Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Hash take II

ng else in AbortTransaction() and then only destroy memory contexts in CleanupTransaction(). This change doesn't go as far, but it's in the same general direction, and I think rightly so. My error was in thinking that the primary use of memory would be for storing data, but really it's about whe

Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions

so if my answer > appears inadequate, then can you provide more details on what you are > concerned about? I don't know why the question of why root->append_rel_list is empty is the relevant thing here for deciding whether to generate gather paths at this point. -- Robert Haas Enterpris

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Hash take II

chunk_pages = p->chunk_pages; + + /* The next reader will start after this chunk. */ + p->read_page += chunk_pages; + } + SpinLockRelease(>mutex); This looks more like the job of an lwlock rather than a spinlock. +/* + * Cr

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Overestimated filter cost and its mitigation

I wonder why we currently postpone this until such a late phase of planning. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- 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] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager

then A. I'm not entirely clear whether your survey leads us to a place where we can articulate such a deadlock-proof rule. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- 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] [POC] Faster processing at Gather node

e benefit if the query is executed without using Explain Analyze? Yes. Before: tpch_5[11878][1]=# SELECT * FROM lineitem WHERE l_suppkey > '5012' OFFSET 100000 LIMIT 1;^[[A ... Time: 7590.196 ms (00:07.590) After: Time: 3862.955 ms (00:03.863) Greetings, Andres Freund -- 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] [PATCH] Assert that the correct locks are held when calling PageGetLSN()

r completely misunderstanding your point? I never got a direct response to my earlier questions on this. --Jacob -- 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] Remove secondary checkpoint

in that CheckPointDistanceEstimate is better if we use multiple checkpoint cycles. But the implementation of that is bogus and multiplying by 2.0 wouldn't make it better if CheckPointDistanceEstimate is wrong. So I will change to 1.0 as you say and rewrite the comment. Thanks for your review. -- Simon Riggshttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- 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] Fix bloom WAL tap test

Hi! On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > I understood the necessity of this patch and reviewed two patches. > Good, thank you. > For /fix-bloom-wal-check.patch, it looks good to me. I found no > problem. But for wal-check-on-bloom-check.patch, if

Re: [HACKERS] Fix bloom WAL tap test

re ok for "patch -p1", but not ok for "git apply". Sorry for that. I resubmit both of them. -- Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company fix-bloom-wal-check-2.patch Description: Binary data wal-check-on-bloom-chec

Re: [HACKERS] Exclude pg_internal.init from base backup

t; Changes made, moving to commit the attached patch. Thanks, Simon! This was on my to do list today -- glad I checked my email first. -- -David da...@pgmasters.net -- 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] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11

t INSERT was the correct thing to do. Geoff -- 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] Exclude pg_internal.init from base backup

http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services pg_basebackup-exclusion-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] Additional logging for VACUUM and ANALYZE

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Bossart, Nathan wrote: > > On 11/7/17, 9:13 AM, "Fabrízio Mello" wrote: > >> int save_nestlevel; > >> + boolrel_lock; > >> > > > > Just remove the additional tab indentation before rel_lock

Re: [HACKERS] Small improvement to compactify_tuples

mentation: #define qsort(a,b,c,d) pg_qsort(a,b,c,d) Greetings, Andres Freund -- 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] Small improvement to compactify_tuples

case, then by all means. Otherwise, if it's a rarely-encountered corner case, I'd recommend simply calling the stdlib's qsort. -- 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] Additional logging for VACUUM and ANALYZE

l_lock; > Just remove the additional tab indentation before rel_lock variable. The rest looks good to me. Regards, Fabrízio Mello The new status of this patch is: Waiting on Author -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscript

Re: [HACKERS] Small improvement to compactify_tuples

2017-11-07 17:15 GMT+03:00 Claudio Freire : > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Юрий Соколов wrote: > > 2017-11-07 1:14 GMT+03:00 Claudio Freire : > >> > >> I haven't seen this trick used in postgres, nor do I know whether it

Re: [HACKERS] Small improvement to compactify_tuples

l be defined together with > qsort (because qsort still needs it), then it is justifiable. What do you mean by heavy-weight? Aside from requiring all that include magic, if you place specialized sort functions in a reusable header, using it is as simple as including the type-specific header (or de

Re: [HACKERS] Additional logging for VACUUM and ANALYZE

/postgresql (master) $ git apply /tmp/new_vacuum_log_messages_v2.patch error: patch failed: doc/src/sgml/config.sgml:5899 error: doc/src/sgml/config.sgml: patch does not apply Regards, Fabrízio Mello The new status of this patch is: Waiting on Author -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql

Re: [HACKERS] Fix bloom WAL tap test

contrib/bloom/Makefile b/contrib/bloom/Makefile index 13bd397..c1566d4 100644 --- a/contrib/bloom/Makefile +++ b/contrib/bloom/Makefile @@ -20,5 +20,7 @@ include $(top_builddir)/src/Makefile.global include $(top_srcdir)/contrib/contrib-global.mk endif +check: wal-check + wal-check: temp-install $(prove_check) Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- 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] Fix bloom WAL tap test

(master) $ git apply /tmp/wal-check-on-bloom-check.patch error: contrib/bloom/Makefile: already exists in working directory Regards, Fabrízio Mello The new status of this patch is: Waiting on Author -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] A hook for session start

d, + false, + PGC_SIGHUP, + 0, NULL, NULL, NULL); +} + +/* + * Module Unload Callback + */ +void +_PG_fini(void) +{ + /* Uninstall Hooks */ + session_start_hook = prev_session_start_hook; + session_end_hook = prev_session_end_hook; +} diff --git a/src/test/modules/test_session_hooks/test_session_hooks.control b/src/test/modules/test_session_hooks/test_session_hooks.control new file mode 100644 index 000..7d7ef9f --- /dev/null +++ b/src/test/modules/test_session_hooks/test_session_hooks.control @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +comment = 'Test start/end hook session with an extension' +default_version = '1.0' +relocatable = true -- 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] [PATCH] Improve geometric types

l2)); - make_bound_box operates directly on the poly->boundbox. I'm afraid that such coding hinders compiers from using registers. This is a bit apart from this patch, it would be better if we could eliminate internal calls using DirectFunctionCall. reagrds, -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Sou

Re: [HACKERS] Flexible configuration for full-text search

ase if any chcked dictionary matched the word even without returning lexeme. Main drawback is that counter increment is implicit. -- Aleksandr Parfenov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com Russian Postgres Company -- 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] parallelize queries containing initplans

patch. > This patch had been switched to Ready For Committer in last CF, then > Robert had comments which I have addressed, so I think the status > should be switched back to Ready For committer. > As mentioned, changed the status of the patch in CF app. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. Enterp

Re: [HACKERS] Custom compression methods

e doesn't work properly with my patch, soon I will send fix for it. -- --- Ildus Kurbangaliev Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com Russian Postgres Company -- 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] Refactor handling of database attributes between pg_dump and pg_dumpall

tional details in the archive handler, but is it really needed? Regards, Hari Babu Fujitsu Australia pg_dump-and-pg_dumpall-database-handling-refactoring_v9.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] pg_stat_wal_write statistics view

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.harib...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Updated patch attached. > Patch rebased. Regards, Hari Babu Fujitsu Australia pg_stat_walwrites-statistics-view_v10.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] Flexible configuration for full-text search

CH CONFIGURATION > dump_test.alt_ts_conf1 ...' > # at t/002_pg_dump.pl line 6715. > Hi Thomas, Thank you for noticing it. I will investigate it during work on next version of patch. -- Aleksandr Parfenov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com Russian Postgres Company --

Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

ll be much faster to compute than going to convert_tuples_by_name() to build the additional maps array. Thanks, Amit -- 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] UPDATE of partition key

these arrays into one, but we are adding a new int[] array that maps subplans to leaf partitions. Will get back with how it looks finally. Robert, Amit , I will get back with your other review comments. -- Thanks, -Amit Khandekar EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company -- Sent via p

Re: [HACKERS] Planning counters in pg_stat_statements

From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Munro > I have often wanted $SUBJECT and was happy to find that Fujii-san had posted > a patch five years ago[1]. The reception then seemed positive. > So here is a

[HACKERS] Planning counters in pg_stat_statements

Hi hackers, I have often wanted $SUBJECT and was happy to find that Fujii-san had posted a patch five years ago[1]. The reception then seemed positive. So here is a refurbished and (hopefully) improved version of his patch with a new column for the replan count. Thoughts? Example output

Re: [HACKERS] LDAP URI decoding bugs

e added as well an entry in the next CF to avoid that bug falling into oblivion: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/16/1372/ -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Fix a typo in dsm_impl.c

Hi, Attached the patch for $subject. s/reamin/remain/ Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center fix_typo_in_dsm_impl_c.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make

