Re: [HACKERS] psql - add ability to test whether a variable exists

Correct Fabien. I have already removed myself as a reviewer. Thanks. - robins | mobile On 20 Sep. 2017 5:13 pm, "Fabien COELHO" wrote: > > Hello Robins, > > I was able to test the functionality (which seemed to work fine) and fed in >> my comment to assist anyone else

Re: [HACKERS] psql - add ability to test whether a variable exists

I was able to test the functionality (which seemed to work fine) and fed in my comment to assist anyone else reviewing this patch (and intentionally let it's state as 'Needs Review'). While trying to provide my feedback, on hindsight I should have been more detailed about what I didn't test.

Re: [HACKERS] psql - add ability to test whether a variable exists

Hi Fabien, I was able to test the functionality (which seemed to work fine) and fed in my comment to assist anyone else reviewing this patch (and intentionally let it's state as 'Needs Review'). While trying to provide my feedback, on hindsight I should have been more detailed about what I

Re: [HACKERS] psql - add ability to test whether a variable exists

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: not tested Implements feature: tested, failed Spec compliant: not tested Documentation:tested, failed The patch applies cleanly and compiles + installs fine (although am

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add --no-comments to skip COMMENTs with pg_dump

On 20 July 2017 at 05:08, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 8:59 PM, > ​​ > Fabrízio de Royes Mello > > You should add the properly sgml docs for this pg_dumpall change also. > > Tests of pg_dump go to src/bin/pg_dump/t/ and tests for objects in >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add --no-comments to skip COMMENTs with pg_dump

On 18 July 2017 at 23:55, David Fetter wrote: > > Excellent point about pg_dumpall. I'll see what I can draft up in the > next day or two and report back. ​Hi David, You may want to consider this patch (attached) which additionally has the pg_dumpall changes. It would be

[HACKERS] Patch: Add --no-comments to skip COMMENTs with pg_dump

Hi, Attached is a patch adds a --no-comments argument to pg_dump to skip generation of COMMENT statements when generating a backup. This is crucial for non-superusers to restore a database backup in a Single Transaction. Currently, this requires one to remove COMMENTs via scripts, which is

Re: [HACKERS] Allow pg_dumpall to work without pg_authid

On 5 March 2017 at 18:00, Simon Riggs wrote: > I'm looking to commit the patch version I posted, so I would like your > comments that it does continue to solve the problems you raised. > ​Thanks Simon, for confirming. Yes, the updated patch does solve the problem.​ -

Re: [HACKERS] Allow pg_dumpall to work without pg_authid

On 26 February 2017 at 21:37, Robert Haas wrote: > > How's that not a bug? I mean, it's reasonable for someone to want to > restrict the superuser in a cloud environment, but if they restrict it > so much that you can't take a backup with standard tools, I'd say they >

Re: [HACKERS] Allow pg_dumpall to work without pg_authid

On 26 February 2017 at 19:26, Robert Haas wrote: ​​ > I am a little surprised that this patch has gotten such a good > reception. We haven't in the past been all that willing to accept > core changes for the benefit of forks of PostgreSQL; extensions, sure, > but forks?

Re: [HACKERS] Allow pg_dumpall to work without pg_authid

Stephen, On 20 February 2017 at 08:50, Stephen Frost wrote: > The other changes to use pg_roles instead of pg_authid when rolpassword > isn't being used look like they should just be changed to use pg_roles > instead of using one or the other. That should be an independent

Re: [HACKERS] Allow pg_dumpall to work without pg_authid

On 19 February 2017 at 17:02, Robins Tharakan <thara...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 19 Feb 2017 at 10:08 Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > >> If anything, it should use pg_roles, not pg_user. >> >> I don't really like the "--avoid-pga

Re: [HACKERS] Allow pg_dumpall to work without pg_authid

On Sun, 19 Feb 2017 at 10:08 Stephen Frost wrote: > If anything, it should use pg_roles, not pg_user. > > I don't really like the "--avoid-pgauthid" option, but "--no-passwords" > would probably work. > > Am sorry, I meant pg_roles (FWIW, the github URL given earlier uses

[HACKERS] Allow pg_dumpall to work without pg_authid

weeks old): https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/552f4d92fde9518f934447e032b8ffcc945f12d9 Thanks Robins Tharakan http://www.thatguyfromdelhi.com/2016/12/custom-pgdumpall-now-works-with-aws.html -- - robins

