On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 08:42:32AM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On 6 July 2017 at 22:43, Joe Conway wrote:
> > I agree we should get this right the first time and I also agree with
> > Dean's proposal, so I guess I'm a +2
> >
>
> On 7 July 2017 at 03:21, Amit Langote wrote:
> > +1 to releasing t
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> If I have a slow function which is evaluated in a simple seq scan, I do not
> get parallel execution, even though it would be massively useful. Unless
> force_parallel_mode=ON, then I get a dummy parallel plan with one worker.
>
> explain selec
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Amit Langote
> wrote:
> > Actually, if \d had shown RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE tables as of Type
> > "partitioned table", we wouldn't need a separate flag for marking a table
> > as having partitions.
>
> I think that is false. Whether someth
If I have a slow function which is evaluated in a simple seq scan, I do not
get parallel execution, even though it would be massively useful. Unless
force_parallel_mode=ON, then I get a dummy parallel plan with one worker.
explain select aid,slow(abalance) from pgbench_accounts;
CREATE OR REPLAC
Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:51 AM, AP wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 05:58:25PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> I can understand your concerns. To address first concern we need to
> >> work on one or more of following work items: (a) work on vacuums that
> >> can be trigger
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:51 AM, AP wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 05:58:25PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 8:22 AM, AP wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 05:19:59PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> >> I think if you are under development, it is always advisable to create
>>
On 2017/07/11 10:34, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
>> Also, there seems to be at least some preference
>> for excluding partitions by default from the \d listing.
>
> As another user of partitions I'll chime in and say that would be very
> nice! On the other hand, with pre-10 partitions you do see all t
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Isn't that what strxfrm() is?
>
> Yeah, just with bugs. If ICU has a non-buggy equivalent, then we can
> make this work.
I agree that it probably isn't worth using strxfrm() again, simply
because the glibc implementation is buggy, and glibc
> Also, there seems to be at least some preference
> for excluding partitions by default from the \d listing.
As another user of partitions I'll chime in and say that would be very
nice! On the other hand, with pre-10 partitions you do see all the
child tables with `\d`, so showing declarative par
At Mon, 10 Jul 2017 18:37:34 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote
in
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > At Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:58:13 +0530, Amit Kapila
> > wrote in
> >
> >
> >> I am also not 100% comfortable with adding flush at two new places,
> >> but that
On 2017/07/11 7:33, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Amit Langote
> wrote:
>> Actually, if \d had shown RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE tables as of Type
>> "partitioned table", we wouldn't need a separate flag for marking a table
>> as having partitions.
>
> I think that is false
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 12:50 AM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>>> So I would suggest the following things to address this issue:
>>> 1) Generate a backup history file for backups
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:01 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 07/10/2017 01:27 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>
>> This commit seems be cause of the documentation compilation error. I
>> think is missing.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Attached small patch fixes this.
>
>
> Thanks, committed!
>
> Strangely, it
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I'll next update this on or before Monday 10th at 19:00 CLT.
I couldn't get to this today as I wanted. Next update on Wednesday
12th, same time.
--
Álvaro Herrerahttps://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Se
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> One thing I would like to see is features like this added to the
> opclasses (or opfamilies?) using standard PG functions that return
> standard PG data types. So if each opclass had a function that took
> the data type in question and returned
On 10 July 2017 at 23:46, David Fetter wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 05:33:34PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Amit Langote
>> wrote:
>> > I posted a patch upthread which makes \d hide partitions
>> > (relispartition = true relations) and include them if the newl
On 10 July 2017 at 19:40, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Key normalization means creating a representation for internal page
> items that we always just memcmp(), regardless of the details of the
> underlying datatypes.
One thing I would like to see is features like this added to the
opclasses (or opfa
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 05:33:34PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Amit Langote
> wrote:
> > I posted a patch upthread which makes \d hide partitions
> > (relispartition = true relations) and include them if the newly
> > proposed '!' modifier is specified. The '+' mo
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Amit Langote
wrote:
> I posted a patch upthread which makes \d hide partitions (relispartition =
> true relations) and include them if the newly proposed '!' modifier is
> specified. The '+' modifier is being used to show additional detail of
> relations chosen to
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 6:20 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> So, I dropped the COPY part.
Ouch. I think we should try to figure out how the COPY part will be
handled before we commit to a design.
I have to admit that I'm a little bit fuzzy about why foreign insert
routing requires all of these chang
On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 3:06 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 06:47:26PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>> On 2017/07/06 16:06, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> > Looks odd to me because the error message doesn't show any DETAIL info;
>> > since the CTE query, which produces the message, is the s
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:
> I do have a patch that attacks suffix truncation, heap tid unification
> and prefix compression all at once.
That's great! I'll certainly be able to review it.
> It's on a hiatus ATM, but, as you say, the implementations are highly
> corr
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Claudio Freire wrote:
>
>> A missing optimization is that having tid unification allows VACUUM to
>> implement a different strategy when it needs to clean up only a tiny
>> fraction of the index. It can do the lookup by key-tid instead of
>>
Claudio Freire wrote:
> A missing optimization is that having tid unification allows VACUUM to
> implement a different strategy when it needs to clean up only a tiny
> fraction of the index. It can do the lookup by key-tid instead of
> scanning the whole index, which can be a win if the index is l
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> It might appear excessive to talk about several different techniques
> in one place, but that seemed like the best way to me, because there
> are subtle dependencies. If most of the optimizations are pursued as a
> project all at once (say,
I've created a new Wiki page that describes a scheme for normalizing
internal page items within B-Tree indexes, and the many optimizations
that this can enable:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Key_normalization
Key normalization means creating a representation for internal page
items that we alw
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 04:15:28PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2017/07/10 15:32, Craig Ringer wrote:
> > On 8 July 2017 at 00:03, David Fetter wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 10:29:26AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> >>> Hi Mark,
> >>>
> >>> On 2017/07/07 9:02, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> >>
Noah Misch writes:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:46:09AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Shall we go for broke and also remove the ASLR-disabling patch in beta2?
> As I mentioned in my message eight hours ago, no.
Ah, sorry, I'd managed to swap out that bit of info already. However,
I've now gone and
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:46:09AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > On Jul 10, 2017 16:08, "Tom Lane" wrote:
> >> Okay, so that leaves us with a decision to make: push it into beta2, or
> >> wait till after wrap? I find it pretty scary to push a patch with
> >> portability im
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:08:53AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch writes:
> > I recommend pushing your patch so the August back-branch releases have it.
> > One can see by inspection that your patch has negligible effect on systems
> > healthy today. I have a reasonable suspicion it will hel
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Jul 10, 2017 16:08, "Tom Lane" wrote:
>> Okay, so that leaves us with a decision to make: push it into beta2, or
>> wait till after wrap? I find it pretty scary to push a patch with
>> portability implications so soon before wrap, but a quick look at the
>> buildfarm
On Jul 10, 2017 16:08, "Tom Lane" wrote:
Noah Misch writes:
> On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 09:56:33AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, being able to reproduce the problem reliably enough to say whether
>> it's fixed or not is definitely the sticking point here. I have some
>> ideas about that: ...
>
Noah Misch writes:
> On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 09:56:33AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, being able to reproduce the problem reliably enough to say whether
>> it's fixed or not is definitely the sticking point here. I have some
>> ideas about that: ...
> I tried this procedure without finding a s
Hello everyone!
There's the second version of my patch for pgbench. Now transactions
with serialization and deadlock failures are rolled back and retried
until they end successfully or their number of attempts reaches maximum.
In details:
- You can set the maximum number of attempts by the ap
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:58:13 +0530, Amit Kapila
> wrote in
>
>> I am also not 100% comfortable with adding flush at two new places,
>> but that makes the code for fix simpler and fundamentally there is no
>> problem in doing so
On 07/10/2017 01:27 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
This commit seems be cause of the documentation compilation error. I
think is missing.
...
Attached small patch fixes this.
Thanks, committed!
Strangely, it worked on my system, despite that clear mistake. Looks
like the 'osx' tool is more str
On 07/03/2017 05:16 PM, Rafael Martinez wrote:
> We have a discussion about this some time ago and we created a wiki page
> where we tried to write down some ideas/proposals and links to threads
> discussing the subject:
>
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Pg_dump_improvements
Thanks for this li
On 07/10/2017 01:47 PM, Arthur Zakirov wrote:
Hello,
2017-07-10 12:30 GMT+03:00 Heikki Linnakangas :
I just remembered that this was still pending. I made the documentation
changes, and committed this patch now.
We're uncomfortably close to wrapping the next beta, later today, but I
think it
Hi, all!
It seems to me that we're allocating shared memory for SLRU lwlocks twice,
unless I'm missing something.
SimpleLruShmemSize() calculates total SLRU shared memory size including
lwlocks size.
SimpleLruInit() starts with line
shared = (SlruShared) ShmemInitStruct(name,
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
> Hello,
Thanks for the review.
>> If a partitioned table is proven dummy, set_rel_pathlist() doesn't mark the
>> partition relations dummy and thus doesn't set any (dummy) paths in the
>> partition relations. The lack of paths in the par
Hello Alik,
Your description is not very precise. What version of Postgres is used?
If there is a decline, compared to which version? Is there a link to
these results?
Benchmark have been done in master v10. I am attaching image with results:
.
Ok, thanks.
More precision would be helpful,
Hello,
2017-07-10 12:30 GMT+03:00 Heikki Linnakangas :
>
>
> I just remembered that this was still pending. I made the documentation
> changes, and committed this patch now.
>
> We're uncomfortably close to wrapping the next beta, later today, but I
> think it's better to get this into the hands o
> "Andrew" == Andrew Gierth writes:
> "Thomas" == Thomas Munro writes:
Thomas> Here it is. Added to open items.
Andrew> On it.
Committed.
--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> Allow multiple hostaddrs to go with multiple hostnames.
>
> Also fix two other issues, while we're at it:
>
> * In error message on connection failure, if multiple network addresses
> were given as the host option, as in "host=127.0.0.1,
> "Thomas" == Thomas Munro writes:
Thomas> Here it is. Added to open items.
On it.
--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Hi,
At Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:58:13 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote
in
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> wrote:
> > At Sat, 8 Jul 2017 16:41:27 +0530, Amit Kapila
> > wrote in
> >
> >> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:36 PM, A
On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 6:29 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On May 31, 2017 11:28:18 AM PDT, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On 2017-05-31 13:27:28 -0400, Dilip Kumar wrote:
[ ... various discussion in support of using DHT ... ]
Ok, good.
Here's a new version that introduces a per-session DSM segment to hold
On 06/09/2017 04:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:36 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Right. I think it's a usability fail as it is; it certainly fooled me. We
could make the error messages and documentation more clear. But even better
to allow multiple host addresses, so that it
Hello,
At Thu, 6 Jul 2017 21:05:21 +0530, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote in
> If a partitioned table is proven dummy, set_rel_pathlist() doesn't mark the
> partition relations dummy and thus doesn't set any (dummy) paths in the
> partition relations. The lack of paths in the partitions means that we can
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote:
> At Sat, 8 Jul 2017 16:41:27 +0530, Amit Kapila
> wrote in
>> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Amit Kapila
>> > wrote:
>> >> I think we should do that as a separate patch (I ca
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Alik Khilazhev wrote:
> Hello, Fabien!
>
> Your description is not very precise. What version of Postgres is used? If
> there is a decline, compared to which version? Is there a link to these
> results?
>
>
> Benchmark have been done in master v10. I am attaching
On 2017/07/10 15:32, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 8 July 2017 at 00:03, David Fetter wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 10:29:26AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> Hi Mark,
>>>
>>> On 2017/07/07 9:02, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
I've been trying out the new partitioning in version 10. Firstly, I
>> must
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> I recommend pushing your patch so the August back-branch releases have it.
> One can see by inspection that your patch has negligible effect on systems
> healthy today. I have a reasonable suspicion it will help some systems. If
> others remai
53 matches
Mail list logo
