* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
* Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
Hm. That issue doesn't particularly concern me. Having all .so's
available in the installation seems like a pretty basic
requirement. Security labels are by far not
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Really? What aspect of postgis requires mucking with
shared_preload_libraries?
Having to have the libraries in place is what I was getting at, which is
what Andres was also talking about, if I understood
Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes:
Ick! So the dummy_seclabel test more or less only works by accident if I
see that correctly. The .so is only loaded because the CREATE EXTENSION
in the test triggers a CREATE FUNCTION dummy_seclabel_dummy() ... LANG
C.
I set it up
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/29/2015 08:56 AM, Corey Huinker wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us Not
sure why inserting a variable name is so much better than inserting
a type name?
In a polymorphic function, I don't know the return
On 2015-07-29 09:23:32 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
I've reproduced it again against commit b2ed8edeecd715c8a23ae462.
It took 5 hours on a 8 core Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2650.
I also reproduced it in 3 hours on the same
On 07/29/2015 02:41 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
I don't think there is any point in adding the new function
transformPolicyClause(), which is identical to transformWhereClause().
You can just use transformWhereClause() with EXPR_KIND_POLICY. It's
already used for lots of other expression kinds.
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
I thought that internal API will automatically take care of it,
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
More generally, I completely agree that this is something which we can
improve upon. It doesn't seem like a release blocker or something which
we need to fix in the back branches though.
No, it's not a release blocker; it's been like this since we
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
Hi,
On 2015-07-19 11:49:14 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
After applying this patch to commit fdf28853ae6a397497b79f, it has
survived
testing long
On 07/29/2015 08:46 AM, Joe Conway wrote:
On 07/29/2015 01:01 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
The CreatePolicy() and AlterPolicy() changes look OK to me, but the
RemovePolicyById() change looks to be unnecessary ---
RemovePolicyById() is called only from doDeletion(), which in turned
is called only
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-07-29 09:23:32 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com
wrote:
I've reproduced it again against commit b2ed8edeecd715c8a23ae462.
It took 5 hours on a 8 core
On 29 July 2015 at 16:52, Joe Conway joe.con...@crunchydata.com wrote:
On 07/29/2015 02:41 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
I don't think there is any point in adding the new function
transformPolicyClause(), which is identical to transformWhereClause().
You can just use transformWhereClause() with
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Joe Conway m...@joeconway.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/29/2015 08:56 AM, Corey Huinker wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us Not
sure why inserting a variable name is so much better than
On 07/29/2015 01:01 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
The CreatePolicy() and AlterPolicy() changes look OK to me, but the
RemovePolicyById() change looks to be unnecessary ---
RemovePolicyById() is called only from doDeletion(), which in turned
is called only from deleteOneObject(), which already
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
Having to also deal with shared_preload_libraries for some cases doesn't
strike me as a huge issue.
I think it is, especially if what we're offering as a workaround is write
a custom script and make sure that
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Corey Huinker corey.huin...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi
wrote:
Let's pursue the CAST(srf() AS row_rtype) syntax that Joe suggested
upthread (
Corey Huinker corey.huin...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Not sure why inserting a variable name is so much better than inserting a
type name?
In a polymorphic function, I don't know the return type. It's whatever type
was specified on
On 07/29/2015 10:13 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 10:54 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
An updated patch is attached.
Attached is v9, that fixes conflicts with 01f6bb4 and recent commits
that added TAP tests in pg_basebackup series.
Thanks,
On 07/29/2015 04:10 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-07-29 14:22:23 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-07-29 15:14:23 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Ah, ok, that should work, as long as you also re-check the variable's value
after queueing. Want to write the patch, or should I?
I'll try.
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Piotr Stefaniak
postg...@piotr-stefaniak.me wrote:
+ Assert(path_rows != 0);
if (tuple_fraction = 1.0)
tuple_fraction /= path_rows;
}
This does not sounds right:
On 07/29/2015 02:41 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
I don't think there is any point in adding the new function
transformPolicyClause(), which is identical to transformWhereClause().
You can just use transformWhereClause() with EXPR_KIND_POLICY. It's
already used for lots of other expression kinds.
On 29 July 2015 at 20:36, Joe Conway joe.con...@crunchydata.com wrote:
On 07/29/2015 02:41 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
I don't think there is any point in adding the new function
transformPolicyClause(), which is identical to transformWhereClause().
