Re: [HACKERS] analyzeCTE is too strict about typmods?

At Thu, 03 Aug 2017 19:29:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote in <28993.1501802...@sss.pgh.pa.us> > I wrote: > > In short, therefore, it's looking to me like analyzeCTE() is wrong here. > > It should allow the case where the recursive result has typmod -1 while > > the non-recursive

Re: [HACKERS] Generate wait event list and docs from text file

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > 1) It is easy to add a wait event and... > 2) It is easy to not update its documentation. > 3) the documentation tables get easily broken. > > As I have participated in the situation present now, I propose to >

Re: [HACKERS] !USE_WIDE_UPPER_LOWER compile errors in v10+

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 05:38:13PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > Noah Misch writes: > >> Perhaps it is time to require HAVE_WCSTOMBS and HAVE_TOWLOWER, removing > >> USE_WIDE_UPPER_LOWER? Every buildfarm fossil has both. > > > +1 ... if nothing else, there's the

Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables in VACUUM commands

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 7:26 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > "Bossart, Nathan" writes: >> [ 0001-error_on_duplicate_columns_in_analyze_v6.patch ] > > I've pushed (and back-patched) the 0001 patch, with some significant > changes: Thanks. Arrived here too late to

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make new crash restart test a bit more robust.

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-09-19 19:00:38 -0700, Andres Freund wrote: >> Given this fact pattern, I'll allow the case without a received error >> message in the recovery test. Objections? > > Hearing none. Pushed. > > While debugging this,

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure when the non-exclusive pg_stop_backup aborted.

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > > Yep, but the deficiency is caused by the use before_shmem_exit() in > the SQL-level functions present in 9.6~ which make the cleanup happen > potentially twice. If you look at the code of basebackup.c, you

Re: [HACKERS] hash index on unlogged tables doesn't behave as expected

At Thu, 21 Sep 2017 20:35:01 -0400, Robert Haas wrote in > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: > > Though I don't see it's bug and agree that the

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure when the non-exclusive pg_stop_backup aborted.

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > Another one to watch out for is that elog(...) and ereport(...) invoke > CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS. That's given me exciting surprises before when > combined with assertion checking and various exit cleanup hooks. Ahah.

Re: [HACKERS] Windows warnings from VS 2017

On 2017-09-21 09:30:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan writes: > > The speed of memset is hardly going to be the dominating factor in a > > 'CREATE DATABASE' command, so we could certainly afford to change to > > plain memset calls here. > > Another

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure when the non-exclusive pg_stop_backup aborted.

On 21 September 2017 at 16:56, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Michael Paquier > > wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:07 AM,

Re: [HACKERS] Windows warnings from VS 2017

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Another thought is that it may be time for our decennial debate about > whether MemSet is worth the electrons it's printed on. I continue to > think that any modern compiler+libc ought to do an equivalent or better >

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > I really think we need to add some kind of debug mode that makes ICU > optionally spit out a locale display name at key points. We need this > to gain confidence that the behavior that ICU provides actually > matches what is

Re: [HACKERS] hash index on unlogged tables doesn't behave as expected

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Though I don't see it's bug and agree that the message is not > proper, currently we can create hash indexes without no warning > on unlogged tables and it causes a problem with replication. That's true,

Re: [HACKERS] hash index on unlogged tables doesn't behave as expected

At Thu, 21 Sep 2017 16:19:27 -0400, Robert Haas wrote in <694cb417-ef2c-4760-863b-aec4530c2...@gmail.com> > On Sep 21, 2017, at 8:59 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:. > > I think giving an error message like "hash indexes are not WAL-logged > > and .." for

Re: [HACKERS] visual studio 2017 build support

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 7:03 AM, Andrew Dunstan < andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > On 08/25/2017 11:29 PM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:27 PM, Christian Ullrich > > > wrote: > > > > * On 2017-06-21

Re: [HACKERS] compress method for spgist - 2

On 21.09.2017 02:27, Alexander Korotkov wrote: On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski > wrote: It is possible for bbox->low.x to be NaN when circle->center.x is and circle->radius are both +Infinity.

