Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup -x/X doesn't play well with archive_mode wal_keep_segments

2015-02-12 Thread Sergey Konoplev
Hi, On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:34 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: pg_receivexlog: could not create archive status file mmm/archive_status/00010003.done: No such file or directory Dang. Stupid typo. And my tests didn't catch it, because I had

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup -x/X doesn't play well with archive_mode wal_keep_segments

2015-02-12 Thread Sergey Konoplev
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: I started getting these errors after upgrading from 9.2.8 to 9.2.10. Is it something critical that requires version downgrade or I can just ignore that errors? What errors are you getting in precisely which

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup -x/X doesn't play well with archive_mode wal_keep_segments

2015-02-12 Thread Sergey Konoplev
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: This obviously should not be the case. I'll have a look in a couple of hours. Until then you can likely just work around the problem by creating the archive_status directory. Thank you. Just let me know if you

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup -x/X doesn't play well with archive_mode wal_keep_segments

2015-02-12 Thread Andres Freund
On February 12, 2015 8:11:05 PM CET, Sergey Konoplev gray...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:34 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: pg_receivexlog: could not create archive status file mmm/archive_status/00010003.done: No such file or directory

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup -x/X doesn't play well with archive_mode wal_keep_segments

2015-02-12 Thread Andres Freund
Hi. This obviously should not be the case. I'll have a look in a couple of hours. Until then you can likely just work around the problem by creating the archive_status directory. -- Please excuse brevity and formatting - I am writing this on my mobile phone. Andres Freund

Re: binworld and install-binworld targets - was Re: [HACKERS] Release note bloat is getting out of hand

2015-02-12 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 2/4/15 8:20 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 02/04/2015 06:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Or maybe use a make variable, like NO_DOC. I think that's preferable to adding more targets. Unless we can come up with a new target name that obviously means world minus docs, the make-variable idea may be

Re: [HACKERS] What exactly is our CRC algorithm?

2015-02-12 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 02/11/2015 04:20 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote: At 2015-02-11 13:20:29 +0200, hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: I don't follow. I didn't change configure at all, compared to your patch. OK, I extrapolated a little too much. Your patch didn't actually include crc_instructions.h; Oh, I'm

Re: [HACKERS] Index-only scans for GiST.

2015-02-12 Thread Anastasia Lubennikova
Thanks for answer. Now it seems to be applied correctly. 2015-02-12 3:12 GMT+04:00 Thom Brown t...@linux.com: On 11 February 2015 at 22:50, Anastasia Lubennikova lubennikov...@gmail.com wrote: Finally there is a new version of patch (in attachments). It provides multicolumn index-only scan

Re: [HACKERS] libpq's multi-threaded SSL callback handling is busted

2015-02-12 Thread Jan Urbański
Andres Freund writes: On 2015-02-12 09:31:27 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote: That doesn't solve the problem of the Python deadlock, where you're not at leisure to call a C function at the beginning of your module. We could just never unload the hooks... That's what we did before

Re: [HACKERS] Table-level log_autovacuum_min_duration

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Naoya Anzai anzai-na...@mxu.nes.nec.co.jp wrote: Hi, Michael-san An updated patch is attached, I'm sorry for confusing you. I think you don't have to implement this code to disable this feature with using value -2.Because this use case is a rare case,

Re: [HACKERS] assessing parallel-safety

2015-02-12 Thread Amit Kapila
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:51 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: I think we may want a dedicated parallel-safe property for functions rather than piggybacking on provolatile, but that will probably also be changeable via ALTER FUNCTION, and stored rules won't get miraculously

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

2015-02-12 Thread Amit Kapila
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 2:19 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2015-02-10 09:23:02 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: As pointed

Re: [HACKERS] [REVIEW] Re: Compression of full-page-writes

2015-02-12 Thread Syed, Rahila
Thank you for comments. Please find attached the updated patch. This patch fails to compile: xlogreader.c:1049:46: error: extraneous ')' after condition, expected a statement blk-with_hole blk-hole_offset = 0)) This has been rectified. Note as well

Re: [HACKERS] How about to have relnamespace and relrole?

2015-02-12 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Hello, I changed the subject. This mail is to address the point at hand, preparing for registering this commitfest. 15 17:29:14 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote in 20150204.172914.52110711.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp Tue, 03 Feb 2015

Re: [HACKERS] enabling nestedloop and disabling hashjon

2015-02-12 Thread Tom Lane
Ravi Kiran ravi.kolanp...@gmail.com writes: I am sorry for the late reply, when I disabled the hash join command enable_hashjoin=off in the postgresql.conf file, it was not working. But I when I used the command set enable_hashjoin=off command in the back end. It worked. I am not able to

Re: [HACKERS] enabling nestedloop and disabling hashjon

2015-02-12 Thread David G Johnston
Jim Nasby-5 wrote On 2/10/15 9:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Ravi Kiran lt; ravi.kolanpaka@ gt; writes: yes sir, I did try the pg_ctl reload command, but its still using the hash join algorithm and not the nested loop algorithm. I even restarted the server, even then its still using the hash

[HACKERS] gcc5: initdb produces gigabytes of _fsm files

2015-02-12 Thread Christoph Berg
Hi, gcc5 is lurking in Debian experimental, and it's breaking initdb. There's bug reports for 9.1 and 9.4: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=778070 (9.1) https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=778071 (9.4) but I could reproduce it with 9.5devel (from last week) as well:

Re: [HACKERS] assessing parallel-safety

2015-02-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote: Probably not, because many queries will scan multiple relations, and we want to do all of this work just once per query. By this, do you mean to say that if there is any parallel-unsafe expression (function call) in

Re: [HACKERS] enabling nestedloop and disabling hashjon

2015-02-12 Thread Jim Nasby
On 2/12/15 3:34 PM, Ravi Kiran wrote: sorry for the inconvenience if caused to anyone, but as David G johnston said, I was trying to change how the postgresql works and was not able to figure out how it should be done. I will make sure it will be clear from the next time. Thank you very much.

Re: [HACKERS] enabling nestedloop and disabling hashjon

2015-02-12 Thread Ravi Kiran
I am sorry for the late reply, when I disabled the hash join command enable_hashjoin=off in the postgresql.conf file, it was not working. But I when I used the command set enable_hashjoin=off command in the back end. It worked. I am not able to understand why it did not get disabled when I

Re: [HACKERS] enabling nestedloop and disabling hashjon

2015-02-12 Thread Jim Nasby
On 2/12/15 3:20 PM, David G Johnston wrote: Does show enable_hashjoin say it's off? If not, I think you must've fat-fingered the postgresql.conf change somehow. For future reference, posts like this belong on pgsql-performance. but postgres is still using the hash join algorithm even after

Re: [HACKERS] enabling nestedloop and disabling hashjon

2015-02-12 Thread Rodrigo Gonzalez
On 12/2/15 18:29, Tom Lane wrote: Ravi Kiran ravi.kolanp...@gmail.com writes: I am sorry for the late reply, when I disabled the hash join command enable_hashjoin=off in the postgresql.conf file, it was not working. But I when I used the command set enable_hashjoin=off command in the back

[HACKERS] Help me! Why did the salve stop suddenly ?

2015-02-12 Thread hailong Li
Hi, dear pgsql-hackers *1. environment* *DB Master* $ cat /etc/issue CentOS release 6.5 (Final) Kernel \r on an \m $ uname -av Linux l-x1.xx.cnx 3.14.29-3.centos6.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Jan 20 17:48:32 CST 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ psql -U postgres psql (9.3.5) Type help for help.

Re: [HACKERS] gcc5: initdb produces gigabytes of _fsm files

2015-02-12 Thread Tom Lane
Christoph Berg c...@df7cb.de writes: gcc5 is lurking in Debian experimental, and it's breaking initdb. Yeah, I just heard the same about Red Hat as well: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190978 Not clear if it's an outright compiler bug or they've just found some creative new way

Re: [HACKERS] enabling nestedloop and disabling hashjon

2015-02-12 Thread Jim Nasby
On 2/10/15 9:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Ravi Kiran ravi.kolanp...@gmail.com writes: yes sir, I did try the pg_ctl reload command, but its still using the hash join algorithm and not the nested loop algorithm. I even restarted the server, even then its still using the hash join algorithm Does show

Re: [HACKERS] Commit fest 2015-12 enters money time

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: We are soon entering in the money time for this CF. The last month has been mainly a vacation period, the progress being fantomatic on many fronts, still there are a couple of patches that are marked as ready for

Re: [HACKERS] How about to have relnamespace and relrole?

2015-02-12 Thread Jim Nasby
On 2/12/15 5:28 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: Hello, I changed the subject. This mail is to address the point at hand, preparing for registering this commitfest. 15 17:29:14 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] Table-level log_autovacuum_min_duration

2015-02-12 Thread Naoya Anzai
You mean that ... Log_autovacuum_min_duration assumes a role of VACOPT_VERBOSE. Even if this parameter never use currently for manual vacuum, log_autovacuum_min_duration should be set zero(anytime output) when we executes VACUUM(or ANALYZE) VERBOSE. Is my understanding correct? If so,it

Re: [HACKERS] gcc5: initdb produces gigabytes of _fsm files

2015-02-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I wrote: Christoph Berg c...@df7cb.de writes: gcc5 is lurking in Debian experimental, and it's breaking initdb. Yeah, I just heard the same about Red Hat as well: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190978 Not

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Reducing lock strength of trigger and foreign key DDL

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Andreas Karlsson andr...@proxel.se wrote: On 01/30/2015 07:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: Looking at the latest patch, it seems that in AlterTableGetLockLevel@tablecmds.c we ought to put AT_ReAddConstraint, AT_AddConstraintRecurse and AT_ProcessedConstraint

Re: [HACKERS] gcc5: initdb produces gigabytes of _fsm files

2015-02-12 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: Christoph Berg c...@df7cb.de writes: gcc5 is lurking in Debian experimental, and it's breaking initdb. Yeah, I just heard the same about Red Hat as well: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190978 Not clear if it's an outright compiler bug or they've just found some

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup -x/X doesn't play well with archive_mode wal_keep_segments

2015-02-12 Thread Andres Freund
On 2015-02-12 11:44:05 -0800, Sergey Konoplev wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: This obviously should not be the case. I'll have a look in a couple of hours. Until then you can likely just work around the problem by creating the

Re: [HACKERS] libpq's multi-threaded SSL callback handling is busted

2015-02-12 Thread Jan Urbański
Andres Freund writes: On 2015-02-09 18:17:14 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote: First of all, the current behaviour is crazy. We're setting and unsetting the locking callback every time a connection is made/closed, which is not how OpenSSL is supposed to be used. The *application* using libpq should

Re: [HACKERS] libpq's multi-threaded SSL callback handling is busted

2015-02-12 Thread Andres Freund
On 2015-02-12 09:31:27 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote: Andres Freund writes: On 2015-02-09 18:17:14 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote: First of all, the current behaviour is crazy. We're setting and unsetting the locking callback every time a connection is made/closed, which is not how OpenSSL

Re: [HACKERS] Table-level log_autovacuum_min_duration

2015-02-12 Thread Naoya Anzai
Hi, Michael-san An updated patch is attached, I'm sorry for confusing you. I think you don't have to implement this code to disable this feature with using value -2.Because this use case is a rare case, and there is a practical workaround using huge value like 2e9. (You suggested 2e9 to me,

[HACKERS] Strange assertion using VACOPT_FREEZE in vacuum.c

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
Hi all, When calling vacuum(), there is the following assertion using VACOPT_FREEZE: Assert((vacstmt-options VACOPT_VACUUM) || !(vacstmt-options (VACOPT_FULL | VACOPT_FREEZE))); I think that this should be changed with sanity checks based on the parameter values of freeze_* in VacuumStmt as

Re: [HACKERS] Odd behavior of updatable security barrier views on foreign tables

2015-02-12 Thread Etsuro Fujita
On 2015/02/11 4:06, Stephen Frost wrote: * Etsuro Fujita (fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: On 2015/02/10 7:23, Dean Rasheed wrote: Sorry, I didn't have time to look at this properly. My initial thought is that expand_security_qual() needs to request a lock on rows coming from the relation

Re: [HACKERS] Table-level log_autovacuum_min_duration

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Naoya Anzai anzai-na...@mxu.nes.nec.co.jp wrote: You mean that ... Log_autovacuum_min_duration assumes a role of VACOPT_VERBOSE. Even if this parameter never use currently for manual vacuum, log_autovacuum_min_duration should be set zero(anytime output) when

Re: [HACKERS] assessing parallel-safety

2015-02-12 Thread Amit Kapila
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 6:40 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote: If we have to go this way, then isn't it better to evaluate the same when we are trying to create parallel path (something like in the

Re: [HACKERS] enabling nestedloop and disabling hashjon

2015-02-12 Thread Ravi Kiran
sorry for the inconvenience if caused to anyone, but as David G johnston said, I was trying to change how the postgresql works and was not able to figure out how it should be done. I will make sure it will be clear from the next time. Thank you very much. @Tom lane Sir, I forgot to remove the #

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: Track TRUNCATE via pgstat

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 5:58 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Here's v0.5. (Why did you use that weird decimal versioning scheme? You could just say v4 and save a couple of keystrokes). This patch makes perfect sense to me now. I was ready to commit, but I checked the

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to support SEMI and ANTI join removal

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 8:23 PM, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com wrote: As the patch stands there's still a couple of FIXMEs in there, so there's still a bit of work to do yet. Comments are welcome Hm, if there is still work to do, we may as well mark this patch as rejected as-is, also

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to support SEMI and ANTI join removal

2015-02-12 Thread Marko Tiikkaja
On 2/13/15 8:52 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 8:23 PM, David Rowley dgrowle...@gmail.com wrote: As the patch stands there's still a couple of FIXMEs in there, so there's still a bit of work to do yet. Comments are welcome Hm, if there is still work to do, we may as well

Re: [HACKERS] WALWriter active during recovery

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Currently, WALReceiver writes and fsyncs data it receives. Clearly, while we are waiting for an fsync we aren't doing any other useful work.

Re: Custom/Foreign-Join-APIs (Re: [HACKERS] [v9.5] Custom Plan API)

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Kouhei Kaigai kai...@ak.jp.nec.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Kouhei Kaigai kai...@ak.jp.nec.com wrote: When custom-scan node replaced a join-plan, it shall have at least two child plan-nodes. The callback handler of PlanCustomPath needs to

Re: ctidscan as an example of custom-scan (Re: [HACKERS] [v9.5] Custom Plan API)

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Kouhei Kaigai kai...@ak.jp.nec.com wrote: Jim, Thanks for your reviewing the patch. The attached patch is revised one according to your suggestion, and also includes bug fix I could found. * Definitions of TIDOperator was moved to pg_operator.h as

Re: [HACKERS] Doing better at HINTing an appropriate column within errorMissingColumn()

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote: To put it another way, creating a separate object obfuscates scanRTEForColumn(), since it's the only client of updateFuzzyAttrMatchState().

Re: [HACKERS] Logical Replication Helpers WIP for discussion

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 10:26 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: What I hope to get from this is agreement on the general approach and protocol so that we can have common base which will both make it easier

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: hashjoin - gracefully increasing NTUP_PER_BUCKET instead of batching

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 5:02 AM, Tomas Vondra tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Maybe we can try later again, but there's no poin in keeping this in the current CF. Any objections? None, marked as rejected. -- Michael

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:42 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:01 AM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote: I had a look at this patch. This patch adds some text below a table of functions. Immediately above that table, there is this existing

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup -x/X doesn't play well with archive_mode wal_keep_segments

