Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit queryId?

On 03/10/17 04:02, Joshua D. Drake wrote: On 10/01/2017 04:22 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Greg Stark wrote: Well these kinds of monitoring systems tend to be used by operations people who are a lot more practical and a lot less worried about

Re: [HACKERS] Patches I'm thinking of pushing shortly

On 13/08/17 16:19, Thomas Munro wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 3:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote: [...] I'd vote for including this in v10. There doesn't seem to be any downside to this: it's a no brainer to avoid our exploding hash table case when we can see it coming. But

Re: [HACKERS] Why does logical replication launcher exit with exit code 1?

On 02/08/17 11:03, Andres Freund wrote: Hi, On 2017-08-02 10:58:32 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: When I shut down a cluster that isn't using logical replication, it always logs a line like the following. So do the build farm members I looked at. I didn't see anything about this in the open

Re: [HACKERS] Make ANALYZE more selective about what is a "most common value"?

On 06/06/17 10:12, Gavin Flower wrote: On 06/06/17 09:41, Mark Kirkwood wrote: On 05/06/17 09:30, Tom Lane wrote: I've been thinking about the behavior discussed in https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20170522132017.29944.48391%40wrigleys.postgresql.org and it seems to me

Re: [HACKERS] Make ANALYZE more selective about what is a "most common value"?

On 06/06/17 09:41, Mark Kirkwood wrote: On 05/06/17 09:30, Tom Lane wrote: I've been thinking about the behavior discussed in https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20170522132017.29944.48391%40wrigleys.postgresql.org and it seems to me that there are a couple of things we ought to do

Re: [HACKERS] password_encryption, default and 'plain' support

On 06/05/17 22:44, Vik Fearing wrote: On 05/05/2017 02:42 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: +This option is obsolete but still accepted for backwards +compatibility. Isn't that incorrect English? No. It seems to me that this be non-plural, as "for backward compatibility".

Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining

On 05/05/17 06:39, Tomas Vondra wrote: On 5/4/17 8:03 PM, Joe Conway wrote: On 05/04/2017 10:56 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 05/04/2017 01:52 PM, Joe Conway wrote: On 05/04/2017 10:33 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: I'm not sure what your point is. We know that for some cases the optimization

Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining

On 30/04/17 16:28, Tom Lane wrote: Craig Ringer writes: - as you noted, it is hard to decide when it's worth inlining vs materializing for CTE terms referenced more than once. [ raised eyebrow... ] Please explain why the answer isn't trivially "never". There's

Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining

On 04/05/17 05:33, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > David Fetter wrote: > >> When we add a "temporary" GUC, we're taking on a gigantic burden. >> Either we support it forever somehow, or we put it on a deprecation >> schedule immediately and expect to be answering questions about it for >> years after

Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining

On 04/05/17 05:33, Alvaro Herrera wrote: David Fetter wrote: When we add a "temporary" GUC, we're taking on a gigantic burden. Either we support it forever somehow, or we put it on a deprecation schedule immediately and expect to be answering questions about it for years after it's been

Re: [HACKERS] Cutting initdb's runtime (Perl question embedded)

On 15/04/17 13:44, Andreas Karlsson wrote: On 04/14/2017 11:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I failed to resist the temptation to poke at this, and found that indeed nothing seems to break if we just use one transaction for the whole processing of postgres.bki. So I've pushed a patch that does that.

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Index Scans

On 07/03/17 02:46, Amit Kapila wrote: On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: I was going to do it after index and index-only scans and parallel bitmap heap scan were committed, but

Re: [HACKERS] case_preservation_and_insensitivity = on

On 25/02/17 09:02, Jim Nasby wrote: On 2/24/17 12:28 AM, Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I think these are straw-man arguments, really. Consider the actual use case for such a feature: it's for porting some application that was not

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: EXPLAIN ANALYZE formatting

On 29/01/17 05:31, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2017-01-28 17:09 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane >: Pavel Stehule > writes: > Now EXPLAIN ANALYZE produce too wide rows for usage in presentations

Re: [HACKERS] RustgreSQL

On 09/01/17 11:31, Michael Paquier wrote: On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 6:51 AM, Jan de Visser wrote: Your fear of C in unfounded. The definitive c89 reference is a little book of about 250 pages, more than half of which is about the standard library of which you'll never use more

Re: [HACKERS] RustgreSQL

On 08/01/17 22:09, Joel Jacobson wrote: Hi all, Is anyone working on porting PostgreSQL to Rust? Corrode looks a bit limited for the task, but maybe it can be a start. It doesn't support goto or switch, but maybe the gotos patterns are not too complicated. My motivation is primarily I don't

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level.

