On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-11/msg01303.php
When I did unusual operations (e.g., suspend bgwriter by gdb,
pgbench -i and issue txid_current many times) on the master
in order to try to
Hi, hackers,
Attached is a patch that adds file_fdw, FDW which reads records from
files on the server side, as a contrib module. This patch is based on
SQL/MED core functionality patch.
[SQL/MED - core functionality]
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-11/msg01698.php
File_fdw
Hi, hackers,
Attached is a patch that adds postgresql_fdw, FDW which retrieves
tuples from external PostgreSQL server, as a contrib module. This
patch is based on SQL/MED core functionality patch.
[SQL/MED - core functionality]
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-11/msg01698.php
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 23:54, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 23:45, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
This was stuck in the moderation queue because of message size limit
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 17:12:44 +0900
Shigeru HANADA han...@metrosystems.co.jp wrote:
Attached is a patch that adds file_fdw, FDW which reads records from
files on the server side, as a contrib module. This patch is based on
SQL/MED core functionality patch.
[SQL/MED - core functionality]
Eliot,
On 11/23/2010 09:43 PM, Eliot Gable wrote:
I know there has been a lot of talk about replication getting built into
Postgres and I know of many projects that aim to fill the role. However,
I have not seen much in the way of a serious attempt at multi-master
write scaling.
Postgres-XC
Hi,
2010/11/25 Markus Wanner mar...@bluegap.ch:
Eliot,
On 11/23/2010 09:43 PM, Eliot Gable wrote:
I know there has been a lot of talk about replication getting built into
Postgres and I know of many projects that aim to fill the role. However,
I have not seen much in the way of a serious
Haven't really gotten much further, but an interesting note: the named
/ unnamed prepared statement and portal stuff seems to be a red
herring. I can add a name to the portal, or move to an unnamed
prepared statement, and I still see the same thing. Which is
interesting, since that's not what
I've seen this as well be a performance issue, in particular with partitioned
tables.
Out of habit I now write functions that always cache the value of the function
in
a variable and use the variable in the actual query to avoid this particular
gotcha.
subquery may be used to cache constants:
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 02:21, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In any case I don't see an argument why warning on connection creation
isn't sufficient.
I'll check all versions of dblink. truncate_identifier() will be called
with warn=false in all cases except dblink_coneect() -
I checked against other parameter bindings and it looks like problem is
connected with oid=0.
In those cases:
1. Executing statement with parameter sent as varchar, int, long, with
text and binary format is ok.
2. Executing statement with oid=0 fail always; I've sent parameter in text
mode
Excerpts from Magnus Hagander's message of jue nov 25 05:46:49 -0300 2010:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 23:54, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Its not so much the moderation load, as I don't like being blindsided by
commits that touch everything in sight. Finding out only when you try
to do
On 25.11.2010 09:34, Shigeru HANADA wrote:
Attached is a patch that adds core functionality of SQL/MED. This
patch provides:
* new option HANDLER for FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER
* CREATE/ALTER DDLs are supported
* psql \dew command shows handler option too
* pg_dump can dump HANDLER option
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of vie nov 19 12:25:13 -0300 2010:
Yeah. You're adding a new fundamental state to the protocol; it's not
enough to bury that in the
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mar nov 23 00:08:54 -0300 2010:
How about publishing additional details to pg_stat_activity via
pgstat_report_waiting()?
I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you suggesting we should create a
new function with that name to report the reason for the lock?
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 22:03, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
I propose the attached API instead. This has a clear separation between plan
and execution.
The APIs seem to be cleaner. The previous ones might be too straight
implementation of the SQL standard.
But
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun nov 22 20:51:09 -0300 2010:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org writes:
A much more common ocurrence is tuple locks. We block in an Xid in that
case; and this has been a frequent question in the mailing lists and
IRC.
I think it would be very
On 25.11.2010 16:16, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 22:03, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
I propose the attached API instead. This has a clear separation between plan
and execution.