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure when the non-exclusive pg_stop_backup aborted.

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >>> +-

Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables in VACUUM commands

"Bossart, Nathan" writes: > [ 0001-error_on_duplicate_columns_in_analyze_v6.patch ] I've pushed (and back-patched) the 0001 patch, with some significant changes: * The list_concat_unique implementation is O(N^2), and seems a bit obscure as well. Perhaps there will never be

[HACKERS] Commitfest 201709 update

Two thirds of the commitfest has now passed, and while a lot of patches have been closed, there is still lots to do. As of now, 48% of the entries are either in “Needs review” or “Waiting on Author”. Let’s try to reduce that number further! A lot of you authors/reviewers have responded to my

Re: Fw: [HACKERS] HACKERS[PATCH] split ProcArrayLock into multiple parts -- follow-up

> On 2017-09-21 15:51:54 -0500, Jim Van Fleet wrote: > > Not to beat on a dead horse, or anything, but this fix was frowned upon > > because in one environment (one socket) it was 6% down and over 15% up in > > the right environment (two sockets). > > > So, why not add a configuration

Re: [HACKERS] !USE_WIDE_UPPER_LOWER compile errors in v10+

I wrote: > Noah Misch writes: >> Perhaps it is time to require HAVE_WCSTOMBS and HAVE_TOWLOWER, removing >> USE_WIDE_UPPER_LOWER? Every buildfarm fossil has both. > +1 ... if nothing else, there's the problem that untested code is likely > to be broken. You just proved it

Re: [HACKERS] visual studio 2017 build support

On 08/25/2017 11:29 PM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:27 PM, Christian Ullrich > > wrote: > > * On 2017-06-21 02:06, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > > Thanks for the review. Here I attached an updated patch with >

Re: Fw: [HACKERS] HACKERS[PATCH] split ProcArrayLock into multiple parts -- follow-up

On 2017-09-21 15:51:54 -0500, Jim Van Fleet wrote: > Not to beat on a dead horse, or anything, but this fix was frowned upon > because in one environment (one socket) it was 6% down and over 15% up in > the right environment (two sockets). > So, why not add a configuration parameter which

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > If we are fine with supporting only ICU 4.2 and later (which I think we are > given that ICU 4.2 was released in 2009) then using uloc_forLanguageTag()[1] > to validate and canonize seems like the right solution. I had

Fw: [HACKERS] HACKERS[PATCH] split ProcArrayLock into multiple parts -- follow-up

Howdy -- Not to beat on a dead horse, or anything, but this fix was frowned upon because in one environment (one socket) it was 6% down and over 15% up in the right environment (two sockets). So, why not add a configuration parameter which specifies the number of parts? Default is 1 which

Re: [HACKERS] hash index on unlogged tables doesn't behave as expected

On Sep 21, 2017, at 8:59 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:. > I think giving an error message like "hash indexes are not WAL-logged > and .." for unlogged tables doesn't seem like a good behavior. +1. This seems like deliberate behavior, not a bug. ...Robert -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] ICU locales and text/char(n) SortSupport on Windows

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > This is currently a v10 open item, but I think it doesn't qualify for that > treatment. It's merely an opportunity for optimization, albeit an > attractively-simple one. I have withdrawn this as an open item. I'm still

Re: [HACKERS] Arrays of domains

I wrote: > Here's a rebased-up-to-HEAD version of this patch set. The only > actual change is removal of a no-longer-needed hunk in pl_exec.c. I see the patch tester is complaining that this broke, due to commit 4bd199465. The fix is trivial (s/GETARG_ANY_ARRAY/GETARG_ANY_ARRAY_P/) but for

Re: [HACKERS] ICU locales and text/char(n) SortSupport on Windows

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> Attached patch shows what I'm getting at. This is untested, since I >> don't use Windows. Proceed with caution. > > Your analysis makes sense, but the patch doesn't work, because "locale" > is never set