Re: [HACKERS] proposal - pg_dump: flag to suppress output of SQL comments

evelopers to use the same late-model version of pg_dump while producing output to go into the VCS. That won't be a 100% solution, because some of the version-specific output is generated on the backend side, but I bet it would improve matters a lot. regards, tom lane --

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] A hook for session start

R_LOCKMETHOD, true); Let's leave this work to people actually implementing the hook contents. -- Michael session_hook_simplify.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] Parallel Plans and Cost of non-filter functions

core! Is there any way I > can productively help? You have already helped a lot by providing the use case, but feel free to ping on that thread if you find it is not moving. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsq

Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions

path here (due to this part of check "!root->append_rel_list"). I am not sure whether I have understood the second part of your question, so if my answer appears inadequate, then can you provide more details on what you are concerned about? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning

le Boolean partitioning. > > Thanks. I'll look over it all again starting my Tuesday morning. (UTC+13) Thank you. Regards, Amit -- 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] [PATCH] Assert that the correct locks are held when calling PageGetLSN()

n idea to remove PageGetLSN to force a breakage of extensions calling it, so as they would review any of its calls. Not a fan of that though. -- Michael -- 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] path toward faster partition pruning

way as partitions in the partition descriptor. */ Assert(partdesc->oids[i] == rte->relid); #endif result = lappend(result, appinfo); } /* Record which partitions must be scanned. */ rel->live_part_appinfos = result; heap_close(parent, NoLock); return result; } ret

[HACKERS] proposal - pg_dump: flag to suppress output of SQL comments

Hello Hackers, Would a patch to add a flag to pg_dump to suppress the output of SQL comments be likely to be accepted? So for example `pg_dump`: -- -- Name: foos; Type: TABLE; Schema: public; Owner: - -- CREATE TABLE foos ( ... With `pg_dump --no-sql-comments` Would become

Re: [HACKERS] Early locking option to parallel backup

it. --- Lucas -- 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] Small improvement to compactify_tuples

2017-11-07 1:14 GMT+03:00 Claudio Freire : > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Юрий Соколов wrote: > > > > 2017-11-06 17:55 GMT+03:00 Claudio Freire : > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Юрий Соколов

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Assert that the correct locks are held when calling PageGetLSN()

tLSN.patch Description: Binary data 0002-PageGetLSN-assert-that-locks-are-properly-held.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] Small improvement to compactify_tuples

e-critical functions. > I can do specialized qsort for this case. But it will be larger bunch of > code, than > shell sort. > >> And I'd recommend doing that when there is a need, and I don't think >> this patch really needs it, since bucket sort handles most cases >> anyway.

Re: [HACKERS] Small improvement to compactify_tuples

2017-11-06 17:55 GMT+03:00 Claudio Freire : > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Юрий Соколов wrote: > >> Maybe leave a fallback to qsort if some corner case produces big buckets? > > > > For 8kb pages, each bucket is per 32 bytes. So, for heap

Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11

Peter Geoghegan -- 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] SQL procedures

just a new type of object with very little interaction with replication, persistence or optimization. -- Simon Riggshttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- 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] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11

so? Where hides the problem? -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- 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] UPDATE of partition key

.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- 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] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11

it would be important to point out that MERGE with Approach1 isn't special, but ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE is special. We'd also say that higher isolation levels will not have duplicate violations. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes t

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] Faster processing at Gather node

Hi -- pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org wrote on 11/06/2017 09:47:22 AM: > From: Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> > > Hi, > > Please don't top-quote on postgresql lists. Sorry > > On 2017-11-06 09:44:24 -0600, Jim Van Fleet wrote: > > > >hammerdb

Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11

at is the written explanation for that, so we can show that to the people who ask in the future about our decisions? -- Simon Riggshttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- 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] pow support for pgbench

is nice and simple. I switched the patch to "Ready for Committer" Let's now hope that a committer gets around to consider these patch some day. -- Fabien. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.post

Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench

2 SELECT :v0, :v1, :v2, :v3; +--- pow() operator +\set poweri debug(pow(-3,3)) +\set powerd debug(pow(2.0,10)) +\set poweriz debug(pow(0,0)) +\set powerdz debug(pow(0.0,0.0)) +\set powernegi debug(pow(-2,-3)) +\set powernegd debug(pow(-2.0,-3.0)) +\set powernull debug(pow(NULL, NULL)) } }); =head -- 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] [pgsql-www] Schedule for migration to pglister

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander writes: > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Hm, around here it's no match -> spam bucket. But in any case, why > > > I think you're quite

