Re: [HACKERS] psql - add special variable to reflect the last query status

2017-06-16 Thread Fabien COELHO
I have not any other comments. The implementation is trivial. I rerun all tests and tests passed. I'll mark this patch as ready for commiters. Oops, I just noticed a stupid confusion on my part which got through, I was setting "ERROR" as "success", inverting the expected boolean value.

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

2017-06-16 Thread Amit Kapila
On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 6:57 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/16/17 10:12, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 6/16/17 06:30, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> How will this compare UTF-8 strings in UTF-8 encoding? It seems to me >>> that ideally, it should use

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

2017-06-16 Thread Amit Kapila
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/16/17 06:30, Amit Kapila wrote: >> How will this compare UTF-8 strings in UTF-8 encoding? It seems to me >> that ideally, it should use ucol_strcollUTF8 to compare the same, >> however, with patch,

Re: [HACKERS] Broken hint bits (freeze)

2017-06-16 Thread Amit Kapila
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 11:03 PM, Sergey Burladyan wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > >> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 08:10:13PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: >> > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 7:03 AM, Sergey Burladyan >> > wrote: >> > > Bruce

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

2017-06-16 Thread Ashutosh Sharma
Hi, On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 6:57 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/16/17 10:12, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 6/16/17 06:30, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> How will this compare UTF-8 strings in UTF-8 encoding? It seems to me >>> that ideally, it should use

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
Piotr Stefaniak writes: > On 2017-06-17 00:02, Tom Lane wrote: >> What I'm testing with right now has just four differences from your repo: > There are also the "portability fixes" and they're the main problem. Fair enough. > I've simply removed things like

Re: [HACKERS] how are the rpms configured that are available in PostgreSQL RPM Building Project - Yum Repository

2017-06-16 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Cook, Malcolm wrote: > Hi, > > > > I am referring to the contents of https://yum.postgresql.org/ > (specifically version 9.6 rpms for CentoOS7) > > > > More specifically I wonder if they are configured:--with-python > --with-tcl --with-pam

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14699: Statement trigger and logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Thomas Munro
On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-06-16 21:08:44 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 6/16/17 09:13, Константин Евтеев wrote: >> > 2017-06-13 5:57 GMT+03:00 Peter Eisentraut >> > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

2017-06-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 6/16/17 10:12, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/16/17 06:30, Amit Kapila wrote: >> How will this compare UTF-8 strings in UTF-8 encoding? It seems to me >> that ideally, it should use ucol_strcollUTF8 to compare the same, >> however, with patch, it will always ucol_strcoll as we never define >>

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14699: Statement trigger and logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-06-16 21:08:44 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/16/17 09:13, Константин Евтеев wrote: > > 2017-06-13 5:57 GMT+03:00 Peter Eisentraut > > > >: > > > > I think this is all working correctly and as

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14699: Statement trigger and logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 6/16/17 09:13, Константин Евтеев wrote: > 2017-06-13 5:57 GMT+03:00 Peter Eisentraut > >: > > I think this is all working correctly and as intended. > > But then, why data copy for init logical replication fires

Re: [HACKERS] Restrictions of logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 6/16/17 10:59, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: >> Docs stated "Publications can choose to limit the changes they produce to >> any combination of INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE". It is clear that only those >> DMLs are supported. > > What about COPY? Sure, added note about that as well. -- Peter Eisentraut

Re: [HACKERS] Restrictions of logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
>> Some of that information was sprinkled around, but I have now added a >> new section that collects them all in one place. (section 31.4) > > > Shouldn't we mention that COPY is supported? I think any commands that are not mentioned in the section are considered to be supported. Best

Re: [HACKERS] RLS policy not getting honer while pg_dump on declarative partition

2017-06-16 Thread Stephen Frost
Greetings, * Rushabh Lathia (rushabh.lat...@gmail.com) wrote: > While doing some testing I noticed that RLS policy not getting honer > while pg_dump on declarative partition. > > I can understand that while doing SELECT on individual child > table, policy of parent is not getting applied. But is

[HACKERS] how are the rpms configured that are available in PostgreSQL RPM Building Project - Yum Repository

2017-06-16 Thread Cook, Malcolm
Hi, I am referring to the contents of https://yum.postgresql.org/ (specifically version 9.6 rpms for CentoOS7) More specifically I wonder if they are configured:--with-python --with-tcl --with-pam --with-ldap And do they install the Additional Supplied Modules

