Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-05-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Mark Dilger wrote: > > My main concern is that a commitment to never, ever break backwards > compatibility is a commitment to obsolescence. ​​You started this sub-thread with: "If I understand correctly..." ​I'm not sure that you

Re: [HACKERS] Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0

2016-05-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On 05/13/2016 07:42 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 8:46 PM, Joshua Drake >> wrote: >> >>> Oh, absolutely. I was just pointing out how a lot of companies are >>>

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-05-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Michael Banck <mba...@debian.org> wrote: > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 05:31:00PM -0400, David G. Johnston wrote: > > The underlying premise, for me, of choosing .4 or .5 was that presently > we > > discontinue support after 5 years/releases.

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-05-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Mark Dilger wrote: > > Any project that starts inflating its numbering scheme sends a message to > users of the form, "hey, we've just been taken over by marketing people, > and > software quality will go down from now on." > ​Tom

[HACKERS] Keeping CURRENT_DATE and similar constructs in original format

2016-05-12 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thursday, May 12, 2016, Tom Lane > wrote: > > So what I've wanted to do for some time is invent a new expression node > type that represents any one of these functions and can be reverse-listed > in the same format that

Re: [HACKERS] Html parsing and inline elements

2016-04-29 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:57:19PM -0300, Marcelo Zabani wrote: > > Hi, Tom, > > > > You're right, I don't think one can argue that the default parser should > know > > HTML. > > How about your suggestion of there being an

Re: [HACKERS] Rename max_parallel_degree?

2016-05-02 Thread David G. Johnston
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > Of course, we could make this value 1-based rather than 0-based, as > Peter Geoghegan suggested a while back. But as I think I said at the > time, I think that's more misleading than helpful. The leader >

Re: [HACKERS] Rename max_parallel_degree?

2016-05-02 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:44 PM, David G. Johnston > <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Does this apply to the extent that a value of 1 is likely worse than 0 > since > > the leade

Re: [HACKERS] full table delete query

2016-05-03 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:51 AM, hari.prasath wrote: > Hi all, > How postgresql handles full table delete in terms of loading the > full table in these scenarios > > consider one big table(tablename: bigtable) > and the query will be >> delete from bigtable; > >

Re: [HACKERS] Pg_stop_backup process does not run - Backup Intervals

2016-05-03 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Rodrigo Cavalcante wrote: > Hi, > > On alternate days my backup is failing, by the pg_stop_backup process () > does not perform or quit. > > Version PostgreSQL: 9.1.6 > ​Reporting unusual behavior while running a years-old point release

Re: [HACKERS] Make PG's "NOT NULL"s and attnotnull ("is_nullable") conform to SQL-2011

2016-05-04 Thread David G. Johnston
On Monday, February 8, 2016, Vitaly Burovoy wrote: > > 12. At the same time in (subcl. 4.13) mentioned there can be "at least > one NNC" (may be via inheritance?). > > This is a bit hard to reason about given that our implementation of inheritance is non-standard. Are

Re: [HACKERS] Make PG's "NOT NULL"s and attnotnull ("is_nullable") conform to SQL-2011

2016-05-03 Thread David G. Johnston
Quick flyby here... On Tuesday, May 3, 2016, Tom Lane wrote: > Vitaly Burovoy > writes: > > On 4/27/16, Alvaro Herrera > > wrote: > >> Point 2 is where things differ from what I remember; my

Re: [HACKERS] force_parallel_mode uniqueness

2016-05-08 Thread David G. Johnston
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 11:42 PM, David G. Johnston > <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > All of the other planner GUCs are basically, {on, off, special} with on > or > > s

Re: [HACKERS] First-draft release notes for next week's back-branch releases

2016-05-08 Thread David G. Johnston
On Sunday, May 8, 2016, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > [ I think you meant to attach this to the other thread, but anyway... ] This is where the link to the online version was; reading the sgml and/or compiling ends up being a bit more than I wanted to do to review these. >

Re: [HACKERS] SET ROLE and reserved roles

2016-04-15 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Robert, > > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 6:53 PM, Stephen Frost > wrote: > > > Requiring that SET ROLE be allowed will mean that many more paths must > > >

Re: [HACKERS] [patch] \crosstabview documentation

2016-04-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Christoph Berg writes: > > Another thing about \crosstabview: > > > # select 1,2 \crosstabview > > The query must return at least two columns to be shown in crosstab > > > s/two/three/, I guess. > > Yeah, I

Re: [HACKERS] Query Procedures

2016-04-21 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Andrea Adami wrote: > > Hello, i'm a developer from italy and i need to make a query to get the > list of stored procedures with its signature. > Basically I would like to get the same list pgAdmin shows under the node > functions of the database

Re: [HACKERS] sign function with INTERVAL?