The APIs seem to be cleaner. The previous ones might be too
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mar nov 23 00:08:54 -0300 2010:
How about publishing additional details to pg_stat_activity via
pgstat_report_waiting()?
I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue nov 25 11:56:27 -0300 2010:
No, what I was suggesting was taking the existing function:
extern void pgstat_report_waiting(bool waiting);
...and instead doing something like this:
extern void pgstat_report_waiting(char *reason);
...and then
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 4:45 AM, Koichi Suzuki koichi@gmail.com wrote:
plus the
communication protocol overhead and latency. However, it occurs to me
that if you had a shared disk system via either iSCSI, Fiber Channel,
NFS, or whatever (which also had higher I/O capabilities than a single
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue nov 25 11:56:27 -0300 2010:
No, what I was suggesting was taking the existing function:
extern void pgstat_report_waiting(bool waiting);
...and instead doing
Win32 buildfarm members are red because of my inet_pton changes. I will
look into this in the next day, and also improve how we include C files
from /port for libpq.
--
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.ushttp://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
On the other hand, pg_locks is already rather unwieldy to use. We
already have a self-join that tells us the details of what's locking
processes: you need to join pg_locks like this:
...
and throw in a bunch of left joins to see the details
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
I left out some details on what exactly FdwPlan should contain and what
it's lifecycle should be. I'm thinking that it should be allocated in
the CurrentMemoryContext that's active when the FDW Plan routine is
called, which
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
No, what I was suggesting was taking the existing function:
extern void pgstat_report_waiting(bool waiting);
...and instead doing something like this:
extern void pgstat_report_waiting(char *reason);
...and then arrange to pass the reason via the
On 25.11.2010 18:18, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
I left out some details on what exactly FdwPlan should contain and what
it's lifecycle should be. I'm thinking that it should be allocated in
the CurrentMemoryContext that's active when the FDW
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Hmm, I see, cached plans are planned in a shorter-lived context first,
and copied to permanent storage afterwards. Needs more thought then.
Maybe the FDW needs to provide a copyFdwPlan() function to copy FdwPlans
returned by
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of jue nov 25 13:23:42 -0300 2010:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
No, what I was suggesting was taking the existing function:
extern void pgstat_report_waiting(bool waiting);
...and instead doing something like this:
extern void
On 25.11.2010 18:28, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Hmm, I see, cached plans are planned in a shorter-lived context first,
and copied to permanent storage afterwards. Needs more thought then.
Maybe the FDW needs to provide a copyFdwPlan() function
2010/11/25 KaiGai Kohei kai...@ak.jp.nec.com:
The attached patch is a revised patch.
- The utils/hooks.h was renamed to catalog/objectaccess.h
- Numeric in the tail of InvokeObjectAccessHook0() has gone.
- Fixed bug in ATExecAddColumn; it gave AttributeRelationId
to the hook instead of
Hi,
Trying to fix a regression test problem I've left for better days while
developping the extensions, some help is needed.
The pg_execute_from_file() function is designed to work with either a
filename as its sole argument, or the filename and a VARIADIC text list
of arguments containing
Maciek Sakrejda msakre...@truviso.com writes:
Since triggering the set of FEBE messages that leads to this was tied
deep into the guts of JDBC, I opted for raw wire protocol. It looks
like the following sequence of messages from the client leads to this
result format mixup:
1. Parse, with
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
On 25.11.2010 18:28, Tom Lane wrote:
Or just specify a format for the extra information. Perhaps it could be
thought of as being a value of type bytea? Obviously we can't just have
a fixed amount of info, but maybe a blob with a
Dimitri Fontaine dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr writes:
The pg_execute_from_file() function is designed to work with either a
filename as its sole argument, or the filename and a VARIADIC text list
of arguments containing placeholder names and values. It works fine with
two entries in pg_proc using
Interesting. I think you're right. Looking at the Wireshark traffic
again, the driver seems to issue a portal-variant Describe when using
unnamed prepared statements, but as soon as the named prepared
statements kick in (per prepare threshold), the Describe is a
statement-variant Describe with the
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Just make two pg_proc entries that are pointing at two C functions.
