Re: [HACKERS] [BUG] pg_basebackup from disconnected standby fails

2016-06-14 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Sorry, I'm confused about the minRecoveryPoint. Reconsidered a bit. At Tue, 14 Jun 2016 20:31:11 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote in <20160614.203111.229211034.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> > > > After looking more closely, I found that

Re: [HACKERS] increase message string buffer size of watch command of psql

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Ioseph Kim writes: > 2016년 06월 15일 01:56에 Tom Lane 이(가) 쓴 글: >> I take it from the vast silence that nobody particularly cares one way >> or the other. On reflection I think that this would be a good change >> to make, so I'll go do so unless I hear

Re: [HACKERS] increase message string buffer size of watch command of psql

2016-06-14 Thread Ioseph Kim
2016년 06월 15일 01:56에 Tom Lane 이(가) 쓴 글: I take it from the vast silence that nobody particularly cares one way or the other. On reflection I think that this would be a good change to make, so I'll go do so unless I hear complaints soon. regards, tom lane I propose to change from asctime()

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On 06/14/2016 05:08 PM, Cat wrote: We have the capability to provide (semi-)structured data. Might be an idea to make greater use of it. postgres=# SELECT * from to_json(row(current_setting('server_version_num'))) as version; Sincerely, jD -- Command Prompt, Inc.

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Vik Fearing
On 15/06/16 02:08, Cat wrote: > is it possible to introduce a JSONB output to it. No thanks. -- Vik Fearing +33 6 46 75 15 36 http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] [sqlsmith] Failed assertion in postgres_fdw/deparse.c:1116

2016-06-14 Thread Amit Langote
On 2016/06/15 0:50, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:06 AM, Amit Langote wrote: >> You're right. It indeed should be possible to push down ft1-ft2 join. >> However it could not be done without also modifying >> build_tlist_to_deparse() a little (as Ashutosh proposed [1] to do >>

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Cat
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 01:38:44PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On 06/14/2016 12:46 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > > >Any ideas on naming for such a function? version_detail()? I suppose > >while we're at this we might as well provide the compile details as well. > > version(detail) or

Re: [HACKERS] Reviewing freeze map code

2016-06-14 Thread Thomas Munro
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 12:44 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Robert Haas wrote: I noticed that the tuples that it reported were always offset 1 in a page, and that the page always had a maxoff over a couple of

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Jim Nasby > wrote: > > On 6/14/16 3:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> > >> Jim Nasby writes: > >>> > >>> On 6/14/16 3:01 PM, Robert Haas

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 6/14/16 3:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> >> Jim Nasby writes: >>> >>> On 6/14/16 3:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote: This seems kind of silly, because anybody who is writing code that

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Jim Nasby
On 6/14/16 3:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Jim Nasby writes: On 6/14/16 3:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote: This seems kind of silly, because anybody who is writing code that might have to run against an existing version of the database won't be able to use it. The one thing that

Re: [HACKERS] Use of index for 50% column restriction

2016-06-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 03:24:12PM -0500, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 6/8/16 4:36 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >Just a follow-up, but even with a randomized correlation order, it seems > >25% restrictivity generates a Bitmap Index Scan: > > AFAIK we do the bitmap heap scan in heap order, thereby

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Jim Nasby
On 6/14/16 3:38 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: On 06/14/2016 12:46 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: Any ideas on naming for such a function? version_detail()? I suppose while we're at this we might as well provide the compile details as well. version(detail) or version(verbose) I don't think that makes as

[HACKERS] Should pg_export_snapshot() and currtid() be tagged parallel-unsafe?