2016-04-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Daniel Lenski wrote: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Jim Nasby writes: > >> Actually, after looking at the code for interval_lt, all that needs to > >> happen to add this

Re: [HACKERS] SET ROLE and reserved roles

2016-04-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > > Stephen Frost writes: > > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2016, Tom Lane wrote: > > >> If you want to prevent that, I think it needs to be

Re: [HACKERS] 9.6 and fsync=off

2016-04-28 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thursday, April 28, 2016, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 27 April 2016 at 17:04, Craig Ringer > wrote: > >> On 27 April 2016 at 21:44, Tom Lane >

Re: [HACKERS] between not propated into a simple equality join

2016-05-09 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Benedikt Grundmann < bgrundm...@janestreet.com> wrote: > We just run into a very simple query that the planner does much worse on > than we thought it would (in production the table in question is ~ 100 > GB). It surprised us given the planner is generally quite

Re: [HACKERS] "pg_xxx" role name restriction not applied to bootstrap superuser?

2016-05-07 Thread David G. Johnston
On Saturday, May 7, 2016, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephen Frost > writes: > > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us ) wrote: > >> ... but I'm left with a policy question: should initdb disallow > >> bootstrap superuser names like "pg_xxx"? >

Re: [HACKERS] First-draft release notes for next week's back-branch releases

2016-05-07 Thread David G. Johnston
On Friday, May 6, 2016, Tom Lane wrote: > If you're not tired of reviewing release notes (I'm sure getting a bit > tired of writing them), see > > > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=eb7de00ac2d282263541ece849ec71e2809e9467 > > guaibasaurus

[HACKERS] force_parallel_mode uniqueness

2016-05-07 Thread David G. Johnston
My take below is that of a user reading our documentation and our projected consistency via that document. All of the other planner GUCs are basically, {on, off, special} with on or special the default as appropriate for the feature - since most/all features default to enabled. While I get that

Re: [HACKERS] Speaking of breaking compatibility...standard_conforming_strings

2016-05-24 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> writes: > > I just noticed this comment in scan.l: > > /* > > * GUC variables. This is a DIRECT violation of the warning given

Re: [HACKERS] Speaking of breaking compatibility...standard_conforming_strings

2016-05-24 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 4:07 PM, David G. Johnston < david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> writes: >> > I just noticed this

[HACKERS] Speaking of breaking compatibility...standard_conforming_strings

2016-05-24 Thread David G. Johnston
I just noticed this comment in scan.l: /* * GUC variables. This is a DIRECT violation of the warning given at the * head of gram.y, ie flex/bison code must not depend on any GUC variables; * as such, changing their values can induce very unintuitive behavior. * But we shall have to live with

Re: [HACKERS] pg_restore & search_path, COPY failed for table "mytable": ERROR: function myinnerfunction(integer) does not exist

2016-07-21 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Jean-Pierre Pelletier < jppellet...@e-djuster.com> wrote: > > I'm puzzled as to how search_path should be used,. > Should all references be schema qualified inside functions body ? > ​Pretty much...you can also do: CREATE FUNCTION funcname() SET search_path TO

Re: [HACKERS] Bug with plpgsql handling of NULL argument of compound type

2016-07-22 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > There is a rather squishy question as to whether NULL::composite_type > should be semantically equivalent to ROW(NULL,NULL,...)::composite_type. > If it is, then the SELECT should have failed before even getting into the >

Re: [HACKERS] Bug with plpgsql handling of NULL argument of compound type

2016-07-22 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 1:39 PM, David G. Johnston > <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >>

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: revert behavior of IS NULL on row types

2016-07-22 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Andrew Gierth wrote: > In light of the fact that it is an endless cause of bugs both in pg and > potentially to applications, I propose that we cease attempting to > conform to the spec's definition of IS NULL in favour of the

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: revert behavior of IS NULL on row types

2016-07-22 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Andrew Gierth <and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk> wrote: > >>>>> "David" == David G Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> writes: > > >> 2. x IS NOT NULL if and only if NOT (x IS NULL) > > David> ​I

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: revert behavior of IS NULL on row types

2016-07-22 Thread David G. Johnston
On Friday, July 22, 2016, Andrew Gierth <and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk> wrote: > >>>>> "David" == David G Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com > <javascript:;>> writes: > > >> Prohibiting IS NOT NULL is not on the cards; it's very wid

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14244: wrong suffix for pg_size_pretty()

2016-07-29 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 8:18 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 01:36:38PM +, thomas.ber...@1und1.de wrote: > > The following bug has been logged on the website: > > > > Bug reference: 14244 > > Logged by: Thomas Berger > > Email address:

Re: [HACKERS] No longer possible to query catalogs for index capabilities?

2016-08-01 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > >> Building on the has-property approach Andrew suggested, I wonder if > >> we need something like pg_index_column_has_property(indexoid,

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: revert behavior of IS NULL on row types

2016-07-26 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > 3. Andrew also revived the bug #7808 thread in which it was complained > that ExecMakeTableFunctionResult should not fail on null results from > functions returning SETOF composite. That's related only in that the >

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14244: wrong suffix for pg_size_pretty()

2016-07-30 Thread David G. Johnston
On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Greg Stark writes: > > I think Bruce's summary is a bit revisionist. > > I would say it's a tempest in a teapot. > > What I think we should do is accept "kb" and the rest case-insensitively, > print them all

Re: [HACKERS] Fwd: [BUGS] BUG #14247: COMMENT is restored on wrong database

2016-08-02 Thread David G. Johnston
Moving to -hackers since this is getting into details Bug Report # 14247 On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> writes: > > Do you have an opinion on this following? > >

Re: [HACKERS] New version numbering practices

2016-08-01 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Over the past couple of months I have already found myself > writing "10.0" or "9.7^H^H^H10" to make it clear that I meant the next > release version, because just "10" seemed too ambiguous. ​I thought that was just (and

Re: [HACKERS] Surprising behaviour of \set AUTOCOMMIT ON

2016-08-11 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:11 AM, Venkata Balaji N wrote: > > ​[...] > committing all the previously open transactions > ​[...] > "All"? ​There can only ever be at most one open transaction at any given time... I don't have a fundamental issue with saying "when turning

Re: [HACKERS] New version numbering practices

2016-08-03 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Greg Stark writes: > > Right now git-describe --tags on a random revision between 9.4 > > and 9.5 will print something like REL9_4_BETA1-1973-g85c25fd or > > something like REL9_5_BETA2-33-g55a2cc8 if it

Re: [HACKERS] New version numbering practices

2016-08-03 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Greg Stark wrote: > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > I thought we'd pretty much done that cleanup during the cvs->git > > conversion? > > I guess I'm talking about tags. I'm not clear on the distinction >

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

2016-08-04 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 12:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Noah Misch writes: > >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 02:28:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> +1, but let's put an entry on the 9.6

Re: [HACKERS] Surprising behaviour of \set AUTOCOMMIT ON

2016-08-12 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 8:34 AM, David G. Johnston > <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't have a fundamental issue with saying "when turning auto-commit on > > yo

Re: [HACKERS] unexpected psql "feature"

2016-07-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > >> I do not think changing this is appropriate. All you are likely to >> accomplish is breaking code that does what its author wanted. >> > > Hmmm... My 0.02€: Currently this feature is NOT documented, so somehow it >

Re: [HACKERS] unexpected psql "feature"

2016-07-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > Hello Tom, > > Although "\;" behavior is not documented, I would have expected both >>> results to be shown one after the other, or having a an error, but not a >>> quiet discard. >>> >> >> See the documentation for

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench - allow to store select results into variables

2016-07-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Fabien COELHO > wrote: > >> If someone thinks that "gset" is a good idea for pgbench, which I > don't, it > >> could be

Re: [HACKERS] unexpected psql "feature"

2016-07-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > I would suggest that: > - the \; psql feature should be documented somewhere > ​agreed ​ > - all results should be shown, not just the last one > disagree # select 1 ; select 2 ; ?column? -- 1 (1

Re: [HACKERS] Odd error when using UNION and COLLATE

2016-07-20 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:38 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I think the 'ORDER BY x COLLATE "C"' is being parsed as an a_expr, and > we don't allow a_expr in a UNION. Perhaps we are too strict here, but I > can't tell. > ​ORDER BY 1 COLLATE "C" is indeed an expression - the

Re: [HACKERS] to_date_valid()

2016-07-04 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum < adsm...@wars-nicht.de> wrote: > On 04.07.2016 18:37, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> >> I don't know if the name "strict" is best, but the name "validate" is >> not good too. Current to_date does some validations too. >> > > Obviously not

