * > * To achieve that, we pass "wal sender process"

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane > TBH, I think that's another reason for not release-noting it. There's no > concrete change to point to, and so it's hard to figure out what to say. > I'm not even very sure that we

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 9/18/17 18:46, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> As I pointed out a couple of times already [1], we don't currently >> sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags within CREATE COLLATION. > > There is no requirement

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/subscription/t/002_types.pl hanging on particular environment

On 19 September 2017 at 20:33, Amit Kapila wrote: > Yeah, but you could have used the way we do for parallel query where > we setup dsm and share all such information. You can check the logic > of execparallel.c and parallel.c to see how we do all such stuff for >

Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 3:31 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > I was just looking the thread since it is found left alone for a > long time in the CF app. > > At Mon, 18 Sep 2017 16:35:58 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote in >

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 3:21 AM, Rushabh Lathia wrote: > As per the earlier discussion in the thread, I did experiment using > BufFileSet interface from parallel-hash-v18.patchset. I took the reference > of parallel-hash other patches to understand the BufFileSet APIs,

Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Claudio Freire wrote: > Maybe this is looking at the problem from the wrong direction. > > Why can't the page be added to the FSM immediately and the check be > done at runtime when looking for a reusable page? > > Index FSMs currently

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add citext_pattern_ops for citext contrib module

Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 09/19/2017 11:11 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Actually, after looking closer, my advice is just to drop the new >> test cases involving accented letters. It surprises me not in the >> least that those would have nonportable behavior:

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

On 09/19/2017 09:32 AM, 'Bruce Momjian' wrote: On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:30:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: "'Bruce Momjian'" writes: On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:22:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: We don't normally release-note documentation changes. If this wasn't purely a

Re: [HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

On 2017-09-19 17:15:21 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > On 2017-09-19 21:37:26 +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: > >> Devel::Confess is more thorough, so +1 on that. > > > Or just try Devel::Confess first, and if the require fails, go to > >

Re: [HACKERS] Re: issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > "David G. Johnston" writes: > > Actually, this does work, just not the way one would immediately expect. > > On closer inspection, what's actually happening in your example is that > you're

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andreas Karlsson writes: >> Hm, I like the idea but I see some issues. > >> Enforcing the BCP47 seems like a good thing to me. I do not see any >> reason to allow input with syntax errors. The issue though

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

On 09/19/2017 11:32 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Well, if PG10 shipped with that restriction in place then it wouldn't be an issue ;-) I was proposing that this be treated as an open item for v10; sorry if I was unclear on

Re: [HACKERS] Setting pd_lower in GIN metapage

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:47 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Amit Kapila writes: >> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >>> I am not saying that no index AMs take advantage FPW compressibility >>> for their

Re: [HACKERS] Re: issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > ​T​ > hat > ​ ​ > doesn't work today, and this patch doesn't fix it, but it does create > enough confusion that we never would be able to fix it. > > I'd be much happier if there were some notational difference > between

[HACKERS] Varying results when using merge joins over postgres_fdw vs hash joins

We are having an issue with a query that will return no results when the query does a merge join with a foreign table, but (correctly) returns results when using a hash join. Here is the situation on the "remote" database (9.5): # \d+ table_with_en_us_utf8_encoding Table

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > If people think it is possible to get this done in time for PostgreSQL 10 > and it does not break anything on older version of ICU (or the migration > from older versions) I am all for it. The only behavioral

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

On 9/19/17 17:55, Jeff Janes wrote: > I guess I'm late to the party, but I don't see why this is needed at > all.  We encourage people to use any and all new features which are > appropriate to them--that is why we implement new features.  Why does > this feature need a special invitation? It's

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:55 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas > wrote: > >> I'm not sure what exactly to do here. Where

Re: [HACKERS] Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test

On 9/19/17 07:37, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> This patch is logged as "waiting on author" in the current commit >>> fest, but any new patch will depend on the feedback that any other >>> hacker has to offer based on the set of ideas I have posted upthread. >>> Hence I am yet unsure what is the

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v1] Add and report the new "in_hot_standby" GUC pseudo-variable.

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Elvis Pranskevichus > wrote: > > I incorporated those bits into your patch and rebased in onto master. > > Please see attached. > > > > FWIW, I think that

Re: [HACKERS] Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > To get things rolling, I have committed just the basic TAP tests, to > give it a spin on the build farm. I'll work through the rest in the > coming days. Thanks! -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:55 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> I'm not sure what exactly to do here. Where should we stick that notice? >> We could put it in the release notes, where the bullet point about

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/subscription/t/002_types.pl hanging on particular environment

On 2017-09-19 17:20:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Thomas Munro writes: > > This type of violent shutdown seems to be associated with occasional > > corruption of .gcda files (the files output by GCC coverage builds). > > The symptoms are that if you use

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

On 9/18/17 18:46, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > As I pointed out a couple of times already [1], we don't currently > sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags within CREATE COLLATION. There is no requirement that the locale strings for ICU need to be BCP 47. ICU locale names like 'de@collation=phonebook'

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting

On 9/18/17 05:39, Arthur Zakirov wrote: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:31:54AM +0200, Dmitry Dolgov wrote: >> Just to clarify, do you mean that `CREATE SUBSCRIPTING FOR` would only make >> a >> dependency record? In this case `DROP SUBSCRIPTING FOR` actually means just >> drop an init function. > I

Re: [HACKERS] Repetitive code in RI triggers

> On 11 Apr 2017, at 03:41, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: > > On 4/10/17 11:55, Ildar Musin wrote: >> I was looking through the RI triggers code recently and noticed a few >> almost identical functions, e.g. ri_restrict_upd() and >> ri_restrict_del(). The

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:25:04PM +0200, Dmitry Dolgov wrote: > > I think it would be good to add new catalog table. It may be named as > pg_type_sbs or pg_subscripting (second is better I think). > > This table may have the fields: > > - oid > > - sbstype > > - sbsinit > > - sbsfetch > > -

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Amit Khandekar wrote: > On 18 September 2017 at 20:45, Dilip Kumar wrote: >> Please find few more comments. >> >> + * in which they appear in the PartitionDesc. Also, extract the >> + * partition key columns of the

Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.

I was just looking the thread since it is found left alone for a long time in the CF app. At Mon, 18 Sep 2017 16:35:58 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote in > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Andres Freund

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

On 18 September 2017 at 20:45, Dilip Kumar wrote: > Please find few more comments. > > + * in which they appear in the PartitionDesc. Also, extract the > + * partition key columns of the root partitioned table. Those of the > + * child partitions would be collected during

Re: [HACKERS] Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test

Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: > > Or we could make upgradecheck a noop, then remove it once all the MSVC > > animals have upgraded to a newer version of the buildfarm client which > > does not use upgradecheck anymore

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Improve geometric types

At Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:25:30 -0400, Robert Haas wrote in > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 4:23 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: > > /* don't merge the following same functions

Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum WIP

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Since v4 patch conflicts with current HEAD I attached the latest version > patch. Hi Sawada-san, Here is an interesting failure with this patch: test rowsecurity ... FAILED test rules

Re: [HACKERS] Pre-existing bug in trigger.c

Tom Lane wrote: > After studying this awhile, I've concluded that neither of those > ideas leads to a fix simple enough that I'd be comfortable with > back-patching it. What seems like the best answer is to not pass > delete_ok = true to afterTriggerInvokeEvents in AfterTriggerEndQuery. > Then,

Re: [HACKERS] issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list

"David G. Johnston" writes: > On Tuesday, September 19, 2017, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'd be much happier if there were some notational difference >> between I-want-the-composite-variable-to-absorb-a-composite-column >> and

Re: [HACKERS] issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list

Robert Haas writes: > I think the fact that single-target INTO lists and multiple-target > INTO lists are handled completely differently is extremely poor > language design. It would have been far better, as you suggested > downthread, to have added some syntax up front to

Re: [HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 09/19/2017 01:31 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >> # Include module showing backtraces upon failures. As it's a >> non-standard module, don't fail if not installed. >> eval { use Carp::Always; } > Or maybe Devel::Confess ? Neither one seems

Re: [HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

On 2017-09-19 21:37:26 +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: > Andrew Dunstan writes: > > > On 09/19/2017 01:31 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I've had a couple cases where tap tests died, and I couldn't easily see > >> where / why. For development

Re: [HACKERS] Re: issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list

"David G. Johnston" writes: >> Aside from being inconsistent, it doesn't cover all >> the cases --- what if you have just one query output column, that is >> composite, and you'd like it to go into a composite variable? That >> doesn't work today, and this patch

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add citext_pattern_ops for citext contrib module

On 09/19/2017 02:47 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 09/19/2017 11:11 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Andrew Dunstan writes: >>> This seems to have upset a number or animals in the buildfarm. >> Actually, after looking closer, my advice is just to drop the new >> test

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: add --if-exists to pg_recvlogical

On 9/17/17 18:21, Rosser Schwarz wrote: > On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Peter Eisentraut > > wrote: >> I understand the --drop-slot part.  But I don't understand what it means >> to ignore a missing replication slot

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

On 09/18/2017 11:13 AM, Noah Misch wrote: On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 09:57:36AM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: On 09/12/2017 04:09 AM, Noah Misch wrote: On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:50:51PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 08:12:51AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Apr 25,

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

Heikki Linnakangas writes: > I'm not sure what exactly to do here. Where should we stick that notice? > We could put it in the release notes, where the bullet point about SCRAM > is, but it would be well hidden. If we want to give advice to people who > might not otherwise pay

Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Amit Kapila > wrote: > > The attached patch fixes both the review comments as discussed above. > > This cost stuff looks unstable: > > test

Re: [HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

On 9/19/17 5:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Andres Freund writes: On 2017-09-19 17:15:21 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Meh --- Carp::Always isn't standard either, so I think this is just extra complication with little value-add. Let's just do the Devel::Confess incantation as Dagfinn

Re: [HACKERS] type cache for concat functions

2017-09-19 21:11 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane : > Pavel Stehule writes: > > [ faster-concat-2.patch ] > > Pushed with some cosmetic adjustments (mostly better comments). > Thank you very much Pavel > regards, tom lane >

Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] USER Profiles for PostgreSQL

Yes, LDAP will do. However we need to sync the user accounts and groups between AD and PG servers.and then AD profiles will apply to PG user accounts for authentication. It is good if we have user profiles in core PostgreSQL database system. So it will add more security. Thanks, Chiranjeevi On

[HACKERS] "inconsistent page found" with checksum and wal_consistency_checking enabled

Currently, page checksum is not masked by Page masking routines used by wal_consistency_checking facility. So, when running `make installcheck` with data checksum enabled and wal_consistency_checking='all', it easily and consistently FATALs with "inconsistent page found". If anything needs to be

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

On 09/19/2017 12:46 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:> At one point a couple of months back, it was understood that get_icu_language_tag() might not always work with (assumed) valid locale names -- that is at least the impression that the commit message of eccead9 left me with. But, that was only with

Re: [HACKERS] Add Roman numeral conversion to to_number

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: tested, passed Spec compliant: tested, passed Documentation:tested, passed Applied clean and runs fine. Previous comments were

Re: [HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

On 09/19/2017 01:31 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > I've had a couple cases where tap tests died, and I couldn't easily see > where / why. For development of a new test I found it useful to show > backtraces in that case - just adding a > use Carp::Always; > at the start of the relevant

Re: [HACKERS] Log LDAP "diagnostic messages"?

On 9/15/17 08:43, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 2:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: >> I think the ldap_unbind() changes should be in a separate preliminary >> patch to be committed separately and backpatched. > > OK, here it is split into two patches.