You can just use transformWhereClause() with
Joe Conway wrote:
On 07/29/2015 02:41 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
I don't think there is any point in adding the new function
transformPolicyClause(), which is identical to transformWhereClause().
You can just use transformWhereClause() with EXPR_KIND_POLICY. It's
already used for lots of
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
plpgsql raise statement with context
Impasse. Everyone wants this feature in some form, but no consensus on
whether to do this client-side or server-side.
+1 for server-side.
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Joe Conway m...@joeconway.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/29/2015 09:40 AM, Corey Huinker wrote:
Say I've got a table my_partitioned_table (key1 integer, key2
integer, metric1 integer, metric2 integer);
And I've got many
On 07/29/2015 02:56 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
On 07/29/2015 02:04 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Why not just in policy expressions? There's no third kind that does
allow these.
WFM
Sold! Will do it that way.
Committed/pushed to HEAD and 9.5.
Joe
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 07/29/2015 11:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
Really? What aspect of postgis requires mucking with
shared_preload_libraries?
Having to have the libraries in place is what I was getting at, which is
what Andres was
I have reviewed this patch and it compiles runs and the new test case
passes. The code is also clean and the test seems like a useful
regression test.
What I do not like though is how the path src/test/tables_fk/t/ tells us
nothing about what features are of PostgreSQL are tested here. For
Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Joe Conway joe.con...@crunchydata.com
wrote:
The equivalent message for functions is:
.. are not allowed in functions in FROM
So how does this sound:
... are not allowed in policies in USING and WITH CHECK expressions
or perhaps
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Amit Langote
langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote:
Attached fixes a minor typo:
s/custom/foreign/g
Committed, thanks.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 07/29/2015 01:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think this reads a bit funny. What's a POLICY USING clause? I
expect that translators will treat the two words POLICY USING as a
single token, and the result is not
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Joe Conway joe.con...@crunchydata.com wrote:
On 07/29/2015 01:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think this reads a bit funny. What's a POLICY USING clause? I
expect that translators
Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Joe Conway m...@joeconway.com wrote:
Ok, gotcha. So Tom's nearby comment about allowing the
p_rowtype%TYPE syntax to be used in the CAST is spot on (as usual).
In other words, to get a complete solution for you we
On 07/29/2015 02:04 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Why not just in policy expressions? There's no third kind that does
allow these.
WFM
Sold! Will do it that way.
Joe
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
plpgsql raise statement with context
Impasse. Everyone wants this feature in some form, but no consensus on
whether to do this client-side or server-side.
+1 for server-side. Does anyone other than you even think that
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Another point is that we decided a long time ago that EXPLAIN's plain-text
output format is not intended to be machine-parsable, and so objecting to
a design on the grounds that it makes machine parsing harder is pretty
Hi
here is proof concept patch
It should be cleaned, but it demonstrates a work well
[pavel@localhost psql]$ ./psql -C 'select 10 x; select 20 y;' -C \l
postgres
x
10
(1 row)
y
20
(1 row)
List of databases
Name| Owner | Encoding |
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Um ... wait a second. There is no support in readfuncs for any
plan node type, and never has been, and I seriously doubt that there
ever should be.
As KaiGai says, the parallel query stuff contemplates changing this;
how
On 7/29/15 8:00 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
As far as I understand this subthread the goal is to have a
pg_basebackup that internally creates a slot, so it can guarantee that
all the required WAL is present till streamed out by -X
stream/fetch. The problem with just creating a slot is that it'd
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think this reads a bit funny. What's a POLICY USING clause? I
expect that translators will treat the two words POLICY USING as a
single token, and the result is not going to make any sense.
Maybe in a policy's
Ok, gotcha. So Tom's nearby comment about allowing the
p_rowtype%TYPE syntax to be used in the CAST is spot on (as usual).
In other words, to get a complete solution for you we would need to
make both things work, so you could do this inside plpgsql:
select * from cast(dblink(connstr,
Qingqing Zhou wrote:
Can we simplify above with foreign table methods? There are two major
concerns about this method per previous discussions: security and
usability. I think the main cause is the sharing foreign table design.