[HACKERS] Incorrect comment in 001_ssltests.pl

2017-06-16 Thread Michael Paquier
Hi all, I have noticed the following thing: --- a/src/test/ssl/t/001_ssltests.pl +++ b/src/test/ssl/t/001_ssltests.pl @@ -34,8 +34,6 @@ sub run_test_psql # The first argument is a (part of a) connection string, and it's also printed # out as the test case name. It is appended to $common_connstr

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Piotr Stefaniak
On 2017-06-17 00:02, Tom Lane wrote: > Piotr Stefaniak writes: >> On 2017-06-16 21:56, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Unless Piotr objects, I propose to add another switch to bsdindent >>> that selects this behavior, and then we can drop entab, removing >>> another impediment to

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
Piotr Stefaniak writes: > On 2017-06-16 21:56, Tom Lane wrote: >> Unless Piotr objects, I propose to add another switch to bsdindent >> that selects this behavior, and then we can drop entab, removing >> another impediment to getting pgindent working. > I understand

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
Piotr Stefaniak writes: > On 2017-06-16 20:11, Tom Lane wrote: >> I assume though that Piotr wants an option to preserve that behavior. >> I'm happy to write up a patch for bsdindent that adds a switch >> controlling this, but is there any rhyme or reason to the way

Re: [HACKERS] Restrictions of logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Euler Taveira
2017-06-16 11:03 GMT-03:00 Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com>: > > > Some of that information was sprinkled around, but I have now added a > new section that collects them all in one place. (section 31.4) Shouldn't we mention that COPY is supported? -- Euler Taveira

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Piotr Stefaniak
On 2017-06-16 20:11, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: >> On 2017-06-16 13:44:30 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> Yes, it is all about <80 column output. The current pgindent does >>> everything possible to accomplish that --- the question is whether we >>> want uglier

Re: [HACKERS] Broken hint bits (freeze)

2017-06-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 04:44:46PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Yes, that is _exactly_ the right place to look. Only in PG 10 do we > restart the new cluster to invalidate hash indexes. In previous > releases we didn't do the restart. > > That didn't matter with the old rsync instructions, but

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Piotr Stefaniak
On 2017-06-16 21:56, Tom Lane wrote: > One other thing I'd like to do while we're changing this stuff is > to get rid of the need for entab/detab. Right now, after doing > all the other work, my copy of pgindent is running the code through > detab and then entab so as to match the old decisions

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 03:56:47PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > can be. I managed to tweak bsdindent so that its output matches > what entab would do, by dint of the attached patch, which implements > the rule "use a space instead of a tab if the tab would only move > one column and we don't need

Re: [HACKERS] Broken hint bits (freeze)

2017-06-16 Thread Sergey Burladyan
Bruce Momjian writes: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 04:33:16AM +0300, Sergey Burladyan wrote: > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > ! > > > ! Also, if upgrading standby servers, change wal_level > > > ! to replica in the postgresql.conf file on > > > !

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
One other thing I'd like to do while we're changing this stuff is to get rid of the need for entab/detab. Right now, after doing all the other work, my copy of pgindent is running the code through detab and then entab so as to match the old decisions about how to represent whitespace (ie, as

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 11:54:06AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-06-16 14:42:38 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 02:23:00PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Well, that's something we need to discuss. I originally argued for > > > back-patching the new rules, whatever

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-06-16 14:42:38 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 02:23:00PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Well, that's something we need to discuss. I originally argued for > > back-patching the new rules, whatever they are (ie, run the new > > pgindent on the back branches whenever

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 02:23:00PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Well, that's something we need to discuss. I originally argued for > back-patching the new rules, whatever they are (ie, run the new > pgindent on the back branches whenever we've agreed that the dust > has settled). But I'm starting to

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-06-16 13:34:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I do intend to apply the diffs to HEAD in multiple steps, just to >> make them more reviewable. But I think we should probably absorb >> all the changes we want into v10, not leave some for later cycles.

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-06-16 13:44:30 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Yes, it is all about <80 column output. The current pgindent does >> everything possible to accomplish that --- the question is whether we >> want uglier code to do it. > For me personally the

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-06-16 13:34:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > I could live with both of these proposed > > changes, the selection of the changes you posted looks like it could be > > improved by code changes, but that's obviously a large amount of work. > > In the end, the only thing that fixes this sort of

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-06-16 13:44:30 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 01:34:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > > I could live with both of these proposed > > > changes, the selection of the changes you posted looks like it could be > > > improved by code changes, but that's obviously a large