On 05/12/16 17:00, Mithun Cy wrote: [...] errorMessage even outside PQconnectPoll. But that seems not required. Attacting the new patch which fixes the same. -- Thanks and Regards Mithun C Y EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com [...] Is that meant to be

Re: [HACKERS] emergency outage requiring database restart

On 18/10/16 14:12, Michael Paquier wrote: On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Merlin Moncure wrote: We had several good backups since the previous outage so it's not clear the events are related but after months of smooth operation I find that

Re: [HACKERS] multivariate statistics (v19)

On 04/10/16 20:37, Dean Rasheed wrote: On 4 October 2016 at 04:25, Michael Paquier wrote: OK. A second thing was related to the use of schemas in the new system catalogs. As mentioned in [1], those could be removed. [1]:

Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq

On 04/10/16 20:15, Michael Paquier wrote: On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Daniel Verite wrote: Wouldn't pgbench benefit from it? It was mentioned some time ago [1], in relationship to the \into construct, how client-server latency was important enough to justify the

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

On 15/09/16 03:45, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Thomas Berger wrote: Today, i found the time to read all the mails in this thread, and i think i have to explain, why we decided to open a bug for this behavior. Pn Tuesday, 23. August 2016,

Re: [HACKERS] Tuplesort merge pre-reading

On 12/09/16 12:16, Gavin Flower wrote: [...] two blocks would be logically adjacent (which means they are likely to be physically close together, but not guaranteed!). [...] Actual disk layouts are quite complicated, the above is an over simplification, but the message is still valid

Re: [HACKERS] Tuplesort merge pre-reading

On 12/09/16 10:13, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: [...] I don't know what the difference is between accessing 10 pages randomly, and accessing a random set of 10 single pages sequentially, in close succession. As Tom would

Re: [HACKERS] Long options for pg_ctl waiting

On 08/09/16 09:08, Vik Fearing wrote: On 09/07/2016 10:41 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Gavin Flower wrote: possibly '--nosync' (& any similar) should have a '--no-sync' variation added, with the '--nosync' variation documented as depreciated? I agree -- I would go as far as just documen

Re: [HACKERS] Long options for pg_ctl waiting

On 08/09/16 07:31, Robert Haas wrote: On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Vik Fearing wrote: One thing that has been irking me ever since I came to PostgreSQL is the fact that pg_ctl -w (and

Re: [HACKERS] sequence data type

On 04/09/16 06:41, Vik Fearing wrote: On 08/31/2016 06:22 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Here is a patch that adds the notion of a data type to a sequence. So it might be CREATE SEQUENCE foo AS integer. The types are restricted to int{2,4,8} as now. This patch does not apply cleanly to current

Re: [HACKERS] System load consideration before spawning parallel workers

On 02/09/16 05:01, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 8/16/16 3:39 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: [...] All of this seems very platform specific, too. You have Windows-specific code, but the rest seems very Linux-specific. The dstat tool I had never heard of before. There is stuff with cgroups, which I

Re: [HACKERS] System load consideration before spawning parallel workers

On 02/09/16 04:44, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 8/1/16 2:17 AM, Gavin Flower wrote: Possibly look how make does it with the '-l' flag? '-l 8' don't start more process when load is 8 or greater, works on Linux at least... The problem with that approach is that it takes about a minute

Re: [HACKERS] Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog

On 27/08/16 20:33, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Andres Freund wrote: On 2016-08-26 17:31:14 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I agree with all that. But the subject line is specifically about moving pg_xlog. So if your opinion is that we shouldn't

Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size

On 26/08/16 05:43, Josh Berkus wrote: On 08/25/2016 01:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote: I agree that #4 is best. I'm not sure it's worth the cost. I'm not worried at all about the risk of master/slave sync thing, per previous statement. But if it does have performance implications, per Andres

Re: [HACKERS] New SQL counter statistics view (pg_stat_sql)

On 24/08/16 12:02, neha khatri wrote: >Andres Freund > writes: >> On 2016-08-22 13:54:43 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Tom Lane > wrote: I'm inclined to suggest

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

On 23/08/16 09:40, Andres Freund wrote: Hi, as noted in [1] I started hacking on removing the current implementation of SRFs in the targetlist (tSRFs henceforth). IM discussion brought the need for a description of the problem, need and approach to light. There are several reasons for wanting

Re: [HACKERS] New SQL counter statistics view (pg_stat_sql)

On 23/08/16 08:27, Tom Lane wrote: Andres Freund writes: On 2016-08-22 13:54:43 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Tom Lane wrote: I'm inclined to suggest you forget this approach and propose a single counter for "SQL commands

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] C++ port of Postgres

On 17/08/16 23:40, Aleksander Alekseev wrote: I'm sure this wasn't your intent, but the tone of your response is part of why people don't get involved with Postgres development... Please note that you're the only person in the entire thread that's said anything to the effect of a holy war...

Re: [HACKERS] Why --backup-and-modify-in-place in perltidy config?

On 16/08/16 16:19, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 08/15/2016 02:23 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: On 08/15/2016 10:19 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: We should probably specify -bext='/', which would cause the backup files to be

Re: [HACKERS] System load consideration before spawning parallel workers

On 01/08/16 18:08, Haribabu Kommi wrote: On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: we observed that spawning the specified number of parallel workers for every query that

Re: [HACKERS] \timing interval

On 10/07/16 12:08, Andrew Gierth wrote: "Gavin" == Gavin Flower <gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz> writes: >> How about >> >> Time: 1234567.666 ms (20m 34.6s) Gavin> I like that, but I think the human form should retain the 3 Gavin> decimal places

Re: [HACKERS] \timing interval

On 10/07/16 08:00, Andrew Gierth wrote: "Tom" == Tom Lane writes: > Peter Eisentraut writes: >> I'm not quite sure what you mean by wanting to do arithmetic on the >> numbers. My phrasing of the problem is that after a long query,

Re: [HACKERS] MVCC overheads

Please see comment at the bottom of this post. On 08/07/16 10:48, Pete Stevenson wrote: Good info, thanks for the note. Agreed that it is difficult to pull things apart to isolate these features for offload — so actually running experiments with offload is not possible, as you point out (and

Re: [HACKERS] to_date_valid()

On 04/07/16 15:19, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2016-07-04 4:25 GMT+02:00 Craig Ringer >: On 3 July 2016 at 09:32, Euler Taveira > wrote: On 02-07-2016 22

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

On 21/06/16 03:53, Mark Dilger wrote: On Jun 18, 2016, at 5:48 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: On 06/16/2016 11:01 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: I thought about raising this, but I think in the end it's replacing one confusing and weird versioning scheme for another confusing and weird

Re: [HACKERS] Bug in to_timestamp().

On 25/06/16 08:33, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Steve Crawford wrote: My observation has been that the PostgreSQL development group aims for correctness and the elimination of surprising results. This was part of the reason to eliminate a

Re: [HACKERS] Does people favor to have matrix data type?

