Re: [HACKERS] More efficient truncation of pg_stat_activity query strings

Hi, On 2017-09-15 17:43:35 +0530, Kuntal Ghosh wrote: > The patch looks good to me. I've done some regression testing with a > custom script on my local system. The script contains the following > statement: > SELECT 'aaa..' as col; > > Test 1 > --- > duration:

Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan

2017-09-19 20:37 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas : > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: > >> You can already set a GUC with function scope. I'm not getting your > >> point. > > > > yes, it is true. But implementation of #option is

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

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 cases involving accented letters. It surprises me not in

Re: [HACKERS] pgjdbc logical replication client throwing exception

Hi Andres, I also checked server log. Nothing unusual is recorded there. Do you have any other suggestion. Thank you. Best regards, Dipesh Dangol On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:32 PM, Dipesh Dangol wrote: > Hi Vladimir, > Ya, initially I was trying with

Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> You can already set a GUC with function scope. I'm not getting your >> point. > > yes, it is true. But implementation of #option is limited to PLpgSQL - so > there is not any too much questions - GUC is global -

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 7:25 AM, Amit Khandekar wrote: > [ new patch ] This already fails to apply again. In general, I think it would be a good idea to break this up into a patch series rather than have it as a single patch. That would allow some bits to be applied

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

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 I'm >> wrong) for users. Shouldn't there be any changes in doc/src/sgml/ with the >> description of new

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

On 2017-09-19 13:15:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > On 2017-09-19 13:00:33 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> You mean, in the postmaster? > > > Yes. We try to avoid touch shmem there, but it's not like we're > > succeeding fully. See e.g. the

Re: [HACKERS] Running some tests with different segment sizes

On 2017-09-19 14:05:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > I'm working on merging the customizable segment size patch [1]. I'd > > like to run some of the regression tests using it, to guarantee > > non-standard settings have test coverage. The reason I'd like

Re: [HACKERS] Running some tests with different segment sizes

Andres Freund writes: > I'm working on merging the customizable segment size patch [1]. I'd > like to run some of the regression tests using it, to guarantee > non-standard settings have test coverage. The reason I'd like to adapt > an existing test, rather than add a new run

[HACKERS] Running some tests with different segment sizes

Hi, I'm working on merging the customizable segment size patch [1]. I'd like to run some of the regression tests using it, to guarantee non-standard settings have test coverage. The reason I'd like to adapt an existing test, rather than add a new run of the standard regression tests, is to avoid

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

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:28 PM, 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

[HACKERS] Show backtrace when tap tests fail

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 module did the trick. I'm wondering if we shouldn't always do so

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

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 > > access has to be blocked few seconds. > > Please let us know, is there

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

Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-09-19 13:00:33 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> You mean, in the postmaster? > Yes. We try to avoid touch shmem there, but it's not like we're > succeeding fully. See e.g. the pgstat_get_crashed_backend_activity() > calls (which do rely on shmem

Re: [HACKERS] USER Profiles for PostgreSQL

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 > access has to be blocked few seconds. > Please let us know, is there any plan to implement user profiles in feature >

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

On 2017-09-19 13:00:33 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > That'd not be that a crazy amount of > > shared memory that'd need to be touched in shared memory, ... > > You mean, in the postmaster? Yes. We try to avoid touch

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

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > That'd not be that a crazy amount of > shared memory that'd need to be touched in shared memory, ... You mean, in the postmaster? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL

[HACKERS] USER Profiles for PostgreSQL

Hi All, Good Morning. We are looking for User profiles in ope source PostgreSQL. For example, If a user password failed n+ times while login ,the user access has to be blocked few seconds. Please let us know, is there any plan to implement user profiles in feature releases?. Thanks,

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

Hi 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 : >> >>> Hi >>> >>> 2017-08-15 4:37 GMT+02:00 Peter Eisentraut <

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

On 2017-09-19 12:24:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > Unfortunately the backends themselves also react with inaccurate error > > messages to things like immediate shutdowns... > > Yeah, those signals are kind of overloaded these days. Not sure if >

Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan

2017-09-19 18:33 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas : > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: > > There is possibility to introduce new compile option #option to disable > plan > > cache on function scope. Do you think so it is acceptable

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

"'Bruce Momjian'" writes: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:30:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Well, if the intent of the note was to encourage people to raise >> shared_buffers, it didn't do a very good job of that as written, >> because I sure didn't understand it that way. > Do

Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > There is possibility to introduce new compile option #option to disable plan > cache on function scope. Do you think so it is acceptable solution? It is > step forward. You can already set a GUC with function

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

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 documentation change, then I was probably

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

"'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 documentation change, then I was probably in error >> to decide it didn't need to be in the notes. > It was

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:22:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "'Bruce Momjian'" writes: > > I am sure Tom can explain his reasoning. > > We don't normally release-note documentation changes. If this > wasn't purely a documentation change, then I was probably in error > to decide

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

Andres Freund writes: > Unfortunately the backends themselves also react with inaccurate error > messages to things like immediate shutdowns... Yeah, those signals are kind of overloaded these days. Not sure if there's any good way to improve that.

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

"'Bruce Momjian'" writes: > I am sure Tom can explain his reasoning. We don't normally release-note documentation changes. If this wasn't purely a documentation change, then I was probably in error to decide it didn't need to be in the notes. regards,

Re: [HACKERS] Page Scan Mode in Hash Index

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 gets the page LSN to see if we can apply LP_DEAD hints, but if the table is unlogged or

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

On 19/09/17 16:30, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> n 18/09/17 18:42, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Amit Kapila writes: On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> So,

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

2017-09-19 11:43 GMT+02:00 Anthony Bykov : > The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: > make installcheck-world: tested, passed > Implements feature: tested, passed > Spec compliant: tested, passed > Documentation:

Re: [HACKERS] type cache for concat functions

2017-09-19 12:18 GMT+02:00 Alexander Kuzmenkov : > The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: > make installcheck-world: tested, passed > Implements feature: tested, passed > Spec compliant: tested, passed > Documentation:

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

On 2017-09-19 07:48:42 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > Oh, I've not seen that. Mostly, what I think we should fix is the > fact that the libpq messages tend to report that the server crashed > even if it was an orderly shutdown. > > [rhaas ~]$ psql > psql (11devel) > Type "help" for help. > >

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

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, particularly for selective joins (where only small

Re: [HACKERS] PG 10 release notes

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 03:13:50AM +, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: > It's embarrassing to ask about such a trivial thing, but I noticed > the following line was missing in the latest release note, which was > originally in Bruce's website: > > Remove documented restriction about using large

Re: [HACKERS] Setting pd_lower in GIN metapage

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 meta pages. There are cases like this one, as well as one >> code path in BRIN

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

Michael Paquier writes: > Now, I just had a look at the logs for a failure and a success, and > one difference can be seen in the subscriber's logs as follows: > -LOG: logical replication table synchronization worker for > subscription "mysub", table "test1" has

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

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 cases involving accented letters. It surprises me not in the least that those would have nonportable

Re: [HACKERS] Bug with pg_basebackup and 'shared' tablespace

On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 12:52:37 PM CEST you wrote: > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 2:17 AM, Pierre Ducroquet wrote: > > All my apologies for the schockingly long time with no answer on this > > topic. > No problem. That's the concept called life I suppose. > > > I will do

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

Andrew Dunstan writes: > This seems to have upset a number or animals in the buildfarm. Looks like all the ones that are testing in en_US locale. > I could create a third output file, but I am seriously questioning the > point of all this, What locale did you

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

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 19/09/17 15:08, Amit Kapila wrote: >> >> I am not much aware of this area. Can you explain what other usages >> it has apart from in the process that has launched the worker and in >> worker itself? >> > >

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: >> Amit Kapila writes: >>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: The subscriber log includes 2017-09-18

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

On 19 September 2017 at 15:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > On 09/19/2017 08:35 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Add citext_pattern_ops for citext contrib module >> >> This is similar to text_pattern_ops. >> > > This seems to have upset a number or animals in the

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

On 09/19/2017 08:35 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Add citext_pattern_ops for citext contrib module > > This is similar to text_pattern_ops. > This seems to have upset a number or animals in the buildfarm. I could create a third output file, but I am seriously questioning the point of all this,

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

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > 2017-08-16 14:06 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule : > >> Hi >> >> 2017-08-15 4:37 GMT+02:00 Peter Eisentraut > com>: >> >>> On 3/11/17 07:06, Pavel Stehule wrote: >>> >

Re: [HACKERS] psql - add ability to test whether a variable exists

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: not tested Implements feature: tested, failed Spec compliant: not tested Documentation:tested, failed The patch applies cleanly and compiles + installs fine (although am

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

Hi, On 09/19/2017 02:55 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Uh, why does the

Re: [HACKERS] Setting pd_lower in GIN metapage

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> I'd think about adjusting the comments the proper way for each AM so >> as one can read those comments and catch any

Re: [HACKERS] Setting pd_lower in GIN metapage

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Amit

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

On 19/09/17 15:08, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> On 19/09/17 14:33, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Petr Jelinek >>> wrote: n 18/09/17 18:42, Tom Lane wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] PoC: full merge join on comparison clause

Hi Alexander, On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 10:11 PM, Alexander Kuzmenkov wrote: > Here is a new version of the patch, rebased to 749c7c41 and with some > cosmetic changes. > I looked at this patch briefly. This is a useful feature. This isn't a design level review of the

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

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 19/09/17 14:33, Amit Kapila wrote: >> 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

[HACKERS] user-defined numeric data types triggering ERROR: unsupported type

Hi, while testing a custom data type FIXEDDECIMAL [1], implementing a numeric-like data type with limited range, I ran into a several issues that I suspect may not be entirely intentional / expected behavior. [1] https://github.com/2ndQuadrant/fixeddecimal Attached is a minimal subset of the

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

On 19/09/17 14:33, Amit Kapila wrote: > 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

Re: [HACKERS] subscription worker signalling wal writer too much

At Sat, 26 Aug 2017 14:45:20 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote in

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

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] [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/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/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] 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] 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] 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] 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] 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] 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] 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

[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] 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] 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] 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] [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] 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] 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] Block level parallel vacuum WIP

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > 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

Re: [HACKERS] Simplify ACL handling for large objects and removal of superuser() checks

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017, Michael Paquier wrote: >>Attached is a set of 3 patches: > > I tried to review the patch and firstly patch applies cleanly without any > noise. Thanks

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] 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] Back-branch release notes up for review

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 02:53:45AM +, Noah Misch wrote: > On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 03:31:12PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > + > > + > > + > > + Show foreign tables > > + in information_schema.table_privileges > > + view (Peter Eisentraut) > > + > > + > > + > > +

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] Race between SELECT and ALTER TABLE NO INHERIT

At Fri, 15 Sep 2017 15:36:26 +0900, Amit Langote wrote in > Hi. > > On 2017/08/28 18:28, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > << the following is another topic >> > > > BTW, in the partitioned table case, the

<    1   2