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Schedule for migration to pglister

not addressed to me (or any list I'm on)" is the best single spam filtering rule I know, and has been for a decade or two. But we veer far off topic here. Do as you will. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To ma

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Schedule for migration to pglister

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander writes: > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I suggest doing that the other way 'round. Otherwise, the email > >> about the change will inevitably

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] Faster processing at Gather node

pecific stuff. Whereas tpcc is oltp, right? > correct In that case, could you provide before/after profiles of the performance changing runs? Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Schedule for migration to pglister

peoples MUAs when their rules no longer match... Hm, around here it's no match -> spam bucket. But in any case, why would you not want to send it before so that it would end up where they're accustomed to seeing the list's traffic? regards, tom lane -- Se

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] Faster processing at Gather node

correct > >hammerdb, in this configuration, runs a variant of tpcc > > Hard to believe that any of the changes here are relevant in that > case - this is parallelism specific stuff. Whereas tpcc is oltp, right? > > Andres > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Schedule for migration to pglister

Tom, * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > Each list will receive an email with a link to the wiki about the > > migration after the list has been migrated. > > I suggest doing that the other way 'round. Otherwise, the email > about the change

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Schedule for migration to pglister

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > Each list will receive an email with a link to the wiki about the > > migration after the list has been migrated. > > I suggest doing that the other way 'round. Otherwise, the

Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Schedule for migration to pglister

bit buckets if they haven't adjusted their mail filters yet. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Schedule for migration to pglister

rences. The changes which we expect to be most significant to users can be found on the wiki here: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGLister_Announce Our planned migration schedule is as follows: Nov 6 - pgsql-www Nov 13 - pgsql-hackers pgsql-bugs pgsql-committers Nov 20 - pgsql-admin p

Re: [HACKERS] [POC] Faster processing at Gather node

relevant in that case - this is parallelism specific stuff. Whereas tpcc is oltp, right? Andres -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- 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] [POC] Faster processing at Gather node

Andres Freund wrote on 11/05/2017 03:40:15 PM: hammerdb, in this configuration, runs a variant of tpcc > > What query(s) did you measure? > > Andres > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >

Re: [HACKERS] Fix performance degradation of contended LWLock on NUMA

best way. Should I add such commit to patch? -- With regards, Sokolov Yura aka funny_falcon Postgres Professional: https://postgrespro.ru The Russian Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postg

Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench

test case to show what happens on NULL arguments, hopefully the result is NULL. -- Fabien. -- 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] Small improvement to compactify_tuples

and I don't think this patch really needs it, since bucket sort handles most cases anyway. -- 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] Small improvement to compactify_tuples

2017-11-05 20:44 GMT+03:00 Claudio Freire : > > On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Юрий Соколов wrote: > > 2017-11-03 5:46 GMT+03:00 Tom Lane : > >> > >> Sokolov Yura writes: > >> > [

Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench

ench_expressions' => q{-- integer functions @@ -299,6 +305,13 @@ sub pgbench \set v2 5432 \set v3 -54.21E-2 SELECT :v0, :v1, :v2, :v3; +--- pow() operator +\set poweri debug(pow(-3,3)) +\set powerd debug(pow(2.0,10)) +\set poweriz debug(pow(0,0)) +\set powerdz debug(pow(0.0,0.0)) +\se

Re: [HACKERS] Early locking option to parallel backup

Lucas, * Lucas (luca...@gmail.com) wrote: > pg_dump was taking more than 24 hours to complete in one of my databases. I > begin to research alternatives. Parallel backup reduced the backup time to > little less than a hour, but it failed almost every time because of > concurrent queries that

Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Plans and Cost of non-filter functions

>From my perspective, this is much much better. For sufficiently large tables, I get parallel behaviour without jimmying with the defaults on parallel_setup_cost and parallel_tuple_cost. *And*, the parallel behaviour *is* sensitive to the costs of functions in target lists, so reasonably chosen

Re: [HACKERS] Client Connection redirection support for PostgreSQL

ool and other systems do today. I think the in-core use of this redirect functionality is useful, but I think the real win would be optionally using it in pgpool and pgbouncer. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench

s @@ -299,6 +303,11 @@ sub pgbench \set v2 5432 \set v3 -54.21E-2 SELECT :v0, :v1, :v2, :v3; +--- pow() operator +\set poweri debug(pow(-3,3)) +\set powerd debug(pow(2.0,10)) +\set powernegi debug(pow(-2,-3)) +\set powernegd debug(pow(-2.0,-3.0)) } }); =head -- 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] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions

are 2 baserels, we're still not the topmost scan/join target. Also, even if inheritance is used, we might still be the topmost scan/join target. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- 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] Early locking option to parallel backup

st allow it as a general option to LOCK, there's plenty other operational cases where the current "fair" behaviour is really annoying, e.g. when executing operational DDL/DML and such. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To ma