Re: [HACKERS] Typo Patch

2016-07-05 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 12:17 PM, CharSyam wrote: > > I fixed typos. and attached patch for this. > > Thanks. > > > > I only changed comments only in src/backend/utils/adt/tsvector_op.c > > Well,

Re: [HACKERS] to_date_valid()

2016-07-05 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum < adsm...@wars-nicht.de> wrote: > On 05.07.2016 04:33, David G. Johnston wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum >> <adsm...@wars-nicht.de <mailto:adsm...@wars-nicht.de>>wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] Fwd: [BUGS] BUG #14247: COMMENT is restored on wrong database

2016-08-04 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 5:42 PM, David G. Johnston > > <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The fact that pg_dump is emitting COMMENT

[HACKERS] Add hint for people who place EXECUTE USING arguments in parentheses (in plpgsql)

2016-08-05 Thread David G. Johnston
Basically, diff --git a/src/backend/parser/parse_param.c b/src/backend/parser/parse_param.c index b402843..97064fc 100644 --- a/src/backend/parser/parse_param.c +++ b/src/backend/parser/parse_param.c @@ -108,6 +108,9 @@ fixed_paramref_hook(ParseState *pstate, ParamRef *pref) ereport(ERROR,

[HACKERS] psql: Missing option to print current buffer to current output channel (i.e., \qprint)

2016-08-04 Thread David G. Johnston
"\echo" has "\qecho" - I'm basically looking for a "\qprint" "\write" doesn't apply The following doesn't work either... #bash (stock Ubuntu 14.04) psql --set=query_in_var='SELECT version();' > /dev/null <<'SQL' \o /tmp/psql-test.txt \set ECHO queries --still ends up on stdout, hence the

Re: [HACKERS] Surprising behaviour of \set AUTOCOMMIT ON

2016-08-08 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Rahila Syed > wrote: > > Thank you for inputs everyone. > > > > The opinions on this thread can be classified into following > > 1. Commit > > 2. Rollback > > 3.

[HACKERS] phrase search TS_phrase_execute code readability patch

2016-08-09 Thread David G. Johnston
Hackers, The attached attempts to make comprehension of the code in "TS_phrase_execute" a bit easier. I posted similar on the "typo patch" thread of July 2nd/5th but my comments there reflected my mis-understanding of the distance operator being exact as opposed to the expected

Re: [HACKERS] Strange behavior of some volatile function like random(), nextval()

2016-06-29 Thread David G. Johnston
More specifically... On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 7:34 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Alex Ignatov > wrote: > > Hello! > > > > Got some strange behavior of random() function: > > > > postgres=# select (select

[HACKERS] TLC for EXPLAIN ANALYZE (parallel query and loops)

2016-07-01 Thread David G. Johnston
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/using-explain.html Existing... 14.1.2 Explain Analyze [...] """ In some query plans, it is possible for a subplan node to be executed more than once. For example, the inner index scan will be executed once per outer row in the above nested-loop plan. In

Re: [HACKERS] Actuall row count of Parallel Seq Scan in EXPLAIN ANALYZE .

2016-07-01 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > >> QUERY PLAN > >> > >> >

Re: [HACKERS] Column COMMENTs in CREATE TABLE?

2016-07-02 Thread David G. Johnston
On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: > > What I would prefer is something like this: > > CREATE TABLE foo( > f1 int NOT NULL COMMENT > 'the first field', > f2 int NOT NULL COMMENT > 'the second field', > ... > ); > > which would ensure the comments are

Re: [HACKERS] Column COMMENTs in CREATE TABLE?

2016-07-02 Thread David G. Johnston
On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello < fabriziome...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Em sábado, 2 de julho de 2016, David G. Johnston < > david.g.johns...@gmail.com> escreveu: > >> On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Marko Tiikkaja <ma...@joh.to>

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

2016-06-20 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Joshua D. Drake > wrote: > > Or we could adopt the very reasonable and practical policy of: > > > > The current versioning scheme isn't broke, so we aren't going

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

2016-06-20 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:52 PM, David G. Johnston > <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Internal or external I do think the number and type of flags described > here, > >

Re: [HACKERS] anyelement -> anyrange

2016-08-16 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 8/15/16 10:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Jim Nasby writes: >> >>> Any reason why we can create a function that accepts anyelement and >>> returns anyarray, but can't do the same with