2015-02-12 Thread Sergey Konoplev
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: No need for debugging. It's plain and simply a (cherry-pick) conflict I resolved wrongly during backpatching. 9.3, 9.4 and master do not have that problem. That whole fix was quite painful because every single release

Re: [HACKERS] parallel mode and parallel contexts

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 3:59 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: We're not seeing eye to eye here yet, since I don't accept your example scenario and you don't accept mine. Let's keep discussing. Meanwhile, here's an updated patch. A lot of cool activity is showing up here, so

Re: [HACKERS] Turning off HOT/Cleanup sometimes

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 15 December 2014 at 20:26, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote: I still get the compiler error in contrib: pgstattuple.c: In function 'pgstat_heap': pgstattuple.c:279: error: too few arguments to function

Re: [HACKERS] Logical Decoding follows timelines

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 16 December 2014 at 21:17, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: This patch is a WIP version of doing that, but only currently attempts With the patch, XLogSendLogical uses the same logic to calculate

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding document

2015-02-12 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2015-02-12 22:55:33 +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: Hi, I need help. In 46.6.4.5 Change Callback Note: Only changes in user defined tables that are not unlogged (see UNLOGGED) and not temporary (see TEMPORARY or TEMP) can be extracted using logical decoding. I cannot parse

Re: [HACKERS] Manipulating complex types as non-contiguous structures in-memory

2015-02-12 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: BTW, I'm not all that thrilled with the deserialized object terminology. I found myself repeatedly tripping up on which form was serialized and which de-. If anyone's got a better

Re: [HACKERS] Logical decoding document

2015-02-12 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
Hi, I need help. In 46.6.4.5 Change Callback Note: Only changes in user defined tables that are not unlogged (see UNLOGGED) and not temporary (see TEMPORARY or TEMP) can be extracted using logical decoding. I cannot parse the sentence above. Maybe logical decoding does not

Re: [HACKERS] Simplify sleeping while reading/writing from client

2015-02-12 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 02/06/2015 11:50 AM, Andres Freund wrote: On 2015-02-05 16:45:50 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: I propose the attached, which pulls all the wait-retry logic up to secure_read() and secure_write(). This makes the code a lot more understandable. Generally a good idea. Especially if we get

Re: [HACKERS] pg_check_dir comments and implementation mismatch

2015-02-12 Thread Marco Nenciarini
Il 02/02/15 21:48, Robert Haas ha scritto: On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Marco Nenciarini marco.nenciar...@2ndquadrant.it wrote: Il 30/01/15 03:54, Michael Paquier ha scritto: On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 2:49 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: There is at least one other bug in that

Re: [HACKERS] Manipulating complex types as non-contiguous structures in-memory

2015-02-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: I've now taken this idea as far as building the required infrastructure and revamping a couple of array operators to use it. There's a lot yet to do, but I've done enough to get some preliminary ideas about performance (see

[HACKERS] Logical decoding document

2015-02-12 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
Hi, I need help. In 46.6.4.5 Change Callback Note: Only changes in user defined tables that are not unlogged (see UNLOGGED) and not temporary (see TEMPORARY or TEMP) can be extracted using logical decoding. I cannot parse the sentence above. Maybe logical decoding does not decode a

Re: [HACKERS] Standby receiving part of missing WAL segment

2015-02-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote: Today I witnessed a situation which appears to have gone down like this: - The primary server starting streaming WAL data from segment 00A8 to the standby - The standby server started receiving that data - Before 00A8 is

Re: [HACKERS] libpq's multi-threaded SSL callback handling is busted

2015-02-12 Thread Jan Urbański
Jan Urbański writes: Andres Freund writes: On 2015-02-12 09:31:27 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote: That doesn't solve the problem of the Python deadlock, where you're not at leisure to call a C function at the beginning of your module. We could just never unload the hooks... That's what we

Re: [HACKERS] SSL renegotiation and other related woes

2015-02-12 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 02/12/2015 01:33 AM, Andres Freund wrote: On 2015-02-11 14:54:03 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Thoughts? Can you reproduce any errors with this? I'm on battery right now, so I can't really test much. Did you test having an actual standby instead of pg_receivexlog? I saw some slightly

