Hi Febien,
I send you my review result and refactoring patch. I think that your patch has
good function and many people surely want to use! I hope that my review comment
will be good for your patch.
* 1. Complete words and variable in source code and sgml document.
It is readable for user an
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 12:10:25AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> David Fetter escribió:
> > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 08:59:27PM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
>
> > > In my testing of sub-queries in the FILTER clause (an extension to the
> > > spec), I was able to produce the following error:
> >
> >
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
> wrote:
> > Magnus Hagander writes:
> >>> Should we have a way of previewing changes that would be applied if we
> >>> reloaded/restarted the server?
> >>
> >> Yes, we should.
> >
> > +1
Actually, I think it would be cleaner to have a new state in pmState,
namely PM_IMMED_SHUTDOWN which is entered when we send SIGQUIT. When
we're in this state, postmaster is only waiting for the timeout to
expire; and when it does, it sends SIGKILL and exits. Pretty much the
same you have, except
On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 10:03 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think the question is whether this feature is really worth adding
> new reserved keywords for. I have a hard time saying we shouldn't
> support something that's part of the SQL standard, but personally,
> it's not something I've seen come u
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 12:10:25AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> David Fetter escribió:
> > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 08:59:27PM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
>
> > > In my testing of sub-queries in the FILTER clause (an extension
> > > to the spec), I was able to produce the following error:
> >
> >
David Fetter escribió:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 08:59:27PM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> > In my testing of sub-queries in the FILTER clause (an extension to the
> > spec), I was able to produce the following error:
>
> Per the spec,
>
> B) A shall not contain a , a function>, or an outer ref
Alvaro asked me to add the display of post minor-release commits to
PgLife (http://pglife.momjian.us/). I have added a link to that
information as a plus-sign after each minor release number, e.g. Stable:
9.2.4+, 9.1.9+, 9.0.13+, 8.4.17+.
Hopefully this will be helpful in us scheduling minor rele
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 08:59:27PM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On 17 June 2013 06:36, David Fetter wrote:
> >> > > Please find attached two versions of a patch which provides optional
> >> > > FILTER clause for aggregates (T612, "Advanced OLAP operations").
> >> > >
> >> > > The first is intended
"Erik Rijkers" writes:
> In a 112 MB test table (containing random generated text) with a trgm index
> (gin_trgm_ops), I consistently get these timings:
> select txt from azjunk6 where txt ~ '^abcd';
>130 ms
> select txt from azjunk6
> where txt ~ 'abcd' and substr(txt,1,4) = 'abcd';
>3 m
On Thu, 2013-06-13 at 15:10 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> Some places in the docs and elog hints refer to "standalone" backends,
> while the official name as used in app-postgres.html is "single-user
> mode",
> and in fact "standalone" does not appear on that page.
>
> This tries to standardize the o
Thanks! The discussions
have been useful, although I am currently just reviewing the code.
I think a good starting point will be to refactor/imrpove the
WinGetFuncArgInPartition and WinGetFuncArgInFrame functions.
Tom Lane wrote this about them before comitting the patch:
I'm
not terribly happ
MauMau escribió:
> From: "Alvaro Herrera"
> One concern is that umount would fail in such a situation because
> postgres has some open files on the filesystem, which is on the
> shared disk in case of traditional HA cluster.
See my reply to Noah. If postmaster stays around, would this be any
di
On 06/21/2013 10:31 AM, Ian Link wrote:
> I am currently looking into this feature. However, as I am quite new to
> Postgres, I think it might take me a while to get up to speed. Anyways,
> I would also appreciate another round of discussion on the future of the
> windowing functions.
Good to know
Noah Misch escribió:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:33:25PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > MauMau escribi?:
> > > Here, "reliable" means that the database server is certainly shut
> > > down when pg_ctl returns, not telling a lie that "I shut down the
> > > server processes for you, so you do not h
I am currently looking
into this feature. However, as I am quite new to Postgres, I think it
might take me a while to get up to speed. Anyways, I would also
appreciate another round of discussion on the future of the windowing
functions.
Ian Link
Craig Ringer
Thursday, J
Hi all
Since 8.4, PostgreSQL has had extremely useful window function support -
but support for "RANGE PRECEDING / FOLLOWING" windows was dropped late
in 8.4's development in order to get the rest of the feature in, per
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-02/msg00540.php.
It looks l
On Sun, 2013-06-16 at 23:53 -0500, Jon Nelson wrote:
> Please find attached v5 of the patch, with the above correction in place.
> The only change from the v4 patch is wrapping the if
> (wal_use_fallocate) block in an #ifdef USE_POSIX_FALLOCATE.
> Thanks!
Thank you.
Greg, are you still working on
9.4devel (but same in 9.3)
In a 112 MB test table (containing random generated text) with a trgm index
(gin_trgm_ops), I consistently get these timings:
select txt from azjunk6 where txt ~ '^abcd';
130 ms
select txt from azjunk6
where txt ~ 'abcd' and substr(txt,1,4) = 'abcd';
3 ms
(a s
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 06:28:07PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> > Well, sometimes we underestimate the impact of changes, sometimes we
> > overestimate. The big problem is weighing the short-term problems of
> > change but not the long-term benefit of a change. This array problem
> > g
Hackers,
So, I can create a custom aggregate "first" and do this:
SELECT first(val order by ts desc) ...
And I can do this:
SELECT first_value(val) OVER (order by ts desc)
... but I can't do this:
SELECT first_value(val order by ts desc)
... even though under the hood, it's the exact same op
Bruce,
> Well, sometimes we underestimate the impact of changes, sometimes we
> overestimate. The big problem is weighing the short-term problems of
> change but not the long-term benefit of a change. This array problem
> goes back to at least 2008:
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-i
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 07:13:48PM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> Kinda -- what I'm saying is you just don't go around changing function
> >> behaviors to make them 'better' unless the affected behavior was
> >> specifically reserved as un
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Kinda -- what I'm saying is you just don't go around changing function
>> behaviors to make them 'better' unless the affected behavior was
>> specifically reserved as undefined. The fact is nobody knows how many
>> users will be affected an
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 03:33:24PM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:57:27AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> >> >> But, couldn't that be solved by deprecating that function and
> >> >> providing a more sensible altern
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:33:25PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> MauMau escribi?:
> > Here, "reliable" means that the database server is certainly shut
> > down when pg_ctl returns, not telling a lie that "I shut down the
> > server processes for you, so you do not have to be worried that some
> >
Hi all,
I have a Debian machine with gcc 4.7.2-5 where make check-world fails
in the isolation check, like so:
...
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/josh/src/postgresql/src/test/regress'
make -C isolation check
[snip]
gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
-Wdeclaration-after-stateme
Andres Freund wrote:
>> 0007: Adjust Satisfies* interface: required, mechanical,
> Version v5-01 attached
I'm still working on a review and hope to post something more
substantive by this weekend, but when applying patches in numeric
order, this one did not compile cleanly.
gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmis
From: "Alvaro Herrera"
I will go with 5 seconds, then.
OK, I agree.
My point is that there is no difference. For one thing, once we enter
immediate shutdown state, and sigkill has been sent, no further action
is taken. Postmaster will just sit there indefinitely until processes
are gone.
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:57:27AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> >> But, couldn't that be solved by deprecating that function and
>> >> providing a more sensible alternatively named version?
>> >
>> > And what would you name that function?
On 17 June 2013 06:36, David Fetter wrote:
>> > > Please find attached two versions of a patch which provides optional
>> > > FILTER clause for aggregates (T612, "Advanced OLAP operations").
>> > >
>> > > The first is intended to be applied on top of the previous patch, the
>> > > second without i
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:57:27AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> >> But, couldn't that be solved by deprecating that function and
> >> providing a more sensible alternatively named version?
> >
> > And what would you name that function? array_dims2? I can't think of
> > a name that makes the dif
I've fixed a conflict, and I've removed extraneous semicolons from the C.
I've left in the fixing of some existing bad indenting in the existing
code, which is not strictly related to my change.
There are still unrelated changes : spacing on -c and -t options' help.
The "pgindent" command is
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
> (2013/06/17 4:02), Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
>>>
>>> It is obviously easy to keep two types of function interfaces,
>>> one with regclass-type and another with text-type, in the next
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
>>
>>
> Thanks for doing the review. I'm not sure what things to go change
> without further feedback/discussion, except point 4. I'll wait a day to
> see if I get more feedback on the
MauMau escribió:
> First, thank you for the review.
>
> From: "Alvaro Herrera"
> >This seems reasonable. Why 10 seconds? We could wait 5 seconds, or 15.
> >Is there a rationale behind the 10? If we said 60, that would fit
> >perfectly well within the already existing 60-second loop in postmast
On 6/20/13 11:04 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I kind of don't see the point of having IF NOT EXISTS for things that
> have OR REPLACE, and am generally in favor of implementing OR REPLACE
> rather than IF NOT EXISTS where possible.
I tend to agree.
>> > Btw., I also want REPLACE BUT DO NOT CREATE.
>
On 2013-06-20 11:29:27 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Do you mean pre-forking and connecting to a specific database? Or really
> > just the forking?
>
> I've considered both at various times, although in this context I was
> mostly thinking about just the forking. Pre-connecting to a specific
> dat
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Markus Wanner wrote:
> On 06/20/2013 04:41 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> The constant factor is also very small. Generally, I would expect
>> num_worker_processes <~ # CPUs
>
> That assumption might hold for parallel querying, yes. In case of
> Postgres-R, it doesn't
On 06/20/2013 10:43 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
As I was updating my cross version upgrade tester to include support for the
9.3 branch, I noted this dump difference between the dump of the original
9.3 database and the dump of the converted d
Hackers,
While developing a C++ client library for Postgres I felt lack of extra
information in command tags in the CommandComplete (B) message
for the following commands:
PREPARE;
DEALLOCATE;
DECLARE;
CLOSE;
LISTEN;
UNLISTEN;
SET;
RESET.
Namely, for example, users of my library ca
On 2013-06-20 13:45:24 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 06/12/2013 07:51 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2013-06-12 19:47:46 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> >> On 06/12/2013 05:55 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 12:56 AM, Craig Ringer
> >>> wrote:
> The main thing I'm wonderi
On 2013-06-20 10:58:59 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Andres Freund
> wrote:
> >> But I'm still on the fence about whether this is really a valid test.
> >
> > I think it shows that we need to be careful and do further performance
> > evaluations and/or alleviate th
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> But I'm still on the fence about whether this is really a valid test.
>
> I think it shows that we need to be careful and do further performance
> evaluations and/or alleviate the pain by making things cheaper (say, a
> "ddl counter" in sha
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 6/12/13 1:29 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
>> The attached patch add support to "IF NOT EXISTS" to "CREATE" statements
>> listed below:
>>
>> - CREATE AGGREGATE [ IF NOT EXISTS ] ...
>> - CREATE CAST [ IF NOT EXISTS ] ...
>> - CREA
On 06/20/2013 04:41 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> The constant factor is also very small. Generally, I would expect
> num_worker_processes <~ # CPUs
That assumption might hold for parallel querying, yes. In case of
Postgres-R, it doesn't. In the worst case, i.e. with a 100% write load,
a cluster of n
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> As I was updating my cross version upgrade tester to include support for the
> 9.3 branch, I noted this dump difference between the dump of the original
> 9.3 database and the dump of the converted database, which looks odd. Is it
> correct
On 2013-06-19 15:01:44 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > On 2013-02-07 11:15:46 -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> > >
> > > Does anyone have suggestions on how to hack the system to make it
> > > fast-forward the current transaction id? It would certai
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Markus Wanner wrote:
> That sounds like a good simplification. Even if it's an O(n) operation,
> the n in question here has relatively low practical limits. It's
> unlikely to be much of a concern, I guess.
The constant factor is also very small. Generally, I wou
On 2013-06-20 09:45:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > With that setup one can create quite a noticeable overhead for the mvcc
> > patch (best of 5):
> >
> > master-optimize:
> > tps = 1261.629474 (including connections establishing)
> > tps = 15121.648834 (excluding connections establishing)
> >
> >
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Nicholas White wrote:
> Thanks for the reviews. I've attached a revised patch that has the lexer
> refactoring Alvaro mentions (arbitarily using a goto rather than a bool
> flag) and uses Jeff's idea of just storing the index of the last non-null
> value (if there
Robert,
On 06/14/2013 11:00 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Parallel query, or any subset of that project such as parallel sort,
> will require a way to start background workers on demand.
thanks for continuing this, very much appreciated. Postgres-R and thus
TransLattice successfully use a similar appr
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-06-14 at 17:00 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Alvaro's work on 9.3, we now have the ability to configure background
>> workers via shared_preload_libraries. But if you don't have the right
>> library loaded at startup time, an
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> So, the biggest issue with the patch seems to be performance worries. I
> tried to create a worst case scenario:
> postgres (patched and HEAD) running with:
> -c shared_buffers=4GB \
> -c max_connections=2000 \
> -c maintenance_work_mem=2GB \
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
>>> Should we have a way of previewing changes that would be applied if we
>>> reloaded/restarted the server?
>>
>> Yes, we should.
>
> +1
>
>> This would go well with something I started working on some time ago
>
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Please fix that and re-send the patch.
>>
>
> Find attached diff wrt current master.
>
>
Thanks.
--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
>> Blog sobre TI: http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com
>> Perfil Linkedin: http://
Please fix that and re-send the patch.
Find attached diff wrt current master.
--
Fabien.diff --git a/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c b/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c
index 1303217..f39fed3 100644
--- a/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c
+++ b/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c
@@ -2109,6 +2109,30 @@ int
main(int argc, c
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 1:52 AM, Amit Langote
> wrote:
>>
>> Is it possible to:
>>
>> CREATE [ OR REPLACE | IF NOT EXISTS ] OPERATOR CLASS
>>
>> I am in a situation where I need to conditionally create an operator
>> class (that
Magnus Hagander writes:
>> Should we have a way of previewing changes that would be applied if we
>> reloaded/restarted the server?
>
> Yes, we should.
+1
> This would go well with something I started working on some time ago
> (but haven't actually gotten far on at all), which is the ability fo
On 6/20/13 1:21 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> Personally, I'm all for just using the local path when building the
> module, and the qualified path elsewhere. It requires only a relatively
> simple change, and I don't think that using "hstore.h" within hstore,
> and "contrib/hstore/hstore.h" elsewhere i
On 6/20/13 1:21 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> As you note, the other option is to just refer to extension headers by
> their unqualified name. I'm *really* not a fan of that idea due to the
> obvious clash possibilities with Pg's own headers or system headers,
> especially given that the whole idea of
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 1:52 AM, Amit Langote
wrote:
>
> Is it possible to:
>
> CREATE [ OR REPLACE | IF NOT EXISTS ] OPERATOR CLASS
>
> I am in a situation where I need to conditionally create an operator
> class (that is, create only if already does not exist).
>
> [...]
>
The intention is cove
First, thank you for the review.
From: "Alvaro Herrera"
This seems reasonable. Why 10 seconds? We could wait 5 seconds, or 15.
Is there a rationale behind the 10? If we said 60, that would fit
perfectly well within the already existing 60-second loop in postmaster,
but that seems way too lon
On 20 June 2013 13:16, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've noticed that there's no easy way of checking which settings will
>> change if the config is reloaded, and I think not being able to do this can
>> cause some unfortunate pr
> Opinions all?
>
> * Give up on being able to use one extension's header from another
> entirely, except in the special case of in-tree builds
There are already a good number of use cases with only hstore and intarray,
I'm in favor of this feature.
> * Install install-enabled contrib headers i
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've noticed that there's no easy way of checking which settings will
> change if the config is reloaded, and I think not being able to do this can
> cause some unfortunate problems.
>
> For example, a customer went to change their conf
On 06/20/2013 12:27 PM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
> My understanding is that the attacker would already have that
> information since the server would have sent an
> AuthenticationMD5Password message to get to the error in the first
> place. And we still reveal the authentication method to the fronten
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've noticed that there's no easy way of checking which settings will change
> if the config is reloaded, and I think not being able to do this can cause
> some unfortunate problems.
>
> For example, a customer went to change their confi
Le jeudi 20 juin 2013 05:26:21, Peter Eisentraut a écrit :
> On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 20:58 +0200, Cédric Villemain wrote:
> > I believe he answered the proposal to put all headers on the same flat
> > directory, instead of a tree.
>
> The headers are used as
>
> #include "hstore.h"
> #include "ltre
Hi,
I've noticed that there's no easy way of checking which settings will
change if the config is reloaded, and I think not being able to do this can
cause some unfortunate problems.
For example, a customer went to change their configuration, just setting
log_autovacuum_min_duration to about 20 s
On 20/06/2013 08:47, Markus Wanner wrote:
On 06/20/2013 12:51 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
I think we need to keep the first "password". "Password authentication"
is a single thing, it is the authentication method attempted. It is the
password method (which includes MD5) which failed, as opposed to t
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Random observation in this general area: Regular triggers provide the
> field Trigger *tg_trigger in the trigger data, which allows you to get
> the trigger name, OID, and such. Event triggers don't expose anything
> comparable. That should perhaps be added.
Agreed.
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Claudio Freire escribió:
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> > * Claudio Freire (klaussfre...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> >> I don't see how this is better than snapshotting at the filesystem
>> >> level. I have no experie
On 20 June 2013 08:05, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On 20 June 2013 06:45, Craig Ringer wrote:
>
>> If the performance isn't interesting it may still be worth adding for
>>
> compliance reasons, but if we can only add IEEE-compliant decimal FP by
>> using non-SQL-standard type names I don't think that'
On 06/18/2013 01:52 AM, Jeremy Evans wrote:
> Maybe I am misunderstanding how LATERAL is supposed to work, but my
> expectation is that doing a LEFT JOIN should not remove rows from
> the LHS.
I have added this to the list of 9.3 blockers.
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.3_Open_Item
n.
OK. I'll also wait for others' comments. For review, an updated version of the
patch is attached, which fixed the bug using the approach that directly uses the
clause information in the parse tree.
Thanks,
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujit
unused-targets-20130620.patch
Description: Bin
On 20 June 2013 06:45, Craig Ringer wrote:
> I think a good starting point would be to use the Intel and IBM
> libraries to implement basic DECIMAL32/64/128 to see if they perform
> better than the gcc builtins tested by Pavel by adapting his extension.
>
Just a few notes:
Not sure if this has
77 matches
Mail list logo