Re: [HACKERS] pg_waldump command line arguments

2017-06-16 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-06-15 17:08:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > pg_waldump --help claims that you run it like this: > > Usage: > pg_waldump [OPTION]... [STARTSEG [ENDSEG]] > > And https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/pgwaldump.html agrees. > Since square brackets indicate optional arguments, this sort

Re: [HACKERS] Why forcing Hot_standby_feedback to be enabled when creating a logical decoding slot on standby

2017-06-16 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2017-06-16 06:31:03 +, sanyam jain wrote: > Isn't XLogRecord carries full information to be decoded in itself?If so a > VACCUM should not be a problem in decoding? First: Please don't full quote emails. Secondly: You've not actually explained what you want to do, nor what your

Re: [HACKERS] Making server name part of the startup message

2017-06-16 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-06-15 09:43:13 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Satyanarayana Narlapuram writes: > > As a cloud service, Azure Database for PostgreSQL uses a gateway proxy to > > route connections to a node hosting the actual server. To do that, the > > proxy needs to

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 01:34:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > I could live with both of these proposed > > changes, the selection of the changes you posted looks like it could be > > improved by code changes, but that's obviously a large amount of work. > > In the end, the only thing that fixes

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

2017-06-16 Thread Kevin Grittner
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Marina Polyakova wrote: > And thank you very much for your explanation how and why transactions with > failures should be retried! I'll try to implement all of it. To be clear, part of "retrying from the beginning" means that if a

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > I think the current logic is pretty horrible, primarily because it's so > hard to get to manually. Yes, I think that's really the big argument against it: no editor on the face of the planet will indent code that way to start with. > I could live with

Re: [HACKERS] Broken hint bits (freeze)

2017-06-16 Thread Sergey Burladyan
Bruce Momjian writes: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 08:10:13PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 7:03 AM, Sergey Burladyan > > wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > > > >> ! against the old primary and standby

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2017-06-16 13:10:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I experimented with disabling that logic and just always aligning > to the paren indentation. That fixes the weird cases with continued > string literals, but it also makes for a heck of a lot of other changes. > The full diff is too big to

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
There was some discussion upthread about how we'd like pgindent not to do weird things with string literals that wrap around the end of the line a little bit. I looked into that and found that it's actually a generic behavior for any line that's within parentheses: normally, such a line will get

[HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] 答复: GiST API Adancement

2017-06-16 Thread Andrew Borodin
2017-06-16 17:06 GMT+03:00 Tom Lane : > Yuan Dong writes: >> ·¢¼þÈË: Andrew Borodin >>> I think there is one more aspect of development: backward >>> compatibility: it's impossible to update all existing extensions. This >>> is not

Re: [HACKERS] Broken hint bits (freeze)

2017-06-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 08:10:13PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 7:03 AM, Sergey Burladyan wrote: > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > >> ! against the old primary and standby clusters. Verify that the > >> ! Latest checkpoint

Re: [HACKERS] Broken hint bits (freeze)

2017-06-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 04:33:16AM +0300, Sergey Burladyan wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > ! > > ! Also, if upgrading standby servers, change wal_level > > ! to replica in the postgresql.conf file on > > ! the new cluster. > > > > > > I am

Re: [HACKERS] ASOF join

2017-06-16 Thread David Fetter
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 11:51:34AM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 4:20 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik > wrote: > > I wonder if there were some discussion/attempts to add ASOF join to Postgres > > (sorry, may be there is better term for it, I am refereeing

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Data at rest encryption

2017-06-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 11:06:39AM +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote: > Encryption is much easier to implement than compression, because it is not > changing page size. So I do not see any "complexity and flexibility > challenges" here. > Just for reference I attached to this mail our own

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Data at rest encryption

2017-06-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 08:08:05PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 04:56:36PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > how few concerns about this feature's complexity / maintainability > > impact have been raised. > > Yeah, I guess we will just have to wait to see it since other

Re: [HACKERS] Restrictions of logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> Docs stated "Publications can choose to limit the changes they produce to > any combination of INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE". It is clear that only those > DMLs are supported. What about COPY? > However, we should mention that large objects are not > supported. Right. Best regards, -- Tatsuo

Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

2017-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut writes: > On 5/19/17 13:31, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> I favor having indent in a separate repository in our Git server, for >> these reasons > I am also in favor of that. >> 0. it's under our control (so we can change rules as we see fit) >> 1.