The C functions can call a common subroutine after extracting their
arguments.
Mmmm, ok, will adapt the idea to the current code, where the extracting
is mingled into the processing. Thanks
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Win32 buildfarm members are red because of my inet_pton changes. I will
look into this in the next day, and also improve how we include C files
from /port for libpq.
OK, I have accomplished both goals with the two attached, applied
patches.
--
Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote:
BTW, it is annoying that we can't definitively distinguish postmaster
is not running from a connectivity problem, but I can't see a way
around that.
Agreed. I will research this.
I have researched this and developed the attached patch. It implements
Okay, looking at the JDBC side of things, I think JDBC doesn't
actually need that information (since, it always used text results
before Radosław's patch--the previous binary support was for
parameters only, right?). From looking at QueryExecutorImpl
(specifically sendOneQuery), it's clear that it
Hi,
Thank you for your response.
I would only ask to be sure...
So, to summarise, I shouldn't believe server DescribeRow (in context of
format), in this situation, but only I should look at this what I asked
for, isn't it? If I asked for columns in binary format, I need to do binary
reading
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
No, what I was suggesting was taking the existing function:
extern void pgstat_report_waiting(bool waiting);
...and instead doing something like this:
extern void
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Chang Chao charleschung...@gmail.com wrote:
How strings are sorted when LC_COLLATE = ja_JP.UTF-8.
I tried to read the documention on that,but there are just a few words,
like LC_COLLATE determines string sort order,
Is there a specific reference about this?
So
So, to summarise, I shouldn't believe server DescribeRow (in context of
format), in this situation, but only I should look at this what I asked
for, isn't it? If I asked for columns in binary format, I need to do binary
reading regarding what server has responded?
Yes, because in this case
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 11:28:02 -0800, Maciek Sakrejda
msakre...@truviso.com
wrote:
So, to summarise, I shouldn't believe server DescribeRow (in context of
format), in this situation, but only I should look at this what I asked
for, isn't it? If I asked for columns in binary format, I need to do
Maciek Sakrejda msakre...@truviso.com writes:
But to the last part of cited protocol specification, when I've sent message
with statement parameter's type int4, int8, varchar the format
field wasn't set to 0, but 1.
I wasn't able to reproduce that with my standalone test case. When I
OTOH, it seems possible that the JDBC driver might behave differently
depending on whether parameter types were prespecified or not --- it
might issue Describe earlier in order to get the parameter types,
perhaps.
Ah. Bingo:
boolean describeStatement = describeOnly || (!oneShot
Hm... I moved Bind before Describe, I now have
// Construct a new portal if needed.
Portal portal = null;
if (usePortal)
{
String portalName = C_ + (nextUniqueID++);
portal = new Portal(query, portalName);
}
sendBind(query,
On 10-11-22 03:24 PM, Steve Singer wrote:
On 10-11-22 09:37 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Steve Singer ssinger...@sympatico.ca
Almost fixed.
I still get an unexpected difference.
! DETAIL: cannot create PRIMARY KEY/UNIQUE constraint with a non-unique
index.
21:43:02.264 (26) FE= Describe(statement=S_1)
You're still doing the statement-flavor Describe. As Tom pointed out,
this won't tell you the result types because it doesn't know them.
Actually, technically if you issue a statement-flavor Describe *after*
a Bind, the server does have this
Itagaki Takahiro itagaki.takah...@gmail.com writes:
Thanks. I'll move the patch to Ready for Committer.
Thanks!
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to
Joshua Tolley eggyk...@gmail.com writes:
I've just looked at pg_execute_from_file[1]. The idea here is to execute all
the SQL commands in a given file. My comments:
Thanks for your review. Please find attached a revised patch where I've
changed the internals of the function so that it's split
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Please do. Tab completion support should really be included in the
patch - adding it as a separate patch is better than not having it, of
course.
Please find attached version 9 of the patch, which includes psql
completion support of the SET SCHEMA
Hi,
So I've been working on improving locks for foreign key checks, as
discussed in a thread started by Joel Jacobson a while ago. I've posted
about this:
http://www.commandprompt.com/blogs/alvaro_herrera/2010/11/fixing_foreign_key_deadlocks/
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
One thing I've often wished for is the ability to dump a specific
function
See getddl from OmniTI, or the alternative version I kept forgetting to
put online somewhere:
https://labs.omniti.com/labs/pgtreats/wiki/getddl
On Thu, 2010-11-25 at 16:59 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
To solve the problem, ISTM that XID should be assigned before the
information about AccessExclusive lock becomes visible to another
process. Or CHECKPOINT (i.e., GetRunningTransactionLocks) should
ignore the locks with XID = 0.
First,
Hi,Robert.
Thanks for your reply.
As far as I looked into postgre's source,
I came to know that It seems that it uses strcoll to compare strings.
So it depends on the underlying operating system,like you said.
Charles.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To
(2010/10/16 4:49), Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
[Moving to -hackers]
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 3:43 AM, Simon Riggssi...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 09:41 -0400, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Josh Kupershmidtschmi...@gmail.com wrote:
I noticed that
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
As to solutions, it cannot be acceptable to ignore some locks just
because an xid has not been assigned.
Even if GetRunningTransactionLocks ignores such a lock, it's eventually
WAL-logged by LogAccessExclusiveLock, isn't
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 10:24:51PM +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
Joshua Tolley eggyk...@gmail.com writes:
I've just looked at pg_execute_from_file[1]. The idea here is to execute all
the SQL commands in a given file. My comments:
Thanks for your review. Please find attached a revised
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 3:18 PM, KaiGai Kohei kai...@ak.jp.nec.com wrote:
The attached patch is revised version.
- Logging part within auth_delay was removed. This module now focuses on
injection of a few seconds delay on authentication failed.
- Documentation parts were added like any other
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 05:51:11PM +0900, Shigeru HANADA wrote:
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 17:12:44 +0900
Shigeru HANADA han...@metrosystems.co.jp wrote:
Attached is a patch that adds file_fdw, FDW which reads records from
files on the server side, as a contrib module. This patch is based on
(2010/11/26 11:35), Fujii Masao wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 3:18 PM, KaiGai Koheikai...@ak.jp.nec.com wrote:
The attached patch is revised version.
- Logging part within auth_delay was removed. This module now focuses on
injection of a few seconds delay on authentication failed.
-
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 18:40:09 -0800
David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 05:51:11PM +0900, Shigeru HANADA wrote:
I'm going to add new CommitFest items for this patch and SQL/MED -
postgresql_fdw patch which have been split from SQL/MED patch. Can
I add them to CF
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 3:11 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
I have applied this patch, with modified wording of the cannot connect
case:
$ pg_ctl -w -l /dev/null start
waiting for server to start done
server started
warning: could not connect,
Maciek Sakrejda msakre...@truviso.com writes:
21:43:02.264 (26) FE= Describe(statement=S_1)
You're still doing the statement-flavor Describe. As Tom pointed out,
this won't tell you the result types because it doesn't know them.
Actually, technically if you issue a statement-flavor Describe
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
That would mean running GetCurrentTransactionId() inside LockAcquire()
if (lockmode = AccessExclusiveLock
locktag-locktag_type == LOCKTAG_RELATION
!RecoveryInProgress())
(void) GetCurrentTransactionId();
Any objections to that fix?
Thank you, but I think about this last night. Opening unnecessary portals
isn't good idea, similarly sending 2nd describe when statement was
prepared. Currently JDBC drivers doesn't make this. I think better will be
to store what format we had requested on stack, and then coerce those
formats when
Thanks for the comments.
I'll revise the patch along the discussion. Before starting code work,
please let me summarize the discussion.
* Generally, we should keep FDWs away from PostgreSQL internals,
such as TupleTableSlot.
* FDW should have planner hook which allows FDW to create
69 matches
Mail list logo