Re: [HACKERS] High-CPU consumption on information_schema (only) query

> > > Without having at least compared EXPLAIN outputs from the two boxes, you > have no business jumping to that conclusion. > > If EXPLAIN does show different plans, my first instinct would be to wonder > whether the pg_stats data is equally up-to-date on both boxes. > >

Re: [HACKERS] High-CPU consumption on information_schema (only) query

On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 at 09:39 Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On 2016-09-07 23:37:31 +0000, Robins Tharakan wrote: > > If someone asks for I could provide SQL + EXPLAIN, but it feels > irrelevant > > here. > > Why is that? information_schema are normal

[HACKERS] High-CPU consumption on information_schema (only) query

Hi, An SQL (with only information_schema related JOINS) when triggered, runs with max CPU (and never ends - killed after 2 days). - It runs similarly (very slow) on a replicated server that acts as a read-only slave. - Top shows only postgres as hitting max CPU (nothing else). When query killed,

Re: [HACKERS] Accurate list of Keywords / Datatypes?

On 8 May 2016 at 07:38, Euler Taveira wrote: > src/include/parser/kwlist.h ​Thanks Everyone. Kwlist.h got me going as to where to look, but I had to improvise (quite) a bit. Any and all advice about any other authoritative lists (like kwlist.h) would be a big help, since

[HACKERS] Accurate list of Keywords / Datatypes?

Hi, While creating a Syntax Highlighting XML for Notepad++ (something like a PLSQL one here http://goo.gl/UBbHdt ), I was looking for a list of Keywords (& separately list of Datatypes) that Postgres uses in a given version (Say DEVEL branch). I did find the Reserved Keyword list (

Re: [HACKERS] Pgbench with -f and -S

Got it. Thanks for explaining that. Was looking at -S earlier and didn't notice the new -b and @ weight options in 9.6devel. On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 at 10:54 Fabien COELHO wrote: > > >> For the future 9.6, scripts options are cumulatives, so -f & -S can be > >> combined. > >> >

Re: [HACKERS] Pgbench with -f and -S

On 17 April 2016 at 21:24, Fabien COELHO wrote: > For the future 9.6, scripts options are cumulatives, so -f & -S can be > combined. > > Indeed, for the <= 9.5 it seems that some options are silently ignores, > when combining -S/-f, only the last one is kept, it should be

[HACKERS] Pgbench with -f and -S

Hi, Pgbench allows -f and -S combinations together where the doc says that -S effectively uses the internal select-only script. Is it okay to assume that -f is disregarded here? Or are they run in round-robin fashion (although then, how does it know which read-only part of my script to run?) or

[HACKERS] Per row status during INSERT .. ON CONFLICT UPDATE?

Hi, Is there a way to know which rows were INSERTed and UPDATEd when doing a INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE? Probably via pseudo column indicating INSERT / UPDATE ? The RETURNING clause just allows us to return columns, but am unable to find a way to know 'what' happened to a given row. ​Any

Re: [HACKERS] Per row status during INSERT .. ON CONFLICT UPDATE?

use-case, so we may need more people requesting this magic field, with a valid use-case. -- Robins Tharakan

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to add regression tests for SCHEMA

make -j3 check Do let me know if something is still amiss. -- Robins Tharakan

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to add regression tests for SCHEMA

../regress_schema_v6.patch patch -p1 -R ../regress_schema_v6.patch patch -p1 ../regress_schema_v6.patch make clean ./configure --enable-depend --enable-coverage --enable-cassert --enable-debug make -j3 check Do let me know if something is still amiss. -- Robins Tharakan regress_schema_v6.patch Description

Re: [HACKERS] Add some regression tests for SEQUENCE

for clarity). git reset --hard HEAD git pull patch -p1 ../regress_sequence_v6.patch patch -p1 -R ../regress_sequence_v6.patch patch -p1 ../regress_sequence_v6.patch make clean ./configure --enable-depend --enable-coverage --enable-cassert --enable-debug make -j3 check -- Robins Tharakan

Re: [HACKERS] Add regression tests for ROLE (USER)

On 6 July 2013 20:25, Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com wrote: Do let me know your view on this second point, so that I can remove these tests if so required. Hi, Please find attached the updated patch. It address the first issue regarding reducing the repeated CREATE / DROP ROLEs

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to add regression tests for SCHEMA

Hi Fabien, Appreciate you being able to check right away. Seems something went wrong with these set of patches... Would check again and resubmit them soon. -- Robins Tharakan On 9 July 2013 10:57, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote: Hello Robins, PFA an updated patch: - Renamed

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to add regression tests for SCHEMA

. Rename regression users to regress_rol_nsp1 etc. per convention established in the CREATE OPERATOR patch. Hi Robert, PFA an updated patch: - Renamed ROLEs as per new feedback (although the previous naming was also as per an earlier feedback) - Merged tests into namespace -- Robins Tharakan

Re: [HACKERS] Add some regression tests for SEQUENCE

On 3 July 2013 10:13, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: I think you should rename the roles used here to regress_rol_seq1 etc. to match the CREATE OPERATOR patch. Please find updated patch: - 'make check' successful with recent changes - Renamed ROLEs as per feedback -- Robins

Re: [HACKERS] Add more regression tests for dbcommands

On 26 June 2013 01:55, Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com wrote: Code coverage improved from 36% to 68%. Updated patch: - Renamed ROLEs as per Robert's feedback (prepend regress_xxx) - Added test to serial_schedule (missed out earlier). -- Robins Tharakan regress_db_v5.patch Description

Re: [HACKERS] Add tests for LOCK TABLE

On 23 May 2013 18:19, Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com wrote: Please find attached a patch to take code-coverage of LOCK TABLE ( src/backend/commands/lockcmds.c) from 57% to 84%. Updated the patch: - Updated ROLEs as per Robert's feedback - Added test to serial_schedule. -- Robins Tharakan

Re: [HACKERS] Add regression tests for SET xxx

On 18 June 2013 05:01, Szymon Guz mabew...@gmail.com wrote: I've checked the patch. Applies cleanly. Tests pass this time :) Updated the patch: - Updated ROLE names as per Robert's feedback (regress_xxx) - Added test to serial_schedule -- Robins Tharakan regress_variable_v5.patch

Re: [HACKERS] Add regression tests for DISCARD

required for this submission. -- Robins Tharakan

Re: [HACKERS] Add regression tests for ROLE (USER)

that not all code is reachable (therefore testable) but the vision generally remains at 100%. Do let me know your view on this second point, so that I can remove these tests if so required. Robins Tharakan

Re: [HACKERS] Add regression tests for DISCARD

a patch, updated towards serial_schedule / parallel_schedule as well as the role name change as per Robert's feedback on CREATE OPERATOR thread. -- Robins Tharakan On 2 July 2013 09:32, Fabrízio de Royes Mello fabriziome...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Robins Tharakan thara

Re: [HACKERS] Add regression tests for DISCARD

. -- Robins Tharakan regress_discard_v3.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Add more regression tests for CREATE OPERATOR

On 26 June 2013 02:26, Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com wrote: So technically I hope this regression patch I submitted could go through since this feedback isn't towards that patch, but in my part I am quite intrigued about this test (and how it passes) and probably I'd get back

Re: [HACKERS] New regression test time

tests that I submit for review (for next CF) would be for 'make check', until a 'make bigcheck' or whatever is up and running. -- Robins Tharakan

Re: [HACKERS] Add more regression tests for dbcommands

missed, but well, its out of the window for now anyway. -- Robins Tharakan On 26 June 2013 06:34, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi, I am generally a bit unsure whether the regression tests you propose aren't a bit too verbose. Does any of the committers have an opinion about

Re: [HACKERS] Add some regression tests for SEQUENCE

again. -- Robins Tharakan On 28 June 2013 15:53, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: On 05/07/2013 03:40 PM, Robins Tharakan wrote: Hi, Have provided an updated patch as per Fabien's recent response on Commitfest site. Any and all feedback is appreciated. The updated patch is giving

Re: [HACKERS] Add more regression tests for CREATE OPERATOR

drop any ROLEs at the end of the script. -- Robins Tharakan regress_createoperator_v2.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Add more regression tests for CREATE OPERATOR