Re: [HACKERS] Broken hint bits (freeze)

2017-06-16 Thread Amit Kapila
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 7:03 AM, Sergey Burladyan wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > >> ! against the old primary and standby clusters. Verify that the >> ! Latest checkpoint location values match in all clusters. > > For "Log-Shipping only"

Re: [HACKERS] Restrictions of logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> On 6/16/17 03:00, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: >> Maybe I am missing something, but I could not find any description >> that logical replication does not support large objects and TRUNCATE >> in the doc. Do we want to add them to the doc as the restrictions of >> the logical replication? > > Some of

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

2017-06-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 6/16/17 06:30, Amit Kapila wrote: > How will this compare UTF-8 strings in UTF-8 encoding? It seems to me > that ideally, it should use ucol_strcollUTF8 to compare the same, > however, with patch, it will always ucol_strcoll as we never define > HAVE_UCOL_STRCOLLUTF8 flag on Windows. We have

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

2017-06-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 6/15/17 13:48, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: >> Maybe just >> >> diff --git a/src/backend/utils/adt/varlena.c >> b/src/backend/utils/adt/varlena.c >> index a0dd391f09..2506f4eeb8 100644 >> --- a/src/backend/utils/adt/varlena.c >> +++ b/src/backend/utils/adt/varlena.c >> @@ -1433,7 +1433,7 @@

Re: [HACKERS] 答复: GiST API Adancement

2017-06-16 Thread Tom Lane
Yuan Dong writes: > ·¢¼þÈË: Andrew Borodin >> I think there is one more aspect of development: backward >> compatibility: it's impossible to update all existing extensions. This >> is not that major feature to ignore them. > I should still maintain

Re: [HACKERS] Restrictions of logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 6/16/17 03:00, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > Maybe I am missing something, but I could not find any description > that logical replication does not support large objects and TRUNCATE > in the doc. Do we want to add them to the doc as the restrictions of > the logical replication? Some of that

Re: [HACKERS] Restrictions of logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Euler Taveira
2017-06-16 4:00 GMT-03:00 Tatsuo Ishii : > Maybe I am missing something, but I could not find any description > that logical replication does not support large objects and TRUNCATE > in the doc. Do we want to add them to the doc as the restrictions of > the logical

Re: [HACKERS] Shortened URLs for commit messages

2017-06-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 01:05:19PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:25:07PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I have written the following sed script to convert regular Postgres > > email message URLs to their shorter form for commit messages: > > > > sed > >

[HACKERS] 答复: GiST API Adancement

2017-06-16 Thread Yuan Dong
Hi Andrey, Thank you for your suggestion. I should still maintain original API of GiST after modification. -- Dong 发件人: Andrew Borodin 发送时间: 2017年6月16日 6:24:03 收件人: Yuan Dong 抄送: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org 主题: Re: GiST API

Re: [HACKERS] Bug in ExecModifyTable function and trigger issues for foreign tables

2017-06-16 Thread Etsuro Fujita
On 2017/06/16 19:26, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Etsuro Fujita Ashutosh mentioned his concern about what I proposed above before [2], but I'm not sure we should address that. And there have been no opinions from him (or anyone else) since then. So, I'd like to leave

Re: [HACKERS] Bug in ExecModifyTable function and trigger issues for foreign tables

2017-06-16 Thread Etsuro Fujita
On 2017/06/16 19:26, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: Also, I don't see any discussion about my concern [3] about a parent with child from multiple foreign servers with different FDWs. So, I am not sure whether the patch really fixes the problem in its entirety. The patch would allow child tables to have

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

2017-06-16 Thread Marina Polyakova
>> P.S. Does this use case (do not retry transaction with serialization or >> deadlock failure) is most interesting or failed transactions should be >> retried (and how much times if there seems to be no hope of success...)? > > I can't quite parse that sentence, could you restate? The way I

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

2017-06-16 Thread Marina Polyakova
P.S. Does this use case (do not retry transaction with serialization or deadlock failure) is most interesting or failed transactions should be retried (and how much times if there seems to be no hope of success...)? I can't quite parse that sentence, could you restate? The way I read it was

Re: [HACKERS] Getting server crash on Windows when using ICU collation

2017-06-16 Thread Amit Kapila
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:18 PM, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 8:36 PM, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: >> On 6/12/17 00:38, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: >>> PFA patch that fixes the issue described in above thread. As

Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors

2017-06-16 Thread Marina Polyakova
Hi, Hello! I think that's a good idea and sorely needed. Thanks, I'm very glad to hear it! - if there were these failures during script execution this "transaction" is marked appropriately in logs; - numbers of "transactions" with these failures are printed in progress, in aggregation

Re: [HACKERS] Bug in ExecModifyTable function and trigger issues for foreign tables