2016-06-14 Thread Andreas Seltenreich
Digging through the sqlsmith logging db, I noticed the following errors: ERROR: cannot update SecondarySnapshot during a parallel operation ERROR: cannot assign XIDs during a parallel operation Queries raising the first one always contain calls to currtid() or currtid2(). Queries

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Jim Nasby writes: > On 6/14/16 3:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> This seems kind of silly, because anybody who is writing code that >> might have to run against an existing version of the database won't be >> able to use it. The one thing that absolutely has to be

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Jim Nasby
On 6/14/16 3:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote: D) Add a version function to 10.0 that returns both parts separately. > > My vote is D. Parsing version() output is a wart, but coming out with a > split output version of that in 9.6 that still has to support 3 numbers > would also be a wart. We've lived

Re: [HACKERS] Use of index for 50% column restriction

2016-06-14 Thread Jim Nasby
On 6/8/16 4:36 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: Just a follow-up, but even with a randomized correlation order, it seems 25% restrictivity generates a Bitmap Index Scan: AFAIK we do the bitmap heap scan in heap order, thereby eliminating the effect of correlation? -- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On 06/14/2016 12:46 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: Any ideas on naming for such a function? version_detail()? I suppose while we're at this we might as well provide the compile details as well. version(detail) or version(verbose) JD -- Command Prompt, Inc.

Re: [HACKERS] gettimeofday is at the end of its usefulness?

2016-06-14 Thread Jim Nasby
On 6/8/16 9:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Thom Brown writes: On 15 May 2014 at 19:56, Bruce Momjian wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 06:58:11PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: A recent question from Tim Kane prompted me to measure the overhead costs of EXPLAIN ANALYZE, which

Re: [HACKERS] Prepared statements and generic plans

2016-06-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 08:20:12AM -0400, ''br...@momjian.us' *EXTERN*' wrote: > > This has caused confussion in the past, see > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/561E749D.4090301%40socialserve.com#561e749d.4090...@socialserve.com > > > > > Right. Updated patch attached. > > > > I am

Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c is not marked as test covered

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> FWIW, I follow all of your reasoning except this. If we believe that the >>> parallel worker context

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 6/13/16 2:12 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >> >> A) make a variant of version() that returns major/minor/bugfix as >> separate fields with minor being set to 0 for all released versions >> 10.0 and beyond. We could then

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Data at rest encryption

2016-06-14 Thread Jim Nasby
On 6/12/16 2:13 AM, Ants Aasma wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 5:23 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > 1. Instead of doing the entire database files encryption, how about > providing user an option to protect only some particular tables that > wants the encryption at

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel safety tagging of extension functions

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 6:37 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: >> I have rebased all my patches on the current master now (and skipped the >> extensions I previously listed). > > Thanks, this is really

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-14 Thread Jim Nasby
On 6/13/16 2:12 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: A) make a variant of version() that returns major/minor/bugfix as separate fields with minor being set to 0 for all released versions 10.0 and beyond. We could then add a NOTE to the version function and other places suggesting to use that instead for

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel safety tagging of extension functions

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 6:37 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > I have rebased all my patches on the current master now (and skipped the > extensions I previously listed). Thanks, this is really helpful. It was starting to get hard to keep track of what hadn't been applied yet. I

Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c is not marked as test covered

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> FWIW, I follow all of your reasoning except this. If we believe that the >> parallel worker context line is useful, then it is a bug that plpgsql >> suppresses it. If we don't

Re: [HACKERS] Rename max_parallel_degree?

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> Of course, it would be nice if we could make these counters 64-bit >> integers, but we can't, because we don't rely on 64-bit reads and >> writes to be atomic on all platforms.

Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c is not marked as test covered

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Peter Eisentraut >>> wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] increase message string buffer size of watch command of psql

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Ioseph Kim wrote: >>> Increase size of this title, please. >>> 50 bytes is so small for multi language. >>> And. I suggest that date string might be local language, >>> or

Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c is not marked as test covered

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Peter Eisentraut >> wrote: >>> Elsewhere in this thread I suggested getting rid of the parallel worker

Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c is not marked as test covered

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: >> Regarding the patch that ended up being committed, I wonder if it is >> intentional that PL/pgSQL overwrites the context

Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Amit Kapila writes: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> ... I got a core dump in the window.sql test: >> which I think may be another manifestation of the failure-to-apply-proper- >> pathtarget issue we're looking at in this thread.

Re: [HACKERS] Rename max_parallel_degree?