On 31/05/16 12:01, Kouhei Kaigai wrote: On 05/29/2016 04:55 PM, Kouhei Kaigai wrote: For the closer integration, it may be valuable if PL/R and PL/CUDA can exchange the data structure with no serialization/de-serialization when PL/R code tries to call SQL functions. I had been thinking about

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add EXPLAIN (ALL) shorthand

On 20/05/16 10:11, David G. Johnston wrote: [...] EXPAIN ABCTV (might need permission to document this variation though) What has an Australian Broadcast Corporation Television got to do with this??? :-) [...] -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make

Re: [HACKERS] Reviewing freeze map code

On 18/05/16 09:34, Vik Fearing wrote: On 17/05/16 21:32, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Is SCAN_ALL really the best we can do here? The business of having an underscore in an option name has no precedent (other than CURRENT_DATABASE and the like). ALTER DATABASE has options for ALLOW_CONNECTIONS,

Re: [HACKERS] 10.0

On 14/05/16 09:31, David G. Johnston wrote: On Friday, May 13, 2016, Tom Lane > wrote: Robert Haas > writes: > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Tom Lane > wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] Academic help for Postgres

On 12/05/16 02:20, Bruce Momjian wrote: I am giving a keynote at an IEEE database conference in Helsinki next week (http://icde2016.fi/). (Yes, I am not attending PGCon Ottawa because I accepted the Helsinki conference invitation before the PGCon Ottawa date was changed from June to May). As

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

On 09/05/16 10:22, Tom Lane wrote: Gavin Flower <gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz> writes: On 09/05/16 08:56, Tom Lane wrote: Hmm, "which see" is perfectly good English to my knowledge, and I'm not sure that other possible ways of wording this would be less awkward. To me the p

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

On 09/05/16 08:56, Tom Lane wrote: [ I think you meant to attach this to the other thread, but anyway... ] "David G. Johnston" writes: "...replacement_sort_tuples, which see for further details." needs rewording. Hmm, "which see" is perfectly good English to my

Re: [HACKERS] Naming of new tsvector functions

On 06/05/16 07:44, Tom Lane wrote: Stas Kelvich writes: On 04 May 2016, at 20:15, Tom Lane wrote: Also, I'd supposed that we'd rename to tsvector_something, since the same patch also introduced tsvector_to_array() and array_to_tsvector(). What's

Re: [HACKERS] Naming of new tsvector functions

On 05/05/16 21:20, Stas Kelvich wrote: On 04 May 2016, at 20:15, Tom Lane wrote: Stas Kelvich writes: On 04 May 2016, at 16:58, Tom Lane wrote: The other ones are not so problematic because they do not conflict with SQL

Re: [HACKERS] Rename max_parallel_degree?

On 26/04/16 06:38, Joshua D. Drake wrote: On 04/25/2016 09:04 AM, Robert Haas wrote: On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: max_parallel_nodes I hope you are trolling me. Actually I wasn't. It is usually a little more obvious when I troll,

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

On 22/04/16 17:36, Amit Kapila wrote: On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Gavin Flower <gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz <mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>> wrote: On 22/04/16 06:07, Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

On 23/04/16 00:56, Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Gavin Flower <gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz> wrote: Why not 4? As most processors n

Re: [HACKERS] max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta

On 22/04/16 06:07, Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Robert Haas writes: On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Andres Freund writes: max_parallel_degree

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest

On 09/04/16 02:58, Magnus Hagander wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Robert Haas > wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:06 AM, David Steele > wrote: > On 4/8/16 10:00 AM, Tom Lane

Re: [HACKERS] Alter or rename enum value

On 26/03/16 08:17, Jim Nasby wrote: On 3/24/16 10:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote: It's conceivable that we could do something like adding an "isdead" column to pg_enum and making enum_in reject new values that're marked isdead. But I can't see that we'd ever be able to support true removal of an enum

Re: [HACKERS] Make primnodes.h gender neutral

On 18/03/16 09:41, Joshua D. Drake wrote: On 03/17/2016 01:36 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: [...] (*) I'm probably going to be expelled from the project for saying this, but I very much doubt that female coders stay away from PostgreSQL just because some files say "he" in comments rather than

Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: RETURNING primary_key()

On 12/03/16 23:27, Michael Paquier wrote: On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:28 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: On 11 March 2016 at 03:07, Igal @ Lucee.org wrote: I noticed that you usually don't put html in the emails here, but I think that it's appropriate here to

Re: [HACKERS] Add generate_series(date,date) and generate_series(date,date,integer)

On 11/03/16 08:48, Igal @ Lucee.org wrote: On 3/10/2016 11:44 AM, Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: But I still don't know "meh" means. Maybe this helps? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meh LOL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOL

Re: [HACKERS] 2016-03 Commitfest Manager

On 02/03/16 17:01, Michael Paquier wrote: On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:25 AM, David Steele wrote: Agreed. I see you created the new CF so no reason to keep it open. OK. Done. May the force to manage all those patches be with you, manager. May the Source be with you

Re: [HACKERS] Figures in docs

On 18/02/16 10:38, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 2/16/16 8:17 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: It seems there's no figures/diagrams in our docs. I vaguely recall that we used to have a few diagrams in our docs. If so, was there any technical reason to remove them? Because no one has been able to propose a

Re: [HACKERS] Releasing in September

On 21/01/16 06:40, Tom Lane wrote: Magnus Hagander writes: That's pretty much what I suggested :) Except that we need to do it for the last one as well. With the only exception that the last one might be a bit longer. But the fact is that the recent of CFs *and* releases,

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: multivariate statistics / proof of concept

On 12/12/14 05:53, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: On 10/13/2014 01:00 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: Hi, attached is a WIP patch implementing multivariate statistics. Great! Really glad to see you working on this. + * FIXME This sample sizing is mostly OK when computing stats for + *

Re: [HACKERS] Truncation of identifiers

On 14/01/16 13:05, Tom Lane wrote: Thomas Munro writes: Wouldn't it be better to raise an error when identifiers are too long, rather than accepting but truncating them? I wouldn't think so. I'm not aware of any other database that does this. It's standard

Re: [HACKERS] Commit fest status for 2015-11

On 25/12/15 01:45, Michael Paquier wrote: [...] And the CF is no closed. Here is the final score: Committed: 30. Moved to next CF: 42. Rejected: 9. Returned with Feedback: 22. Total: 103. Regards, You didn't say how may regards... [More seriously] Many thanks to you, and the other Postgres

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Equivalence Class Filters

On 08/12/15 05:27, David G. Johnston wrote: On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Jim Nasby >wrote: On 12/6/15 10:38 AM, Tom Lane wrote: I said "in most cases". You can find example cases to support almost any

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Equivalence Class Filters

On 08/12/15 08:34, Evgeniy Shishkin wrote: On 07 Dec 2015, at 22:27, Gavin Flower <gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz> wrote: On 08/12/15 05:27, David G. Johnston wrote: On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com <mailto:jim.na...@bluetreble.com>>wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] custom function for converting human readable sizes to bytes

On 24/11/15 06:31, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2015-11-23 18:04 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane >: Jim Nasby writes: > On 11/23/15 3:11 AM, Corey Huinker wrote: >> +1 to both pg_size_bytes() and ::bytesize. Both contribute to

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

On 16/11/15 12:05, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Thom Brown wrote: And perhaps associated PIDs? Yeah, that can be useful, if others also feel like it is important, I can look into preparing a patch for the same. Thanks. Thom, what do you think the

Re: [HACKERS] can we add SKIP LOCKED to UPDATE?

On 12/11/15 13:52, Greg Stark wrote: On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 6:57 PM, Gavin Flower <gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz> wrote: Don't you realize that 400MB is over 4 million of the old 100Kb floppy disks, and even with the new big 1.44MB 3.5 " disks, you'd need about 280!!! Don't be

Re: [HACKERS] can we add SKIP LOCKED to UPDATE?

On 12/11/15 02:07, Craig Ringer wrote: On 11 November 2015 at 16:02, Torsten Zühlsdorff > wrote: From my experience most databases are just tpo small. Their operations finish before there can be a deadlock. Same for

Re: [HACKERS] Erroneous cost estimation for nested loop join

On 09/11/15 23:08, kawami...@tkl.iis.u-tokyo.ac.jp wrote: Hi guys, I’ve been using Postgres for research at an university, Great! [...] ・Postgres 9.4.1 [..] More knowledgeable people are sure to reply in more detail! However, they would probably appreciate it if you can run with 9.4.5

Re: [HACKERS] patch for geqo tweaks

On 07/11/15 09:59, Nathan Wagner wrote: [...] My day to make a fool of myself in public I guess. You're right of course. I can only plead distraction by having too many projects in mind at once and not focusing properly. Sorry for taking up your time on things I should have checked better.

Re: [HACKERS] fortnight interval support

On 02/11/15 07:06, Tom Lane wrote: David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> writes: On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 07:30:13PM +, Nathan Wagner wrote: On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 08:17:25AM +1300, Gavin Flower wrote: I had actually written: > You trying to get PostgreSQL banned in France??? &

Re: [HACKERS] fortnight interval support

On 28/10/15 02:52, Nathan Wagner wrote: On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 01:58:52PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: Aw, you're no fun. select '1 fortnight'::interval => '14 days' would be cool. Patch attached... :) [...] You trying to get PostgreSQL banned in France??? :-) When I was learning French

Re: [HACKERS] questions about PG update performance

On 27/10/15 11:37, Jim Nasby wrote: On 10/25/15 9:36 PM, Kisung Kim wrote: I want to explain for our clients that PG's update performance is comparable to Oracle's. There's really only 2 ways you can answer that. You can either handwave the question away ("Yes, update performance is

Re: [HACKERS] Release of CVEs

On 14/10/15 18:19, Tom Lane wrote: I wrote: Michael Paquier writes: On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Josh Berkus wrote: I don't know that there's anything the PostgreSQL project can do about it. If anyone on this list is connected with MITRE, please ask them what

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 29/09/15 11:54, Joshua D. Drake wrote: On 09/28/2015 03:40 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Now, running gitlab on community-owned hardware would potentially be an option, if we find gitlab attractive from a functionality standpoint. The question I'd have about that is whether it

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Use gender-neutral language in documentation

An example from a book on PostgreSQL server programming that I'm working through (Note that it is obviously awkward to write with gender pronouns when gender is irrelevant, note the "he she" in one place and "he/she" in another!): "If the user is a superuser, then he she has permission

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Use gender-neutral language in documentation

On 24/09/15 22:41, Geoff Winkless wrote: On 24 September 2015 at 11:33, Gavin Flower <gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz <mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>>wrote: An example from a book on PostgreSQL server programming that I'm working through (Note that it is obvio

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Use gender-neutral language in documentation

On 23/09/15 08:17, Christopher Browne wrote: [...] "The user should do [something]; he or she or it, or the cis/trans/asexual personage or connection used by a web application, whether written in C, Java, Perl, PHP, running on Windows or Unix or ..." as the increasing inclusions heads to some

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Use gender-neutral language in documentation

On 22/09/15 21:33, Geoff Winkless wrote: On 22 September 2015 at 09:28, Albe Laurenz >wrote: Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Erik Rijkers > wrote: >> I

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Use gender-neutral language in documentation

On 22/09/15 22:17, Geoff Winkless wrote: On 22 September 2015 at 10:52, Gavin Flower <gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz <mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>>wrote: On 22/09/15 21:33, Geoff Winkless wrote: ​ ​ Without wanting to get into a grammar war, ​I'm n

Re: [HACKERS][PROPOSAL] Covering + unique indexes.

On 15/09/15 09:44, Jim Nasby wrote: On 9/14/15 1:50 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: CREATE [UNIQUE {ON FIRST {COLUMN | n_unique_column COLUMNS}} INDEX ON table_name (column_name1, column_name2 ...); I would use the first (simple) syntax and just throw an

Re: [HACKERS] Freeze avoidance of very large table.

On 04/09/15 12:11, Bruce Momjian wrote: On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:37:09PM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: I don't understand. I'm just proposing that the source code for the extension to live in src/extensions/, and have the shared library installed by toplevel make install; I'm not suggesting

Re: [HACKERS] Our trial to TPC-DS but optimizer made unreasonable plan

On 27/08/15 13:36, Kouhei Kaigai wrote: [...] My measurement is done on v9.5 based system. So, it also seems to me replacement of CHAR(n) by VARCHAR(n) will make sense. Is there any reason to not simply use text instead of CHAR(n) or VARCHAR(n)? [...] -Gavin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] [RFC] allow 'semester' in functions EXTRACT, DATE_PART, TO_CHAR and so on.

On 15/08/15 11:58, Dickson S. Guedes wrote: Hello hackers, * Description This patch is a proposal to allow the use of word 'semester' to extract it from date in functions like EXTRACT, DATE_PART, etc and adds the letter 'S' to format the date output in to_char. ** Example SELECT

Re: [HACKERS] [RFC] allow 'semester' in functions EXTRACT, DATE_PART, TO_CHAR and so on.

On 15/08/15 13:06, Dickson S. Guedes wrote: 2015-08-14 21:32 GMT-03:00 Gavin Flower gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz: ... So semesters don't appear to align with normal half year boundaries. Interesting links, thanks! Which sounds better for a native English: 'half', 'halfyear'? For example

Re: [HACKERS] 9.5 release notes

On 08/08/15 06:43, Bruce Momjian wrote: On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:53:30AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: [...] Well, we could just throw a Postgres 9.5 is faster release note item in there and call it a day. ;-) Nah! Just say it is Much Shinier, I'll buy it. Unfortunately, we have to have much

Re: [HACKERS] 64-bit XIDs again

On 31/07/15 02:24, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: On 07/30/2015 04:26 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: Also, I think it's possible to migrate to 64-bit XIDs without breaking pg_upgrade. Old tuples can be leaved with 32-bit XIDs while new tuples would be created with 64-bit XIDs. We can use free bits in

Re: [HACKERS] Alpha2/Beta1

On 22/07/15 09:01, Josh Berkus wrote: [...] My question for Hackers is: should this be Alpha2 or Beta 1? Yes! :-) (The decision, as to which, I'll leave to the REAL Developers.) More seriously, I expect that the alpha probably generated a lot of useful feedback. Was this actually the

Re: [HACKERS] Implementation of global temporary tables?

On 20/07/15 15:00, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2015-07-19 21:39 GMT+02:00 Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com mailto:j...@agliodbs.com: Pavel, All: Just to be clear, the idea of a global temp table is that the table def is available to all users, but the data is private to each session?

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Seq Scan

On 01/07/15 17:37, Amit Kapila wrote: On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 4:00 AM, Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com mailto:pg...@j-davis.com wrote: [Jumping in without catching up on entire thread. [...] . 2. Where is the speedup coming from? How much of it is CPU and IO overlapping (i.e. not leaving

Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] Restore-reliability mode

On 09/06/15 00:59, David Gould wrote: I think Alphas are valuable and useful and even more so if they have release notes. For example, some of my clients are capable of fetching sources and building from scratch and filing bug reports and are often interested in particular new features. They

Re: [HACKERS] [CORE] Restore-reliability mode

On 06/06/15 21:07, Simon Riggs wrote: On 5 June 2015 at 17:20, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com mailto:alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: On 5 June 2015 at 15:00, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Stamping it a beta

Re: [HACKERS] Is it possible to have a fast-write Index?

On 06/06/15 04:07, deavid wrote: There are several use cases where I see useful an index, but adding it will slow too much inserts and updates. For example, when we have 10 million rows on a table, and it's a table which has frequent updates, we need several index to speed up selects, but then

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade resets timeline to 1

On 29/05/15 12:59, Noah Misch wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 05:26:56PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote: Re: Noah Misch 2015-05-28 20150528150234.ga4111...@tornado.leadboat.com To clarify for the archives, the 2015-05-16 changes did not revert to 9.3 and earlier behavior. Rather, they

Re: [HACKERS] Problems with question marks in operators (JDBC, ECPG, ...)

On 20/05/15 07:37, Jan de Visser wrote: On May 19, 2015 07:04:56 PM Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: Bruno Harbulot asked for a devil's advocate by saying: My main point was that this is not specific to JDBC. Considering that even PostgreSQL's own ECPG is affected, the issue goes probably deeper

Re: [HACKERS] Triaging the remaining open commitfest items

On 15/05/15 10:58, Bruce Momjian wrote: On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:57:24PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes: * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: I will call for a vote that the freeze deadline be changed if this patch is rejected to due to time. I might

  1   2   3   >