Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning

Hello Amit, In the example >create table part201606week4 partition of parted >for values start (2016, 6, 2) end (2016, 6, 29); seems to be a typo regards Sameer -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.nabble.com/Declarative-partitioning-tp5862462p5903204.html Sent from the Postgr

Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

Hello, Continuing testing: For pg_syncinfo.conf below an error is thrown. { "sync_info": { "quorum": 3, "nodes":

Re: [HACKERS] Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

Hello, I did apply the patch to HEAD and tried to setup basic async replication.But i got an error. Turned on logging for details below. Unpatched Primary Log LOG: database system was shut down at 2015-09-12 13:41:40 IST LOG: MultiXact member wraparound protections are now enabled LOG: database

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.

Hello, >Your current design completely misses the time taken to scan indexes, which is significant. I tried to address this issue in the attached patch. The patch calculates index scan progress by measuring against scanned pages in LVRelStats. It checks for a change current page being scanned and i

Re: [HACKERS] [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.

Hello, >Thank you for suggestion. The design with hooks and a separate view was mainly to keep most of the >code outside core as the feature proposed is specific to VACUUM command. Also, having a separate view >can give more flexibility in terms of displaying various progress parameters. >FWIW ,the

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] two-arg current_setting() with fallback

Hello, >Well, speaking of the two-arg form vs alternate name, here's a version of the patch which includes the >new behavior Thought i will attempt a review. The patch applies cleanly to latest HEAD. patch -p1 < /home/Sameer/Downloads/0001-Add-two-arg-form-of-current_setting-to-optionally-su.pat

Re: [HACKERS] Priority table or Cache table

Hello, I applied the patch to current HEAD. There was one failure (attached), freelist.rej Compiled the provided pgbench.c and added following in .conf shared_buffers = 128MB # min 128kB Shared_buffers=64MB

Re: [HACKERS] Compression of full-page-writes

Hello, > What kind of error did you get at the server crash? Assertion error? If yes, > it might be because of the conflict with > 4a170ee9e0ebd7021cb1190fabd5b0cbe2effb8e. > This commit forbids palloc from being called within a critical section, but > the patch does that and then the assertion er

Re: [HACKERS] Compression of full-page-writes

Hello, >Done. Attached is the updated version of the patch. I was trying to check WAL reduction using this patch on latest available git version of Postgres using JDBC runner with tpcc benchmark. patching_problems.txt

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with displaying "wide" tables in psql

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:13 PM, Sergey Muraviov wrote: > Hi. > > I've improved the patch. > It works in expanded mode when either format option is set to wrapped (\pset > format wrapped), or we have no pager, or pager doesn't chop long lines (so > you can still use the trick). > Target output wi

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

> >I've cleaned this up - revision attached - and marked it "ready for > committer". > Thank you for this. > I did the basic hygiene test. The patch applies correctly and compiles with no warnings. Did not find anything broken in basic functionality. In the documentation i have a minor suggesti

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

Hello, Please find v10 of patch attached. This patch addresses following review comments 1. Removed errcode and used elogs for error "pg_stat_statements schema is not supported by its binary" 2. Removed comments and other code formatting not directly relevant to patch functionality 3. changed posit

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

> I took a quick look. Observations: > > + /* Making query ID dependent on PG version */ > + query->queryId |= PG_VERSION_NUM << 16; > > If you want to do something like this, make the value of > PGSS_FILE_HEADER incorporate (PG_VERSION_NUM / 100) or something. > > Why are you doing this? The thou

Re: [HACKERS] Extra functionality to createuser

> 1. cloned from https://github.com/samthakur74/postgres Sorry. cloned from https://github.com/postgres/postgres regards Sameer -- 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] Extra functionality to createuser

Hello, Tried to test this patch. Did the following 1. cloned from https://github.com/samthakur74/postgres 2. Applied patch and make install 3. created rolesapp_readonly_role,app2_writer_role 4. Tried createuser -D -S -l -g app_readonly_role,app2_writer_role test_user got error: createuser: invalid

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

Hello, Please find attached pg_stat_statements-identification-v9.patch. I have tried to address the following review comments 1. Use version PGSS_TUP_V1_2 2.Fixed total time being zero 3. Remove 'session_start' from the view and use point release number to generate queryid 4. Hide only queryid and