I think foreign data wrappers are great. I do not think that we
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/29/2015 09:40 AM, Corey Huinker wrote:
Say I've got a table my_partitioned_table (key1 integer, key2
integer, metric1 integer, metric2 integer);
And I've got many partitions on that table. My code lets you do
something like this:
select
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
A user may set atomic_foreign_transaction to ON to guarantee atomicity, IOW
it throws error when atomicity can not be guaranteed. Thus if application
accidentally does something to a foreign server, which
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
It's possible that the problem here is not so much reliance on
shared_preload_libraries as it is that there's no provision in
pg_upgrade for dealing with the need to set it. But one way or
the other, this is a usability
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/14/2015 03:46 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
I think the docs for the LEAKPROOF option in create_function.sgml
ought to mention RLS as well as security barrier views. Also the
current text is no longer strictly correct in light of commit
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
On 07/29/2015 10:13 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 10:54 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
An updated patch is attached.
Attached is v9, that fixes conflicts with 01f6bb4 and
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
If no one weighs in after a few days, I'll mark the patch rejected
in the CF app.
The patch has been marked rejected in the CF app. I withdraw it.
Obviously I still think that the patch is worthwhile, but not if that
The behavior of external sorts that do not require any merge step due
to only having one run (what EXPLAIN ANALYZE output shows as an
external sort, and not a merge sort) seems like an area that can
be significantly improved upon. As noted in code comments, this
optimization did not appear in The
I wrote:
Well, it would depend on how we fixed %TYPE, but my thought is that
we should teach the core parser to accept variable%TYPE anywhere that
a suitable variable is in scope. The core already allows related
syntaxes in some utility commands, but not within DML commands.
I poked at this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/29/2015 05:13 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
What's possibly more palatable is to introduce some other special
notation for obtain the type of this expression at parse time.
I'm thinking for example about
SELECT x::pg_typeof(some_expression) FROM ...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/01/2015 02:21 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
While going through this, I spotted another issue --- in a DML
query with additional non-target relations, such as UPDATE t1 ..
FROM t2 .., the old code was checking the UPDATE policies of both
t1 and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/29/2015 07:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
We can definitely do
SELECT x::any_single_unreserved_word(some_expression) FROM ...
because that's actually not something the grammar needs to
distinguish from type-with-a-typmod; we can deal with the
Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com writes:
hamster has not complained for a couple of weeks now, and the issue
was reproducible every 4~6 days:
http://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=hamsterbr=HEAD
Hence let's consider the issue as resolved.
Nah, I'm afraid not. We
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:54 AM, Andreas Karlsson andr...@proxel.se wrote:
What I do not like though is how the path src/test/tables_fk/t/ tells us
nothing about what features are of PostgreSQL are tested here. For this I
personally prefer the earlier versions where I think that was clear.
Joe Conway m...@joeconway.com writes:
On 07/29/2015 05:13 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
What's possibly more palatable is to introduce some other special
notation for obtain the type of this expression at parse time.
I'm thinking for example about
SELECT x::pg_typeof(some_expression) FROM ...
You
On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
And, we get a failure:
http://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=hamsterdt=2015-06-20%2017%3A59%3A01
I am not sure why buildfarm runs makes it more easily reproducible,
one of the reasons may be the
Qingqing Zhou zhouqq.postg...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Piotr Stefaniak
postg...@piotr-stefaniak.me wrote:
+ Assert(path_rows != 0);
if (tuple_fraction = 1.0)
tuple_fraction /= path_rows;
}
This does not sounds right: path_rows only used
Hi,
Heikki complained about pg_receivexlog --create-slot starting to stream
in his talk in St. Petersburg. Saying that that makes it a hard to
script feature - and I have to agree. Since that option is new to 9.5 we
can should change that behaviour now if we decide to.
Michael, what do you
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
On 07/29/2015 10:37 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Heikki complained about pg_receivexlog --create-slot starting to stream
in his talk in St. Petersburg. Saying that that makes it a hard to
script feature - and I have to
On 07/29/2015 05:26 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
Attached fixes a typo:
- * no permanent tables cannot reference unlogged ones.
+ * permanent tables cannot reference unlogged ones.
Thanks, fixed.
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make
On 07/29/2015 10:58 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
On 07/29/2015 10:37 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Heikki complained about pg_receivexlog --create-slot starting to stream
in his talk in St. Petersburg. Saying that that makes
On 29 July 2015 at 02:36, Joe Conway joe.con...@crunchydata.com wrote:
On 07/03/2015 10:03 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
(6) AlterPolicy() calls InvokeObjectPostAlterHook(PolicyRelationId, ...), but
CreatePolicy() and DropPolicy() lack their respective hook invocations.
Patch attached. Actually
On 2015-07-29 08:57:38 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 22 July 2015 at 05:43, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Now, do we plan to do something about the creation of a slot. I
imagine that it would be useful if we could have --create-slot to
create a slot when beginning a
On 07/18/2015 01:32 AM, Corey Huinker wrote:
So this patch would result in less C code while still adding 3 new
functions. Can anyone think of why that wouldn't be the best way to go?
Let's pursue the CAST(srf() AS row_rtype) syntax that Joe suggested
upthread
On 29 July 2015 at 09:09, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-07-29 08:57:38 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 22 July 2015 at 05:43, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
wrote:
Now, do we plan to do something about the creation of a slot. I
imagine that it would be
On 29 July 2015 at 08:37, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
Heikki complained about pg_receivexlog --create-slot starting to stream
in his talk in St. Petersburg. Saying that that makes it a hard to
script feature - and I have to agree. Since that option is new to 9.5 we
can should
On 2015-07-29 08:54:40 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
--drop-slot seems pointless, since you can just do that with psql
If we make --create-slot do nothing but add the slot, then that seems
pointless also
Would we need to add those options to all commands, when it can be done
with psql?
They
On 29 July 2015 at 09:01, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-07-29 08:54:40 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
--drop-slot seems pointless, since you can just do that with psql
If we make --create-slot do nothing but add the slot, then that seems
pointless also
Would we need to
On 29 July 2015 at 05:02, Joe Conway joe.con...@crunchydata.com wrote:
On 07/03/2015 10:03 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
(7) Using an aggregate function in a policy predicate elicits an inapposite
error message due to use of EXPR_KIND_WHERE for parse analysis. Need a new
ParseExprKind. Test case:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi
wrote:
On 07/29/2015 10:58 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi
wrote:
On 07/29/2015 10:37 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Heikki complained about pg_receivexlog
On 07/29/2015 10:37 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Heikki complained about pg_receivexlog --create-slot starting to stream
in his talk in St. Petersburg. Saying that that makes it a hard to
script feature - and I have to agree. Since that option is new to 9.5 we
can should change that behaviour now if
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 10:54 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
An updated patch is attached.
Attached is v9, that fixes conflicts with 01f6bb4 and recent commits
that added TAP tests in pg_basebackup series.
--
Michael
0001-TAP-tests-for-MSVC.patch
Description:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Hmm. pg_receivelogical is basically a debugging tool. I don't think anyone
will have it integrated into production scripts etc. So maybe we could just
change it.
This sounds good to me as well.
I'm not sure I understand the proposal
On 07/29/2015 02:39 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-07-15 18:44:03 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Previously, LWLockAcquireWithVar set the variable associated with the lock
atomically with acquiring it. Before the lwlock-scalability changes, that
was straightforward because you held the
On 2015-07-29 09:23:43 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
Creating a temporary slot goes against the whole concept of slots, so using
the same id in the same script isn't actually needed, except maybe to
simplify testing.
The concept of a slot is to reserve resources. I don't see why it's
wrong to
On 29 July 2015 at 11:43, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-07-29 09:17:04 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 29 July 2015 at 09:09, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
The point of using a temporary slot is to not have a
leftover slot afterwards, reserving resources.
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 9:59 PM, Beena Emerson memissemer...@gmail.com
wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
The choice between formats is not
solely predicated on whether we have multi-line support.
I still think
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
David Steele wrote:
I have reviewed and tested this patch and everything looks good to me.
It also looks like you added better coverage for schema DDL, which is a
welcome addition.
Thanks -- I have pushed
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Egor Rogov e.ro...@postgrespro.ru wrote:
Well, I looked into a draft of SQL:2003. It basically says that cascade
for revoke role statement must behave the same way as for revoke
privilege statement. That is, from standard's point of view we have a code
issue.
On 28 July 2015 at 14:20, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 4:11 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 22 July 2015 at 21:45, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
But it seemed to me that this could be rather confusing. I thought it
would be
On July 13 I wrote:
Yes, but I think the plugin is the right place to do it. What is more,
this won't actually prevent you completely from producing non-ECMAScript
compliant JSON, since json or jsonb values containing offending numerics
won't be caught, AIUI. But a fairly simple to write
On 2015-07-29 09:17:04 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 29 July 2015 at 09:09, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
The point of using a temporary slot is to not have a
leftover slot afterwards, reserving resources. Especially important if
the basebackup actually failed...
Creating a
Hi,
Finally getting to this.
On 2015-07-15 18:44:03 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Previously, LWLockAcquireWithVar set the variable associated with the lock
atomically with acquiring it. Before the lwlock-scalability changes, that
was straightforward because you held the spinlock anyway,
On 2015-07-29 12:47:01 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 29 July 2015 at 11:43, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
On 2015-07-29 09:17:04 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 29 July 2015 at 09:09, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
The point of using a temporary slot is to not have a
On 2015-07-29 15:14:23 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Ah, ok, that should work, as long as you also re-check the variable's value
after queueing. Want to write the patch, or should I?
I'll try. Shouldn't be too hard.
Andres
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 2015-07-29 13:45:22 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
So this would be needed when creating a standalone backup that would not be
persistently connected to the master, yet we want to bring it up as a
live/writable server in a single command
I'm not understanding what you mean with 'single command'
On 29 July 2015 at 12:51, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
In short, I would propose the following:
- Have --create-slot only create a slot, then exit for both
pg_recvlogical and pg_receivexlog.
- Have --drop-slot drop a slot, then exit.
It makes more sense to create one
On 2015-07-29 14:22:23 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-07-29 15:14:23 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Ah, ok, that should work, as long as you also re-check the variable's value
after queueing. Want to write the patch, or should I?
I'll try. Shouldn't be too hard.
What do you think
On 2015-07-29 13:53:31 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
It makes more sense to create one new utility to issue replication commands
than to enhance multiple utility commands to have bizarre looking
additional features and modes.
pg_reputil --create-slot
pg_reputil --drop-slot
etc
Logical slots
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Sawada Masahiko sawada.m...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 9:59 PM, Beena Emerson memissemer...@gmail.com
wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
The choice between formats is not
On 29 July 2015 at 13:00, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
As far as I understand this subthread the goal is to have a
pg_basebackup that internally creates a slot, so it can guarantee that
all the required WAL is present till streamed out by -X
stream/fetch. The problem with just
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
It's not that uncommon to have replicas only access the primary for
replication type connections. So it seems completely sensible to use the
replication protocol to manage slots. And that you can't really do with
psql.
Actually, you can.
On 2015-07-29 22:17:27 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
Here is a patch implementing those things. IMO if-not-exists does not
make much sense anymore
What? It's rather useful to be able to discern between 'slot was already
there' and 'oops, some error occured'. -1
To me the pg_recvlogical changes
On 2015-07-29 14:55:54 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 07/29/2015 02:39 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
In an earlier email you say:
After the spinlock is released above, but before the LWLockQueueSelf() call,
it's possible that another backend comes in, acquires the lock, changes the
variable's
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Sawada Masahiko sawada.m...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Sawada Masahiko sawada.m...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 10 July 2015 at 15:11, Sawada Masahiko
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
I would expect that if the current user has permission to bypass RLS,
and they have set row_security to OFF, then it should be off for all
tables that they have
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Michael Paquier
michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Hmm. pg_receivelogical is basically a debugging tool. I don't think anyone
will have it integrated into production scripts etc. So maybe we could just
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Kouhei Kaigai kai...@ak.jp.nec.com wrote:
Hi Amit,
Could you tell me the code intention around ExecInitFunnel()?
ExecInitFunnel() calls InitFunnel() that opens the relation to be
scanned by the underlying PartialSeqScan and setup ss_ScanTupleSlot
Hello,
Just looking at how the 2 differnt methods can be used to set the s_s_names
value.
1. For a simple case where quorum is required for a single group the JSON
could be:
{
sync_standby_names:
{
quorum:2,
nodes:
[
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