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > Of course, it would be nice if we could make these counters 64-bit > integers, but we can't, because we don't rely on 64-bit reads and > writes to be atomic on all platforms. So instead they'll have to be > uint32. That means they could wrap (if you

Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I think this is bad because it forces any external creators of >> UPPERREL_GROUP_AGG to duplicate that code --- and heaven help everybody >> if anyone is out of sync on whether to

Re: [HACKERS] [sqlsmith] Failed assertion in postgres_fdw/deparse.c:1116

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:06 AM, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2016/06/14 6:51, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> Although I have done a bit of review of this patch, it needs more >>> thought than I have

Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist

2016-06-14 Thread Amit Kapila
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Robert Haas writes: > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> BTW, decent regression tests could be written without the need to create > >> enormous tables if

Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
David Rowley writes: > Do you think it's worth also applying the attached so as to have > ressortgroupref set to NULL more consistently, instead of sometimes > NULL and other times allocated to memory wastefully filled with zeros? Meh --- that seems to add

Re: [HACKERS] Use of CREATE OR REPLACE in bloom--1.0.sql

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Andreas Karlsson writes: > I do not think that extension SQL scripts should be using CREATE OR > REPLACE FUNCTION like bloom--1.0.sql currently does. I suspect that this > might just be a typo. It's definitely a bug. Grepping around found another instance in sslinfo, and I

Re: [HACKERS] Using FDW AddForeignUpdateTargets for a hidden pseudo-column

2016-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Bernd Helmle writes: > --On 14. Juni 2016 10:32:13 + Albe Laurenz > wrote: >> I first thought of using the internal ROWID column that's probably >> similar to your case, but that wouldn't fit into a tid's 6 bytes, and I >> found that I could

Re: [HACKERS] Using FDW AddForeignUpdateTargets for a hidden pseudo-column

2016-06-14 Thread Aleksey Demakov
A very quick and dirty hack I did in src/backend/optimizer/plan/initsplan.c (in 9.5.3): --- initsplan.c.orig2016-06-14 19:08:27.0 +0600 +++ initsplan.c 2016-06-14 19:10:55.0 +0600 @@ -185,9 +185,12 @@ if (IsA(node, Var)) {

Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist

2016-06-14 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:16 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Robert Haas writes: > > In practice, we don't yet have the ability for > > parallel-safe paths from subqueries to affect planning at higher query > > levels, but that's because the pathification stuff

Re: [HACKERS] Using FDW AddForeignUpdateTargets for a hidden pseudo-column

2016-06-14 Thread Bernd Helmle
--On 14. Juni 2016 10:32:13 + Albe Laurenz wrote: > I first thought of using the internal ROWID column that's probably > similar to your case, but that wouldn't fit into a tid's 6 bytes, and I > found that I could only add resjunk columns for existing columns of

Re: [HACKERS] Reviewing freeze map code

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> I noticed that the tuples that it reported were always offset 1 in a >>> page, and that the page always had a maxoff over a couple of hundred, >>> and that we called record_corrupt_item because VM_ALL_VISIBLE returned

Re: [HACKERS] [BUG] pg_basebackup from disconnected standby fails

2016-06-14 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: >> +# Take a second backup of the standby while the master is offline. >> +$node_master->stop; >> +$node_standby_1->backup('my_backup_2'); >> +$node_master->start; > > I'm not sure that adding the test case

Re: [HACKERS] Prepared statements and generic plans

2016-06-14 Thread ''br...@momjian.us' *EXTERN*'
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 08:37:12AM +, Albe Laurenz wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > However, for the wire protocol prepare/execute, how do you do EXPLAIN? > > The only way I can see doing it is to put the EXPLAIN in the prepare > > query, but I wasn't sure that works. So, I just wrote and

Re: [HACKERS] Reviewing freeze map code

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Thomas Munro > wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Robert Haas

Re: [HACKERS] Reviewing freeze map code

2016-06-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Robert Haas wrote: How about changing the return tuple of

Re: [HACKERS] [BUG] pg_basebackup from disconnected standby fails

2016-06-14 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Hello, thank you for looking this. At Fri, 10 Jun 2016 17:39:59 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote in > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: > >

Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist

2016-06-14 Thread Amit Kapila
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 8:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Amit Kapila writes: > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 7:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I think the real question here is why the code removed by 04ae11f62 > >> was wrong. It was

Re: [HACKERS] Rename max_parallel_degree?