Sure Robert. I 'll update the tests and get back. Two questions, while we're at it: 1. Any other conventions (for naming)? 2. Should I assume that all database objects that get created, need to be dropped explicitly? Or is this point specifically about ROLES? -- Robins Tharakan On 27 June

Re: [HACKERS] Add more regression tests for dbcommands

the 'CONNECTION LIMIT' was working. Removed that as well. Code coverage improved from 36% to 68%. -- Robins Tharakan On 24 June 2013 07:47, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2013-05-21 02:58:25 +0530, Robins Tharakan wrote: Attached is an updated patch that does only 1 CREATE

Re: [HACKERS] Add more regression tests for CREATE OPERATOR

Tharakan On 25 June 2013 04:12, Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks a ton Szymon (for a reminder on this one). As a coincidental turn of events, I have had to travel half way across the world and am without my personal laptop (without a linux distro etc.) and just recovering

Re: [HACKERS] Add more regression tests for CREATE OPERATOR

something going to respond as soon as is possible. Thanks -- Robins Tharakan -- Robins Tharakan On 17 June 2013 05:19, Szymon Guz mabew...@gmail.com wrote: On 23 May 2013 00:34, Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Please find attached a patch to take code-coverage of CREATE OPERATOR

Re: [HACKERS] Add regression tests for SET xxx

Thanks ! PFA the updated patch. Also remove a trailing whitespace at the end of SQL script. -- Robins Tharakan On 17 June 2013 17:29, Szymon Guz mabew...@gmail.com wrote: On 26 May 2013 19:56, Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Please find attached a patch to take code

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to add support of IF NOT EXISTS to others CREATE statements

, procedure = path_inter, commutator = ## ); NOTICE: operator ## already exists, skipping = -- Robins Tharakan On 24 May 2013 20:52, Fabrízio de Royes Mello fabriziome...@gmail.comwrote: Hi all, I working in a patch to include support of IF NOT EXISTS into CREATE statements

[HACKERS] Revisit items marked 'NO' in sql_features.txt

Sequence generator support: simple restart option NO T522Default values for IN parameters of SQL-invoked procedures NO T571Array-returning external SQL-invoked functions NO -- Robins Tharakan

[HACKERS] Add regression tests for SET xxx

Hi, Please find attached a patch to take code-coverage of SET (SESSION / SEED / TRANSACTION / DATESTYLE / TIME ZONE) (src/backend/commands/variable.c) from 65% to 82%. Any and all feedback is welcome. -- Robins Tharakan regress_variable.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql

[HACKERS] Add tests for LOCK TABLE

Hi, Please find attached a patch to take code-coverage of LOCK TABLE ( src/backend/commands/lockcmds.c) from 57% to 84%. Any and all feedback is welcome. -- Robins Tharakan regress_lock.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org

[HACKERS] Add more regression tests for CREATE OPERATOR

Hi, Please find attached a patch to take code-coverage of CREATE OPERATOR (src/backend/commands/operatorcmds.c) from 56% to 91%. Any and all feedback is welcome. -- Robins Tharakan regress_createoperator.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Add more regression tests for dbcommands

Hi, Attached is an updated patch that does only 1 CREATE DATABASE and reuses that for all other tests. The code-coverage with this patch goes up from 36% to 70%. -- Robins Tharakan On 13 May 2013 21:04, Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com wrote: I believe Tom / Andres and Fabien all have

Re: [HACKERS] Add more regression tests for dbcommands

with minimal CREATE/DROP). -- Robins Tharakan On 13 May 2013 20:30, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2013-05-13 16:52:08 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote: Hello, Would you be okay if there is one/a few effective create/drop (some tests check that the create or drop fails e.g

[HACKERS] Add more regression tests for ASYNC

need to be clubbed (bundled up in 2-3) and submitted as a single submit. -- Robins Tharakan regress_async.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Add more regression tests for dbcommands

Hi, Please find attached a patch to take code-coverage of DBCommands (CREATE DATABASE / ALTER DATABASE / DROP DATABASE) from 36% to 71%. Any and all feedback is obviously welcome. -- Robins Tharakan regress_db_v2.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql

[HACKERS] Add regression tests for DISCARD

Hi, Please find attached a patch that adds basic regression tests for DISCARD command. Any and all feedback is obviously welcome. -- Robins Tharakan regress_discard_v2.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your