Re: [HACKERS] Idea on how to simplify comparing two sets

2017-02-07 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Joel Jacobson writes: > > Currently there is no simple way to check if two sets are equal. > > Uh ... maybe check whether SELECT set1 EXCEPT SELECT set2 > and SELECT set2 EXCEPT SELECT set1 are both empty? >

Re: [HACKERS] Idea on how to simplify comparing two sets

2017-02-08 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Fetter writes: > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:22:56AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Yes. I think a new set-operation keyword would inevitably have to > >> be fully reserved --- UNION, INTERSECT, and

Re: [HACKERS] pgbench more operators & functions

2017-01-24 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 2:03 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > I've got no objection to a more-nearly-TPC-B script as an option. >> > > Good, because adding a "per-spec" tpc-b as an additional builtin option is > one of my intentions, once pgbench is capable of it. ​Trying to

Re: [HACKERS] Superowners

2017-01-26 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thursday, January 26, 2017, Michael Banck wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 12:37:44PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 1/24/17 8:19 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > > What about just saying that the database owner has those privileges? > > > After all, the ultimate

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal

2017-01-26 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-01-26 14:28:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Andres Freund > wrote: > > >> Whether the voters recognized that fact at the time I would have to > concur > >

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal

2017-01-26 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-01-26 14:05:43 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > I completely understand that position. I have always been doubtful of > > the value of renaming pg_xlog to pg_wal, and I'm not any more > > dedicated to the idea now

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \G

2017-01-30 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > This particular bike-shedding really doesn't seem to be terribly useful > > or sensible, to me. \gx isn't "consistent" or "descriptive", frankly. > > Why not? To me it reads as

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \G

2017-01-30 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > Tom, > > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > > Stephen Frost writes: > > > This particular bike-shedding really doesn't seem to be terribly useful > > > or sensible, to me. \gx isn't

Re: [HACKERS] Query fails when SRFs are part of FROM clause (Commit id: 69f4b9c85f)

2017-01-27 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 5:28 AM, Rushabh Lathia wrote: > Consider the below test; > > CREATE TABLE tab ( a int primary key); > > SELECT * > FROM pg_constraint pc, > CAST(CASE WHEN pc.contype IN ('f','u','p') THEN generate_series(1, > array_upper(pc.conkey, 1)) ELSE

Re: [HACKERS] Query fails when SRFs are part of FROM clause (Commit id: 69f4b9c85f)

2017-01-27 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 3:13 PM, David G. Johnston < david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > In any case the more idiomatic way of writing your query these days (since > 9.4 came out) is: > > SELECT * > FROM pg_constraint pc > LEFT JOIN LATERAL generate_series(1, case whe

Re: [HACKERS] One-shot expanded output in psql using \G

2017-01-27 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > D'Arcy Cain wrote: > > > > > I am a pretty heavy user of psql but I don't think that that would be > so > > > helpful. I assume you mean a new option, let's call it

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal

2017-01-26 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > We decided s/pg_xlog/pg_wal/ was necessary because people lost their > data, and we couldn't come up with a reasonable way to change it without > the name. The tradeoff is dataloss vs. dealing with directory renaming >

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal

2017-01-26 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > I *personally* don't think it's worth > changing all this without taking more care about backward compat than > we're apparently willing to do. I'm ok with loosing that argument. I > just don't think the previous

Re: [HACKERS] gitlab post-mortem: pg_basebackup waiting for checkpoint

2017-02-17 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > What about adding a paragraph into pg_basebackup docs, explaining that > with 'fast' it does immediate checkpoint, while with 'spread' it'll wait > for a spread checkpoint. > I agree that a better, and

Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query

2017-02-23 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/02/24 8:38, Venkata B Nagothi wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > >> Upper bound of a range partition is an exclusive bound. A note was > added > >> recently to the

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

2017-02-23 Thread David G. Johnston
On Friday, February 24, 2017, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Amit Khandekar > wrote: > > I am inclined to at least have some option for the user to decide the > > behaviour. In the future we can even consider

Re: [HACKERS] Make subquery alias optional in FROM clause

2017-02-24 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 9:35 AM, David Fetter wrote: > > > => SELECT "?column"? FROM (select 1+1 as "?column?", 1+1) AS x; > > ERROR: 42703: column "?column" does not exist > > LINE 2: SELECT "?column"? FROM (select 1+1 as "?column?", 1+1) AS x; > >^ > > HINT:

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

2017-02-24 Thread David G. Johnston
On Friday, February 24, 2017, Simon Riggs wrote: > > 2. I know that DB2 handles this by having the user specify WITH ROW > MOVEMENT to explicitly indicate they accept the issue and want update > to work even with that. We could have an explicit option to allow > that. This

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

2017-02-25 Thread David G. Johnston
On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> wrote: > On 24 February 2017 at 14:57, David G. Johnston > <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I dislike an error. I'd say that making partition "just work" here is > > material f

Re: [HACKERS] Make subquery alias optional in FROM clause

2017-02-22 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Bernd Helmle writes: > >> From time to time, especially during migration projects from Oracle to > > PostgreSQL, i'm faced with people questioning why the alias in the FROM > > clause for subqueries in

Re: [HACKERS] Make subquery alias optional in FROM clause

2017-02-22 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Or else not generate > a name at all, in which case there simply wouldn't be a way to refer to > the subquery by name; I'm not sure what that might break though. > ​Yeah, usually when I want this I don't end up needing refer

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] Temporal query processing with range types

2017-02-15 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:32 AM, Peter Moser wrote: > >> Using common terms such as ALIGN and NORMALIZE for such a specific > >> functionality seems a bit wrong. > > > > Would ALIGN RANGES/RANGE

Re: [HACKERS] Undefined psql variables

2017-01-23 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Corey Huinker wrote: > I was giving some thought to how psql handles undefined variables. > > I would like an option where either psql can provide an alternate value > when an undefined variable is referenced, or a way to detect that a >

Re: [HACKERS] Undefined psql variables

2017-01-23 Thread David G. Johnston
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > [...] Obviously the \if stuff is things we don't have yet either, but it >>> seems less likely to have surprising side-effects. >>> >> > I agree, a more generic solution seems better than an ad-hoc one. > > Currently

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal

2017-02-09 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Magnus Hagander > wrote: > >>> Here is what I have, 6 votes clearly stated: > >>> 1. Rename nothing: Daniel, > >>> 2.

Re: [HACKERS] Implement targetlist SRFs using ROWS FROM() (was Changed SRF in targetlist handling)

2017-01-18 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > I'll try to write something about the SRF-in-CASE issue too. Seeing > > whether we can document that adequately seems like an important part > > of making the decision about whether we need to block it. > >

Re: [HACKERS] smallint out of range EXECUTEing prepared statement

2017-01-18 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote: > Is this expected behavior ? ​​ > > ts=# SELECT * FROM t WHERE site_id=32768 LIMIT 1; > (0 rows) > > ts=# PREPARE x AS SELECT * FROM t WHERE site_id=$1 LIMIT 1; > PREPARE > ts=# EXECUTE x(32768); > ERROR: smallint out

Re: [HACKERS] temporary table vs array performance

2016-09-26 Thread David G. Johnston
Its considered bad form to post to multiple lists. Please pick the most relevant one - in this case I'd suggest -general. On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 8:39 AM, dby...@163.com wrote: > > Array is not convenient to use in function, whether > there are other methods can be replaced

Re: [HACKERS] Mention column name in error messages

2016-11-04 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Paquier writes: > > I am passing that down to a committer for review. The patch looks > > large, but at 95% it involves diffs in the regression tests, > > alternative outputs taking a large

Re: [HACKERS] Multiple psql history files

2016-10-18 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jonathan Jacobson wrote: > The .psql_history file is naturally used by different DB connections > (distinguished by a different combination of host + port + database + user). > At least in my multi-database working environment, this leads

Re: [HACKERS] Multiple psql history files

2016-10-18 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jonathan Jacobson wrote: > The .psql_history file is naturally used by different DB connections > (distinguished by a different combination of host + port + database + user). > At least in my multi-database working environment, this leads

Re: [HACKERS] Multiple psql history files

2016-10-18 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> One interesting point, if you wish to cons

Re: [HACKERS] Multiple psql history files

2016-10-18 Thread David G. Johnston
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Jonathan Jacobson writes: > > The .psql_history file is naturally used by different DB connections > > (distinguished by a different combination of host + port + database + > user). > > At least in my

Re: [HACKERS] Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog

2016-10-20 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > I'm mostly with Stephen on this. As the names stand, they encourage > > people to go look at the documentation, > >

Re: [HACKERS] Move pg_largeobject to a different tablespace *without* turning on system_table_mods.

2016-10-19 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 04:51:54PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > > > 2. Being able to move pg_largeobject to a different tablespace > > >*without* turning on system_table_mods. This is important for > >

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >