Re: [HACKERS] JIT & function naming

Hi, On 2017-08-31 23:41:31 -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > I previously had an early prototype of JITing [1] expression evaluation > and tuple deforming. I've since then worked a lot on this. > > Here's an initial, not really pretty but functional, submission. One of the things I'm not really

Re: [HACKERS] Function to move the position of a replication slot

On 2017-09-02 18:31:10 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > I don't quite see how you'd get corruption from a physical slot being > > forwarded? I mean you surely can get into the situation that there's > > missing WAL from wherever a standby is receiving its

Re: [HACKERS] Function to move the position of a replication slot

Andres Freund writes: > I don't quite see how you'd get corruption from a physical slot being > forwarded? I mean you surely can get into the situation that there's > missing WAL from wherever a standby is receiving its WAL, but that'll > "just" break replication. Um, doesn't

Re: [HACKERS] Function to move the position of a replication slot

On 2017-09-01 23:37:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut writes: > > On 8/31/17 08:19, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> I think that, in the end, covered all the comments? > > > I didn't see any explanation of what this would actually be useful for. > > I

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel worker error

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 2:51 AM, Noah Misch wrote: > [Action required within three days. This is a generic notification.] > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item. Robert, > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this

Re: [HACKERS] Function to move the position of a replication slot

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 11:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 8/31/17 08:19, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> Rebased. Now named pg_advance_replication_slot. ERROR on logical slots. >> Forward only. >> >> I think that, in the end, covered all the comments? > > I didn't

Re: [HACKERS] adding the commit to a patch's thread

> On 01 Sep 2017, at 15:40, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 4:26 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: >> Erik Rijkers wrote: >>> Would it be possible to change the commitfest a bit and make it possible to >>> add the commit (or

Re: [HACKERS] [bug fix] Savepoint-related statements terminates connection

I wrote: > My thought is that what we need to do is find a way for isTopLevel > to be false if we're processing a multi-command string. Nah, that's backwards, the problem is exactly that isTopLevel is false if we're processing a multi-command string. That allows DefineSavepoint to think that

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Zipfian distribution in pgbench

Hello Fabien, Thank you for detailed review. I hope I have fixed all the issues you mentioned in your letter. pgbench-zipf-08v.patch Description: Binary data — Thanks and Regards, Alik Khilazhev Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] GnuTLS support

Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > >> There are currently two failing SSL tests which at least to me seems more > >> like they test specific OpenSSL behaviors rather than something which

[HACKERS] Exclude pg_internal.init from base backup

Hackers, The cache in pg_internal.init was reused in days of yore but has been rebuilt on postmaster startup since v8.1. It appears there is no reason for this file to be backed up. I also moved the RELCACHE_INIT_FILENAME constant to relcache.h to avoid duplicating the string. I'll add this to

Re: [HACKERS] Secondary index access optimizations

On 09/02/2017 06:44 AM, Thomas Munro wrote: On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 9:23 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote: postgres=# explain select * from bt where k between 1 and 2 and v = 100; QUERY PLAN

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel worker error

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 03:11:10PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> > But since that's an established design fl^H^Hprinciple, maybe that >> > means

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel worker error

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> The problem here is exactly that we cannot transmit the leader's >> state to the worker. You can't blame it on SET ROLE, because >> I didn't do

Re: [HACKERS] Crash on promotion when recovery.conf is renamed

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 7:32 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:05 AM, David Steele wrote: >>> On 3/28/17 1:21 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] Rename RECOVERYXLOG to RECOVERYWAL?

On 9/1/17 7:53 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 3:06 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> I don't think this really buys us anything. If we'd applied it to v10 >> maybe, but what do we get out of whacking it around now? >> >> "Consistency", I hear you cry! Fair

Re: [HACKERS] configure issue - warnings sort: No such file or directory

2017-09-02 13:28 GMT+02:00 Devrim Gündüz : > > Hi, > > On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 06:52 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > but looks so it is Fedora26 issue - I see these lines elsewhere too. > > I cannot reproduce it on my F26 box. > I have to do deep research Thank you for info

Re: [HACKERS] configure issue - warnings sort: No such file or directory

Hi, On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 06:52 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > but looks so it is Fedora26 issue - I see these lines elsewhere too. I cannot reproduce it on my F26 box. Regards, -- Devrim Gündüz EnterpriseDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified

Re: [HACKERS] pg_basebackup throttling doesn't throttle as promised

Jeff Janes wrote: > On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > > The "-r" option to pg_basebackup is supposed to throttle the rate of the > backup. But it only works properly if the server is mostly idle. > > Every non-trivial call to

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel worker error

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 03:11:10PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > But since that's an established design fl^H^Hprinciple, maybe that > > means we should go with the approach of teaching SerializeGUCState() > > to ignore