Re: [HACKERS] Add regression tests for COLLATE

). This updated patch doesn't have UTF8 string anywhere. Let me know if you prefer to remove the commented out tests completely. -- Robins Tharakan On 9 May 2013 07:44, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com writes: Fabien pointed out that currently does not check

Re: [HACKERS] Add regression tests for COLLATE

points out. (Apologies for the delay though. An update to the patch was mostly done back in April, but since most of the other Code-Coverage patches (SCHEMA/ROLE/etc.) had no other feedback, I worked on all of them together just this week). -- Robins Tharakan On 12 April 2013 09:28, Michael Paquier

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to add regression tests for SCHEMA

Hi, Please find attached an updated patch with the said changes. I'll try to update the other patches (if they pertain to this feedback) and update on their respective threads (as well as on Commitfest). -- Robins Tharakan On 8 May 2013 13:01, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote: Dear

Re: [HACKERS] Add regression tests for ROLE (USER)

. Let me know if you need anything else changed in this. -- Robins Tharakan On 20 March 2013 03:41, Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Please find attached a patch to take 'make check' code-coverage of ROLE (USER) from 59% to 91%. Any feedback is more than welcome. -- Robins

Re: [HACKERS] Add some regression tests for SEQUENCE

Hi, Have provided an updated patch as per Fabien's recent response on Commitfest site. Any and all feedback is appreciated. -- Robins Tharakan regress_sequence_v4.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to add regression tests for SCHEMA

Hi, Here is an updated patch that uses different schema / role names for different tests (as per commitfest site feedback). -- Robins Tharakan On 18 March 2013 17:16, robins thara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Attached is an updated patch that uses better schema / role names. -- Robins

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to add regression tests for SCHEMA

Completely agree. Although the poster was kind enough to intimate me by email about his update there, but was wondering that if he hadn't, I wouldnt' have dreamt that there is a feedback on the site, two months down the line. -- Robins Tharakan On 8 May 2013 09:13, Robert Haas robertmh

[HACKERS] How to use EXPLAIN (TIMING)

-- PostgreSQL 9.2.3 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compiled by gcc (GCC) 4.4.6 20120 305 (Red Hat 4.4.6-4), 64-bit (1 row) Thanks -- Robins Tharakan

[HACKERS] Add regression tests for COLLATE

Hi, Please find attached a patch to take 'make check' code-coverage of COLLATE (/src/backend/commands/collationcmds) from 0% to 96%. Any feedback is more than welcome. Also posting this to Commitfest-next. -- Robins Tharakan regress_collate_v1.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql

[HACKERS] Add regression tests for ROLE (USER)

Hi, Please find attached a patch to take 'make check' code-coverage of ROLE (USER) from 59% to 91%. Any feedback is more than welcome. -- Robins Tharakan regress_user.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your

Re: [HACKERS] Add some regression tests for SEQUENCE

Hi, Please find an updated patch (reworked on the names of SEQUENCES / ROLES / SCHEMA etc.) Takes code-coverage of 'make check' for SEQUENCE to ~95%. -- Robins Tharakan On 16 March 2013 02:03, robins thara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I've added some regression tests for SEQUENCE. A cumulative

Re: [HACKERS] Add some regression tests for SEQUENCE

Duh. Apologies. That's what happens when you make that 1 last change. Please find an updated patch. -- Robins Tharakan On 19 March 2013 04:07, Josh Kupershmidt schmi...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Robins Tharakan thara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Please find

[HACKERS] Function management in PG

wondered whether this has already been done. How do you manage large list of functions (where a hard segregation isn't hard and therefore one can't separate functions based on schemas) ?Any pointers to a Free or Commercial tool would be of immense help. Thanks, Robins Tharakan

[HACKERS] Query Builder in pgAdmin for GSoC 2008

at FOSDEM earlier. Since I am still into reading, I thought this probably is the right time to ask. Is anyone working on a Query Builder for pgAdmin yet ? Regards, *Robins Tharakan*

Re: [HACKERS] Query Builder in pgAdmin for GSoC 2008

Sorry! As rightly pointed out, guess I should have posted this to pgadmin-hackers instead. *Robins Tharakan* On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Robins Tharakan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I read about Google Summer of Code recently and being involved with pgAdmin since a few weeks, would