2016-06-14 Thread Julien Rouhaud
On 14/06/2016 04:09, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Julien Rouhaud > wrote: >> Agreed, and fixed in attached v3. > > I don't entirely like the new logic in > RegisterDynamicBackgroundWorker. I'm not that happy with it too. We can avoid iterating

[HACKERS] Use of CREATE OR REPLACE in bloom--1.0.sql

2016-06-14 Thread Andreas Karlsson
Hi, I do not think that extension SQL scripts should be using CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION like bloom--1.0.sql currently does. I suspect that this might just be a typo. I have attached the tiny patch which fixes this. Andreas diff --git a/contrib/bloom/bloom--1.0.sql

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel safety tagging of extension functions

2016-06-14 Thread Andreas Karlsson
On 06/07/2016 05:54 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: On 06/07/2016 05:44 PM, Robert Haas wrote: cube: I think we need a new extension version. hstore: Does not apply for me. intarray: Does not apply for me. Those three and ltree, pg_trgm, and seg depend on my patch with fixes for the GiST/GIN

Re: [HACKERS] Using FDW AddForeignUpdateTargets for a hidden pseudo-column

2016-06-14 Thread Albe Laurenz
Aleksey Demakov wrote: > I have a data store where tuples have unique identities that normally are not > visible. > I also have a FDW to work with this data store. As per the docs to implement > updates > for this data store I have AddForeignUpdateTargets() function that adds an > artificial >

[HACKERS] Using FDW AddForeignUpdateTargets for a hidden pseudo-column

2016-06-14 Thread Aleksey Demakov
Hi all, I have a data store where tuples have unique identities that normally are not visible. I also have a FDW to work with this data store. As per the docs to implement updates for this data store I have AddForeignUpdateTargets() function that adds an artificial column to the target list.

Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist

2016-06-14 Thread David Rowley
On 14 June 2016 at 04:07, Tom Lane wrote: > Just as an experiment to see what would happen, I did > > - int parallel_threshold = 1000; > + int parallel_threshold = 1; > > and ran the regression tests. I got a

Re: [HACKERS] Prepared statements and generic plans

2016-06-14 Thread Albe Laurenz
Bruce Momjian wrote: > However, for the wire protocol prepare/execute, how do you do EXPLAIN? > The only way I can see doing it is to put the EXPLAIN in the prepare > query, but I wasn't sure that works. So, I just wrote and tested the > attached C program and it properly output the explain

Re: [HACKERS] [sqlsmith] Failed assertion in postgres_fdw/deparse.c:1116

2016-06-14 Thread Amit Langote
On 2016/06/14 6:51, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> Although I have done a bit of review of this patch, it needs more >> thought than I have so far had time to give it. I will update again >> by Tuesday. > > I've reviewed this a

Re: [HACKERS] Possible gaps/garbage in the output of XLOG reader

2016-06-14 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Antonin Houska wrote: > While playing with xlogreader, I was lucky enough to see one of the many > record validations to fail. After having some fun with gdb, I found out that > in some cases the reader does not enforce enough data to be in

Re: [HACKERS] Reviewing freeze map code

2016-06-14 Thread Thomas Munro
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> How about changing the return tuple of heap_prepare_freeze_tuple to >>> a bitmap? Two flags: "Freeze [not] done" and "[No] more freezing

Re: [HACKERS] [sqlsmith] Failed assertion in postgres_fdw/deparse.c:1116

2016-06-14 Thread Ashutosh Bapat
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:10 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Robert Haas > wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Robert Haas > wrote: > >> Although I have done a bit of review of this patch, it