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

> This paragraph reads a bit strange to me: > > + A statistics session is the time period when statistics are gathered by > statistics collector > + without being reset. So a statistics session continues across normal > shutdowns, > + but whenever statistics are reset, like during a crash or upg

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

Please find patch attached which adds documentation for session_start and introduced fields and corrects documentation for queryid to be query_id. session_start remains in the view as agreed. regards Sameer pg_stat_statements-identification-v8.patch.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data -- Se

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Daniel Farina wrote: > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Sameer Thakur wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Sameer Thakur wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Looks prett

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

>> Please find the patch attached > > Thanks for the patch! Here are the review comments: > > +OUT session_start timestamptz, > +OUT introduced timestamptz, > > The patch exposes these columns in pg_stat_statements view. > These should be documented. Yes, will add to documentation. > I don

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Sameer Thakur wrote: >> >> Looks pretty good. Do you want to package up the patch with your >> change and do the honors and re-submit it? Thanks for helping out so >> much! > Sure, will do. Need to add a bit of documentation explaining &

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

> > Looks pretty good. Do you want to package up the patch with your > change and do the honors and re-submit it? Thanks for helping out so > much! Sure, will do. Need to add a bit of documentation explaining statistics session as well. I did some more basic testing around pg_stat_statements.max, n

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Daniel Farina-5 [via PostgreSQL] wrote: > > On Sep 30, 2013 4:39 AM, "Sameer Thakur" <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> > Also, for onlookers, I have changed this patch around to do the >> > date-oriented stuff but

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Daniel Farina-5 [via PostgreSQL] wrote: > > On Sep 30, 2013 4:39 AM, "Sameer Thakur" <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> > Also, for onlookers, I have changed this patch around to do the >> > date-oriented stuff but

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

> Also, for onlookers, I have changed this patch around to do the > date-oriented stuff but want to look it over before stapling it up and > sending it. If one cannot wait, one can look at > https://github.com/fdr/postgres/tree/queryid. The squashed-version of > that history contains a reasonable

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 1:26 PM, samthakur74 wrote: >> >> I forgot about removal of the relevant SGML, amended here in v6. > > Thank you for this! > i did a quick test with following steps: > 1. Applied v6 patch > 2. make and make install on pg_stat_statements; > 3. Restarted Postgres with pg_stat

Re: [HACKERS] Patch for fail-back without fresh backup

>> > >Attached patch combines documentation patch and source-code patch. > I have had a stab at reviewing the documentation. Have a look. --- a/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml @@ -1749,6 +1749,50 @@ include 'filename' + + synchronous_transfer

Re: [HACKERS] pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

>> >You seem to have forgotten to include the pg_stat_statements--1.2.sql >> >and pg_stat_statements--1.1--1.2.sql in the patch. >> Sorry again. Please find updated patch attached. I did not add pg_stat_statements--1.2.sql. I have added that now and updated the patch again. The patch attached sho

[HACKERS] Extending pg_stat_statements to expose queryid

Hello All, I am trying to revive the discussion about exposing queryid in pg_stat_statements. I did find the same request posted on hackers @ http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABUevExLnb6xJwS=8rTaLOfDOS-tFm09==z2m_vz5hhfkgw...@mail.gmail.com and http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/cacn56+n

Re: [HACKERS] Detach/attach table and index data files from one cluster to another

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-04-12 12:14:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Andrew Dunstan writes: > > > On 04/12/2013 10:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > >> There's 0 chance of making that work, because the two databases > wouldn't > > >> have the same notions of committe

[HACKERS] Detach/attach table and index data files from one cluster to another

Hello, The current process of transferring data files from one cluster to another by using pg_dump and pg_restore is time consuming. The proposed tool tries to make migration faster for tables and indices only by copying their binary data files. This is like pg_upgrade but used for migration of t

Re: [HACKERS] Inconsistent DB data in Streaming Replication

Hello, >The only potential use case for this that I can see, would be for system maintenance and a controlled failover. I agree: that's a major PITA >when doing DR testing, but I personally don't think this is the way to fix that particular edge case. This is the use case we are trying to address