Re: [HACKERS] File based Incremental backup v8

2015-02-12 Thread Marco Nenciarini
Hi, I've attached an updated version of the patch. This fixes the issue on checksum calculation for segments after the first one. To solve it I've added an optional uint32 *segno argument to parse_filename_for_nontemp_relation, so I can know the segment number and calculate the block number

Re: [HACKERS] assessing parallel-safety

2015-02-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote: That is a major mark against putting the check in simplify_function(), agreed. I do see one way to rescue that idea, which is this: put two flags, parallelModeOK and parallelModeRequired, into PlannerGlobal. At the beginning

Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2015 - mentors, students and admins.

2015-02-12 Thread Alexander Korotkov
Hi! On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:52 PM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote: Google Summer of Code 2015 is approaching. I'm intending on registering PostgreSQL again this year. Before I do that, I'd like to have an idea of how many people are interested in being either a student or a mentor.

Re: [HACKERS] Standby receiving part of missing WAL segment

2015-02-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote: On 12 February 2015 at 13:56, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote: Today I witnessed a situation which appears to have gone down like this: - The

Re: [HACKERS] Standby receiving part of missing WAL segment

2015-02-12 Thread Thom Brown
On 12 February 2015 at 13:56, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote: Today I witnessed a situation which appears to have gone down like this: - The primary server starting streaming WAL data from segment 00A8 to the

Re: [HACKERS] Index-only scans for GiST.

2015-02-12 Thread Thom Brown
On 12 February 2015 at 10:40, Anastasia Lubennikova lubennikov...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for answer. Now it seems to be applied correctly. (please avoid top-posting) Thanks for the updated patch. I can confirm that it now cleanly applies and compiles fine. I've run the tested in the SQL

Re: [HACKERS] Manipulating complex types as non-contiguous structures in-memory

2015-02-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: My first thought is that we should form some kind of TOAST-like backronym, like Serialization Avoidance Loading and Access Device (SALAD) or Break-up, Read, Edit, Assemble, and Deposit (BREAD). I don't think there is anything

Re: [HACKERS] Index-only scans for GiST.

2015-02-12 Thread Thom Brown
On 12 February 2015 at 16:40, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: On 02/12/2015 12:40 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote: Thanks for answer. Now it seems to be applied correctly. * Documentation is missing. Anastasia provided a documentation patch in the first email. Thom

Re: [HACKERS] Index-only scans for GiST.

2015-02-12 Thread Fabrízio de Royes Mello
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Thom Brown t...@linux.com wrote: On 12 February 2015 at 16:40, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: On 02/12/2015 12:40 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote: Thanks for answer. Now it seems to be applied correctly. * Documentation is missing.

Re: [HACKERS] Index-only scans for GiST.

2015-02-12 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 02/12/2015 12:40 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote: Thanks for answer. Now it seems to be applied correctly. Thanks, it would be great to get this completed. This still leaks memory with the same test query as earlier. The leak seems to be into a different memory context now; it used to be

Re: [HACKERS] assessing parallel-safety

2015-02-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 6:40 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote: If we have to go this way, then isn't it better to evaluate the same when we are trying to create parallel path (something like in the parallel_seq scan patch - create_parallelscan_paths())? Probably not, because many

Re: [HACKERS] assessing parallel-safety

2015-02-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 3:21 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: I think we may want a dedicated parallel-safe property for functions rather than piggybacking on provolatile ... I went through the current contents of pg_proc and tried to assess how much parallel-unsafe stuff we've got.

Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of wal_level=archive and default to hot_standby + wal_senders

2015-02-12 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 2/3/15 11:00 AM, Robert Haas wrote: Crazy ideas: Could we make wal_level something other than PGC_POSTMASTER? PGC_SIGHUP would be nice... Could we, maybe, even make it a derived value rather than one that is explicitly configured? Like, if you set max_wal_senders0, you automatically get