Re: [HACKERS] ICU locales and text/char(n) SortSupport on Windows

On 9/16/17 18:33, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > In summary, we're currently attaching the use of SortSupport to the > wrong thing. We're treating this UTF-16 business as something that > implies a broad OS/platform restriction, when in fact it should be > treated as implying a restriction for one

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix bool/int type confusion

Peter Eisentraut writes: > On 9/21/17 11:46, Tom Lane wrote: >> This also means that the portability problem is purely hypothetical; >> given valid tz reference data the code wouldn't ever try to increment >> "hit" to 2 anyway. It's even more hypothetical for

Re: [HACKERS] !USE_WIDE_UPPER_LOWER compile errors in v10+

On 9/21/17 01:29, Noah Misch wrote: > I checked !USE_WIDE_UPPER_LOWER by configuring v10 as follows: > > ./configure -C --prefix=$HOME/sw/nopath/pg10 --enable-debug \ > --enable-cassert --enable-depend --enable-tap-tests --with-libxml \ > --with-gssapi --with-openssl

Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed

2017-09-21 20:20 GMT+02:00 Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com>: > On 9/21/17 13:54, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > I see where you are coming from, but there is no association in the > > existing UI that equates "+" to the word "verbose". I think just > > removing the

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix bool/int type confusion

On 9/21/17 11:46, Tom Lane wrote: > So the code in their git repo still has the variable as bool, but > there's no ++ operator on it anymore. > > This also means that the portability problem is purely hypothetical; > given valid tz reference data the code wouldn't ever try to increment > "hit" to

Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed

On 9/21/17 13:54, Pavel Stehule wrote: > I see where you are coming from, but there is no association in the > existing UI that equates "+" to the word "verbose".  I think just > removing the verbose prefix and applying the sorting behavior in all > cases should be easier to

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 9/19/17 20:45, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 9/19/17 17:55, Jeff Janes wrote: > >> I guess I'm late to the party, but I don't see why this is needed at > >> all. We encourage people to use any and

Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed

2017-09-21 15:30 GMT+02:00 Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com>: > On 9/21/17 04:27, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > yes. It was designed for + commands only. Can be enhanced to all > > commands - then VERBOSE prefix should be removed - not sure if it is > > necessary. For me interesting

Re: [HACKERS] Effect of changing the value for PARALLEL_TUPLE_QUEUE_SIZE

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Rafia Sabih wrote: > On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Rafia Sabih >> wrote: >> > > Please find the attached file for the

Re: [HACKERS] ICU locales and text/char(n) SortSupport on Windows

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > This is currently a v10 open item, but I think it doesn't qualify for that > treatment. It's merely an opportunity for optimization, albeit an > attractively-simple one. Fair enough. This is clearly an omission that was

Re: [HACKERS] PSA: don't be in a hurry to update to XCode 9.0

Too late I just stumbled over this as well! Dave Cramer da...@postgresintl.com www.postgresintl.com On 20 September 2017 at 14:34, Tom Lane wrote: > It seems to install some libraries that depend on > /usr/lib/system/libsystem_darwin.dylib, which doesn't exist. > Googling

Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Claudio Freire > wrote: >> Maybe this is looking at the problem from the wrong direction. >> >> Why can't the page be added to the FSM immediately and the check be >>

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix bool/int type confusion

Peter Eisentraut writes: > Fix bool/int type confusion > Using ++ on a bool variable doesn't work well when stdbool.h is in use. > The original BSD code appears to use int here, so use that instead. I'm fairly unhappy with this approach to fixing this problem, because

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting

> On 20 September 2017 at 17:19, Arthur Zakirov wrote: > As a conclusion: > * additional field are needed to pg_type for *_fetch and *_assign functions to solve dependency problem One last thing that I need to clarify. Initially there was an idea to minimize changes in

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

On 09/21/2017 07:51 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 9/20/17 15:52, Jeff Janes wrote: I think that the addition of a link to > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/List_of_drivers would be appropriate. I don't have any

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

On 9/20/17 15:52, Jeff Janes wrote: > I think that the addition of a link to > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/List_of_drivers > would be appropriate. > > I don't have any expectation that that list will be kept up to date. >

Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM in the PG 10 release notes

On 9/19/17 20:45, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 9/19/17 17:55, Jeff Janes wrote: >> I guess I'm late to the party, but I don't see why this is needed at >> all.  We encourage people to use any and all new features which are >> appropriate to them--that is why we implement new features.  Why does >>

Re: [HACKERS] user-defined numeric data types triggering ERROR: unsupported type

Tomas Vondra writes: > [ scalarineqsel may fall over when used by extension operators ] I concur with your thought that we could have ineq_histogram_selectivity fall back to a "mid bucket" default if it's working with a datatype it is unable to convert_to_scalar.

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Amit Khandekar wrote: > On 20 September 2017 at 00:06, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 7:25 AM, Amit Khandekar > wrote: > >> [ new patch ] > 86 - (event ==

Re: [HACKERS] !USE_WIDE_UPPER_LOWER compile errors in v10+

Noah Misch writes: > Perhaps it is time to require HAVE_WCSTOMBS and HAVE_TOWLOWER, removing > USE_WIDE_UPPER_LOWER? Every buildfarm fossil has both. +1 ... if nothing else, there's the problem that untested code is likely to be broken. You just proved it *is* broken, of

Re: [HACKERS] Windows warnings from VS 2017

Andrew Dunstan writes: > The speed of memset is hardly going to be the dominating factor in a > 'CREATE DATABASE' command, so we could certainly afford to change to > plain memset calls here. Another thought is that it may be time for our decennial debate about

Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed

On 9/21/17 04:27, Pavel Stehule wrote: > yes. It was designed for + commands only. Can be enhanced to all > commands - then VERBOSE prefix should be removed - not sure if it is > necessary. For me interesting different order than default is only in > verbose mode. I see where you are coming from,

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Rafia Sabih wrote: >> > > Limit (cost=83341943.28..83341943.35 rows=1 width=92) (actual > time=1556989.996..1556989.997 rows=1 loops=1) >-> Finalize GroupAggregate (cost=83341943.28..83342723.24 > rows=10064 width=92) (actual

Re: [HACKERS] hash index on unlogged tables doesn't behave as expected

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > postgres=# create table test (id int primary key, v text); > postgres=# create index on test using hash (id); > WARNING: hash indexes are not WAL-logged and their use is discouraged > > But not for for

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > About your earlier comment of making build_joinrel_partition_info() > simpler. Right now, the code assumes that partexprs or > nullable_partexpr can be NULL when either of them is not populated. > That may

Re: [HACKERS] Windows warnings from VS 2017

On 09/21/2017 02:53 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Andrew Dunstan > > wrote: > > > > On 09/20/2017 08:18 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > > On 09/20/2017 07:54 PM, Tom Lane

Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise aggregation/grouping

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Jeevan Chalke < jeevan.cha...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Jeevan Chalke < > jeevan.cha...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi < >> rajkumar.raghuwan...@enterprisedb.com>

Re: [HACKERS] Effect of changing the value for PARALLEL_TUPLE_QUEUE_SIZE

On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote: > On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Rafia Sabih > wrote: > >> I worked on this idea of using local queue as a temporary buffer to >> write the tuples when master is busy and shared queue is

Re: [HACKERS] hash index on unlogged tables doesn't behave as expected

Hello, Following a bit older thread. At Tue, 18 Jul 2017 08:33:07 +0200, Michael Paquier wrote in > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:18 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > Thanks. Do you

Re: [HACKERS] coverage analysis improvements

Peter Eisentraut writes: > On 9/20/17 13:13, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: >> I have no opinion on the bulk of this patch set, but skimming it out of >> curiosity I noticed that the plperl change seems to have lost the >> dependency on plperl_helpers.h from

Re: [HACKERS] CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

On 09/21/2017 01:40 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: pg_import_system_collations() takes care to use the non-BCP-47 style for such versions, so I think this is working correctly. But CREATE COLLATION doesn't use

Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Make the optimiser aware of partitions ordering

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > With 9140cf8269b0c4ae002b2748d93979d535891311, we store the > RelOptInfos of partitions in the RelOptInfo of partitioned table. For > range partitioned table without default partition, they are arranged >

Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT?

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > On 16 Sep 2017, at 01:51, Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Daniel Gustafsson > wrote: > > > On 04 Apr 2017, at

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure when the non-exclusive pg_stop_backup aborted.

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:07 AM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> The bug can happen in PostgreSQL 9.1 or

Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Make the optimiser aware of partitions ordering

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 3:30 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 5:30 AM, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: >> On 3/20/17 11:03, Ronan Dunklau wrote: Great idea. This is too late for v10 at this point, but please add it to

Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.

Hi, At Tue, 19 Sep 2017 16:55:38 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote in > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Claudio Freire > wrote: > > Maybe this is looking at the problem from the wrong

Re: [HACKERS] DROP SUBSCRIPTION hangs if sub is disabled in the same transaction

On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 9:52 PM, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: >> On 9/15/17 13:35, Arseny Sher wrote: >>> Peter Eisentraut writes: >>> Here is a

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench: Skipping the creating primary keys after initialization

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > Hello Masahiko-san, > >>> ISTM that you probably intended "\(.*\)" (actual parenthesis) instead of >>> "(.*)" (memorization) in the data generation message check. >> >> >> Thank you, fixed it. >> >>> Otherwise all is

Re: [HACKERS] compress method for spgist - 2

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 3:14 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Alexander Korotkov writes: > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski < > >> It seems to me that any circle with radius of any Infinity should > become a > >> [-Infinity ..

Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed

2017-09-21 10:19 GMT+02:00 Alexander Korotkov : > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Peter Eisentraut < > peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> On 9/8/17 00:13, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> > I am sending rebased patch >> > >> > rebased again + fix obsolete help >>

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench: Skipping the creating primary keys after initialization

Hello Masahiko-san, ISTM that you probably intended "\(.*\)" (actual parenthesis) instead of "(.*)" (memorization) in the data generation message check. Thank you, fixed it. Otherwise all is well for me. Attached the updated version patch. Applies, compiles, make check & tap test ok,

Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 9/8/17 00:13, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > I am sending rebased patch > > > > rebased again + fix obsolete help > > Why are the variables called VERBOSE_SORT_* ? What is verbose about them? I

Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:52 AM, Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 9/19/17 12:54, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > However, patch misses regression tests covering added functionality. > > > > I am not sure if there are any tests related to output of \dt+ commands > > -

Re: [HACKERS] coverage analysis improvements

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > OK, I was not aware that people are using it that way. At least one. > So updated patch > set there, which separates coverage and coverage-html into two > independent targets. Thanks for the new

Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure when the non-exclusive pg_stop_backup aborted.

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:07 AM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> The bug can happen in PostgreSQL 9.1 or higher that non-exclusive >> backup has been introduced, so we should back-patch to

Re: [HACKERS] close_ps, NULLs, and DirectFunctionCall

> Does this need fixing, and if so how? My improve geometric types patch [1] fixes this issue, by cosidering NaNs larger than any non-NAN same as the float types. There are many issues with the geometric types similar to this. Let's combine our efforts to put them into a shape. [1]

Re: [HACKERS] Page Scan Mode in Hash Index

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Ashutosh Sharma > wrote: >> Attached are the patches with above changes. Thanks. > > Thanks. I think that the comments and README changes in 0003 need >

Re: [HACKERS] Windows warnings from VS 2017

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Andrew Dunstan < andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > On 09/20/2017 08:18 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > > On 09/20/2017 07:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Andrew Dunstan writes: > >>> It's also warning that it will copy 16

Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > During testing of this patch, I found some behavior difference > with the support of parallel query, while experimenting with the provided > test case in the patch. > > But I tested the V6 patch, and I don't think

Re: [HACKERS] ICU locales and text/char(n) SortSupport on Windows

On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 03:33:53PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > In summary, we're currently attaching the use of SortSupport to the > wrong thing. We're treating this UTF-16 business as something that > implies a broad OS/platform restriction, when in fact it should be > treated as implying a