Re: [HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-09-19 17:15:21 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Meh --- Carp::Always isn't standard either, so I think this is just extra >> complication with little value-add. Let's just do the Devel::Confess >> incantation as Dagfinn has it. > Has ~25 times the

Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > 2017-09-19 16:14 GMT+02:00 Alexander Korotkov : > >> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Pavel Stehule >> wrote: >> >>> 2017-08-16 14:06 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule

Re: [HACKERS] Boom filters for hash joins (was: A design for amcheck heapam verification)

On 09/19/2017 06:03 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:28 AM, Tomas Vondra > wrote: >> The patch is fairly simple, and did not try to push the bloom filters to >> scan nodes or anything like that. It might be a meaningful first step, >> though,

Re: [HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-09-19 21:37:26 +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: >> Devel::Confess is more thorough, so +1 on that. > Or just try Devel::Confess first, and if the require fails, go to > Carp::always. Meh --- Carp::Always isn't standard either, so I think

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Assert that the correct locks are held when calling PageGetLSN()

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Jacob Champion wrote: > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> In short, it seems to me that this patch should be rejected in its >> current shape. > > Is the half of the patch that switches

Re: [HACKERS] type cache for concat functions

Pavel Stehule writes: > [ faster-concat-2.patch ] Pushed with some cosmetic adjustments (mostly better comments). regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > The attached patch fixes both the review comments as discussed above. This cost stuff looks unstable: test select_parallel ... FAILED ! Gather (cost=0.00..623882.94 rows=9976 width=8) Workers

Re: [HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 09/19/2017 01:31 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've had a couple cases where tap tests died, and I couldn't easily see >> where / why. For development of a new test I found it useful to show >> backtraces in that case - just

Re: [HACKERS] Re: issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Aside from being inconsistent, it doesn't cover all > the cases --- what if you have just one query output column, that is > composite, and you'd like it to go into a composite variable? That > doesn't work today, and this

Re: [HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

Tom Lane writes: > Andrew Dunstan writes: >> On 09/19/2017 01:31 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >>> # Include module showing backtraces upon failures. As it's a >>> non-standard module, don't fail if not installed. >>> eval { use Carp::Always; } >

Re: [HACKERS] Re: issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list

"David G. Johnston" writes: > Actually, this does work, just not the way one would immediately expect. On closer inspection, what's actually happening in your example is that you're getting the SELECT's ct1 result crammed into the first column of c1, and then a

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/subscription/t/002_types.pl hanging on particular environment

Thomas Munro writes: > This type of violent shutdown seems to be associated with occasional > corruption of .gcda files (the files output by GCC coverage builds). > The symptoms are that if you use --enable-coverage and make > check-world you'll very occasionally

Re: [HACKERS] issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list

On Tuesday, September 19, 2017, Tom Lane wrote: > Pavel Stehule > writes: > > 2017-09-14 12:33 GMT+02:00 Anthony Bykov >: > >> As far as I understand, this patch adds functionality (correct me if

Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] USER Profiles for PostgreSQL

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 01:28:11PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Tom, > > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > > chiru r writes: > > > We are looking for User profiles in ope source PostgreSQL. > > > For example, If a user password failed n+ times while login ,the user >

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/subscription/t/002_types.pl hanging on particular environment

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-09-18 21:57:04 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: >> WARNING: terminating connection because of crash of another server >> process >> DETAIL: The postmaster has commanded this server process to roll >> back

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

Andreas Karlsson writes: > Hm, I like the idea but I see some issues. > Enforcing the BCP47 seems like a good thing to me. I do not see any > reason to allow input with syntax errors. The issue though is that we do > not want to break people's databases when they upgrade to

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > I'm not sure what exactly to do here. Where should we stick that notice? > We could put it in the release notes, where the bullet point about SCRAM > is, but it would be well hidden. If we want to give advice to

Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning

I have done some refactoring of the code where I have moved the code of getting the matching clause into the separate function so that it can fetch the matching clause from any set of given restriction list. It can be applied on top of 0002-WIP: planner-side-changes-for-partition-pruning.patch

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/subscription/t/005_encoding.pl is broken

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > To my knowledge here's not really any difference between the two in > logical replication. Received changes are immediately applied, there's > no equivalent to a walreceiver queing up "logical wal" onto disk. Huh?

Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6

On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > > > I think Tom is reviewing this patch [1]. > I am marking this as ready for committer as I don't have any new comments and possibly other reviewers have also done reviewing it. -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat

Re: [HACKERS] Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >> > Or we could make upgradecheck a noop, then remove it once all the MSVC >> > animals have upgraded

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Perform only one ReadControlFile() during startup.

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-09-18 12:16:42 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Andres Freund wrote: >> > One thing that I've noticed for a while, but that I was reminded of >> > again here. We

Re: [HACKERS] type cache for concat functions

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: tested, passed Spec compliant: tested, passed Documentation:tested, passed Looks good to me. The new status of this patch is: Ready

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

Rafia Sabih wrote: > On completing the benchmark for all queries for the above mentioned > setup, following performance improvement can be seen, > Query | Patch | Head > 3 | 1455 | 1631 > 4 | 499 | 4344 > 5 | 1464 | 1606 > 10 | 1475 | 1599 > 12 | 1465 | 1790 > > Note that all

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/subscription/t/005_encoding.pl is broken

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >> To my knowledge here's not really any difference between the two in >> logical replication. Received changes are immediately applied, there's

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/subscription/t/002_types.pl hanging on particular environment

n 18/09/17 18:42, Tom Lane wrote: > Amit Kapila writes: >> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> The subscriber log includes >>> 2017-09-18 08:43:08.240 UTC [15672] WARNING: out of background worker slots >>> Maybe that's harmless, but

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting

> On 19 September 2017 at 10:21, Arthur Zakirov wrote: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:25:04PM +0200, Dmitry Dolgov wrote: >> > I think it would be good to add new catalog table. It may be named as >> pg_type_sbs or pg_subscripting (second is better I think). >> > This

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/subscription/t/002_types.pl hanging on particular environment

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > n 18/09/17 18:42, Tom Lane wrote: > >> So, frankly, I think we would be best off losing the "logical rep >> worker slot" business altogether, and making do with just bgworker >> slots. I think that would be

[HACKERS] Re: issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: tested, passed Spec compliant: tested, passed Documentation:tested, passed Hello, I've tested it (make check-world) and as far as I

Re: [HACKERS] JIT compiling expressions/deform + inlining prototype v2.0

On 04.09.2017 23:52, Andres Freund wrote: Hi. That piece of code isn't particularly clear (and has a bug in the submitted version), I'm revising it. ... Yea, I've changed that already, although it's currently added earlier, because the alignment is needed before, to access the column

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Andrey Borodin writes: > [ 0001-Allow-uncompressed-GiST-4.patch ] Pushed, with a bit more work on the documentation and some minor cosmetic changes. I did not like the fact that the new code paths added by the patch were untested, so I went ahead and removed the

Re: [HACKERS] src/test/subscription/t/002_types.pl hanging on particular environment

On 20 September 2017 at 12:16, Craig Ringer wrote: > The thought I had in mind upthread was to get rid of logicalrep slots >> in favor of expanding the underlying bgworker slot with some additional >> fields that would carry whatever extra info we need about a logicalrep

Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size

Hi, On 2017-09-14 11:31:33 +0530, Beena Emerson wrote: > The change looks good and is working as expected. > PFA the updated patch after running pgindent. I've pushed this version. Yay! Thanks for the work Beena, everyone! The only change I made is to run the pg_upgrade tests with a 1 MB

Re: [HACKERS] "inconsistent page found" with checksum and wal_consistency_checking enabled

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:23 AM, Ashwin Agrawal wrote: >> Currently, page checksum is not masked by Page masking routines used by >> wal_consistency_checking facility. So, when running

  1   2   >