2017-06-16 Thread Ashutosh Bapat
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > On 2017/06/16 0:05, Ildus Kurbangaliev wrote: > > > I wrote: > > One approach I came up with to fix this issue is to rewrite the > targetList entries of an inherited UPDATE/DELETE properly using >

[HACKERS] GSoC 2017 : Patch for predicate locking in Gist index

2017-06-16 Thread Shubham Barai
Hi, hackers! I have created my first patch for predicate locking in gist index. It includes a test for verification of serialization failures and a test to check false positives. I am submitting my patch little late because there were some issues with "make check" that I was trying to solve. Now,

Re: [HACKERS] Bug in ExecModifyTable function and trigger issues for foreign tables

2017-06-16 Thread Etsuro Fujita
On 2017/06/16 0:05, Ildus Kurbangaliev wrote: I wrote: One approach I came up with to fix this issue is to rewrite the targetList entries of an inherited UPDATE/DELETE properly using rewriteTargetListUD, when generating a plan for each child table in inheritance_planner. Attached is a WIP

Re: [HACKERS] Restrictions of logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Aleksander Alekseev
Hi Tatsuo, On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 04:00:56PM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > Maybe I am missing something, but I could not find any description > that logical replication does not support large objects and TRUNCATE > in the doc. Do we want to add them to the doc as the restrictions of > the

Re: [HACKERS] pg_waldump command line arguments

2017-06-16 Thread Ashutosh Bapat
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 2:38 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > A slightly broader concern is whether we need to require the start > position at all. It seems like one could locate the WAL directory > using the existing logic, then search for the earliest file. It might > be a

Re: [HACKERS] Get stuck when dropping a subscription during synchronizing table

2017-06-16 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> On 13/06/17 21:49, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> On 6/13/17 02:33, Noah Misch wrote: > Steps to reproduce - > X cluster

Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

2017-06-16 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Hello, I'd like to review this but it doesn't fit the master, as Robert said. Especially the interface of predicate_implied_by is changed by the suggested commit. Anyway I have some comment on this patch with fresh eyes. I believe the basic design so my comment below are from a rather micro

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Data at rest encryption

2017-06-16 Thread Konstantin Knizhnik
On 16.06.2017 03:08, Bruce Momjian wrote: Yeah, I guess we will just have to wait to see it since other people are excited about it. My concern is code complexity and usability challenges, vs punting the problem to the operating system, though admittedly there are some cases where that is

[HACKERS] RLS policy not getting honer while pg_dump on declarative partition

2017-06-16 Thread Rushabh Lathia
While doing some testing I noticed that RLS policy not getting honer while pg_dump on declarative partition. I can understand that while doing SELECT on individual child table, policy of parent is not getting applied. But is this desirable behaviour? I think for partitions, any policy on the root

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication: \dRp+ and "for all tables"

2017-06-16 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/10/17 02:02, Jeff Janes wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Masahiko Sawada > > wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Jeff

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

2017-06-16 Thread Surafel Temesgen
On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Jing Wang wrote: > Hi all, > > The attached patch is to support the feature "COMMENT ON DATABASE > CURRENT_DATABASE". The solution is based on the previous discussion in [2] . > Your patch doesn't cover security labels on databases which

[HACKERS] Restrictions of logical replication

2017-06-16 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
Maybe I am missing something, but I could not find any description that logical replication does not support large objects and TRUNCATE in the doc. Do we want to add them to the doc as the restrictions of the logical replication? Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English:

Re: [HACKERS] proposal psql \gdesc

2017-06-16 Thread Fabien COELHO
Hello Pavel, new update - rebase, changed message I did yet another rebase of your patch after Tom alphabetically ordered backslash commands. Here is the result. -- Fabien.diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/psql-ref.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/psql-ref.sgml index e6eba21..833460e 100644 ---

Re: [HACKERS] Why forcing Hot_standby_feedback to be enabled when creating a logical decoding slot on standby

2017-06-16 Thread sanyam jain
Isn't XLogRecord carries full information to be decoded in itself?If so a VACCUM should not be a problem in decoding? Thanks Sanyam Jain From: Michael Paquier Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 6:52:06 AM To: sanyam jain Cc: Pg Hackers

Re: [HACKERS] GiST API Adancement

2017-06-16 Thread Andrew Borodin
Hi, Dong! 2017-06-15 21:19 GMT+05:00 Yuan Dong : > I'm going to hack on my own. With the help of Andrew Borodin, I want to > start the project with adding a third state to collision check. The third > state is that: > subtree is totally within the query. In this case, GiST