Re: [HACKERS] Early locking option to parallel backup

/www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- 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] Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots

don't think 'distance' is a good metric - that's going to continually change. Why not store the LSN that's available and provide a function that computes this? Or just rely on the lsn - lsn operator? - Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your

Re: [HACKERS] Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots

of this mainly for logical slots. That seems more like a page read callback's job than xlogreader's. Greetings, Andres Freund -- 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] Secondary index access optimizations

Filter: ((dlevel <= $0) AND f_leak(dtitle)) (6 rows) -- pp1 ERROR @@ -1136,14 +1136,14 @@ NOTICE: f_leak => awesome science fiction (4 rows) EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF) SELECT * FROM part_document WHERE f_leak(dtitle); - QUERY PLAN

Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench

- 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] proposal - Default namespaces for XPath expressions (PostgreSQL 11)

Thank you for the new patch. - The latest patch is missing xpath_parser.h at least since ns-3. That of the first (not-numbered) version was still usable. - c29c578 conflicts on doc/src/sgml/func.sgml At Sun, 15 Oct 2017 12:06:11 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote in

Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning

, including the fix to make the new pruning > code handle Boolean partitioning. Thanks. I'll look over it all again starting my Tuesday morning. (UTC+13) -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- S

Re: [HACKERS] Display number of heap accesses for index scans

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Geoghegan writes: > > Andres Freund wrote: > >> The number of index lookups that failed to return anything can be a > >> critical performance factor in OLTP workloads. Therefore it

Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager

benchmark the number of acquire/release cycles per second >> that we can do with the current relation extension lock system vs. the >> proposed new system. Ideally, we'd be faster, since we're proposing a >> more specialized mechanism. But at least we should not be slower. >> pgbench isn't a good test because the relation extension lock will >> barely be taken let alone contended; we need to check something like >> parallel copies into the same table to see any effect. >> > > I did a benchmark using a custom script that always updates the > primary key (disabling HOT updates). But parallel copies into the same > tale would also be good. Thank you. > Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- 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] Statement-level rollback

h to apply on top of yours to fix that and some small copy/paste errors, if I understood correctly. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com docs-suggestion.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] Statement-level rollback

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] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions

ttps://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1JUvL9WS9z%3D5hjSuSMNCo3TdBxFa0pA%3DE__E%3Dp6iUffUQ%40mail.gmail.com -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning

a > (5 rows) > > match_clause_to_indexcol() shows an example of how to handle this. > > explain select * from pt where a = false; > > will need to be allowed too. This works slightly differently. You're right. I've fixed things to handle Boolean partitioning in the updated se

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Overestimated filter cost and its mitigation

rs could also benefit > (having perhaps already ordered the qual clauses earlier). +1. -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Removing useless DISTINCT clauses

om/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services remove_useless_distinct_clauses.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] Race to build pg_isolation_regress in "make -j check-world"

ld" and "make -j +# installcheck-world" would spawn multiple, concurrent builds in this +# directory. Later builds would overwrite files while earlier builds are +# reading them, causing occasional failures. +install: | all + submake-regress: $(MAKE) -C $(top_builddi

Re: [HACKERS] dropping partitioned tables without CASCADE

est/regress/expected/insert.out @@ -393,11 +393,11 @@ select tableoid::regclass::text, a, min(b) as min_b, max(b) as max_b from list_p Partition key: LIST (lower(a)) Partitions: part_aa_bb FOR VALUES IN ('aa', 'bb'), part_cc_dd FOR VALUES IN ('cc', 'dd'), -part_default DEFAULT,

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept

. It's kind of understandable for users that DDL > might cancel read-only query on standby. So, if you're running long report > query then you should wait with your DDL. But VACUUM is a different story. > It runs automatically when you do normal DML queries. > > AccessExclusiveLock

Re: [Sender Address Forgery]Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning

having all the partset_union, partset_intersect, partset_range_empty, partset_range_overlap, partset_range_adjacent code. You'd end up just using bms_union and bms_intersect then bms_add_range to handle the min/max bound you get from the bsearch. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >