On 31 July 2015 at 22:46, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 07/31/2015 12:29 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> On 07/30/2015 07:24 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You'd never be forced to do anti-wraparound
>>> vacuums, you could just let the clog grow arbitrarily large
>>>
>>
>> When I introduce
Oh sorry, I think I misunderstood your suggestion - setting lc_messages in
the startup packet wouldn't work any more than setting client_encoding,
would it. So any solution here would be on the database/backend side, and
so irrelevant for a general-purpose driver...
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 4:28 PM
Tom Lane writes:
> What concerns me more is that what you're finding is only cases that trip
> an assertion sanity check. It seems likely that you're also managing to
> trigger other bugs with less drastic consequences, such as "could not
> devise a query plan" failures or just plain wrong answer
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Etsuro Fujita
wrote:
> Can't FDWs get the join information through the root, which I think we would
> pass to the API as the argument?
This is exactly what Tom suggested originally, and it has some appeal,
but neither KaiGai nor I could see how to make it work . D
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <
ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> 2. New catalog - This method takes out the need to have separate method
> for C1, C5 and even C2, also the synchronization will be taken care of by
> row locks, there will be no limit on the number of fore
On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 5:00 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> FabrÃzio de Royes Mello wrote:
>
>> In this patch I didn't change all lockmode comparison places previous
>> pointed by you, but I can change it maybe adding other method called
>> LockModeIsValid(lockmode) to do the comparison "lockmode >= N
On August 1, 2015 2:17:24 PM GMT+02:00, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 5:00 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> FabrÃzio de Royes Mello wrote:
>>
>>> In this patch I didn't change all lockmode comparison places
>previous
>>> pointed by you, but I can change it maybe adding other method
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Kouhei Kaigai wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 7:59 AM, Kouhei Kaigai
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
> > > > > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Kouhei
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Etsuro Fujita
> wrote:
> > Can't FDWs get the join information through the root, which I think we would
> > pass to the API as the argument?
>
> This is exactly what Tom suggested originally, and it has some appeal,
> but neither KaiGai nor I could see how to mak
On 31/07/15 18:31, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote:
>> Heapification is O(n) already, whether siftup (existing) or down.
>
> That's not my impression, or what Wikipedia says. Source?
Measurements done last year:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/52f
On 2015-07-31 13:31:54 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> > Heapification is O(n) already, whether siftup (existing) or down.
>
> That's not my impression, or what Wikipedia says. Source?
Building a binary heap via successive insertions is O(n lo
>The total number of heap pages is known, and the total number of index
>pages is also known, so it's possible to derive a percentage out of
>this part.
The total number of index pages scanned during entire vacuum will depend on
number
of index scans that happens.
In order to extrapolate percent c
Robert Haas writes:
> The problem that was bothering us (or at least what was bothering me)
> is that the PlannerInfo provides only a list of SpecialJoinInfo
> structures, which don't directly give you the original join order. In
> fact, min_righthand and min_lefthand are intended to constraint t
Hi,
According to https://www.openssl.org/blog/blog/2015/08/01/cla/ openssl
is planning to relicense to the apache license 2.0. While APL2 is not
compatible with GLP2 it *is* compatible with GPL3.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To
I believe we have a project policy that all user-facing error reports
should go through ereport not elog (so that they're translatable) and
should not have ERRCODE_INTERNAL_ERROR as SQLSTATE. It's sometimes
debatable where the line is between user-facing and not, but surely any
error that is trigg
Andreas Seltenreich writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> What concerns me more is that what you're finding is only cases that trip
>> an assertion sanity check. It seems likely that you're also managing to
>> trigger other bugs with less drastic consequences, such as "could not
>> devise a query plan" f
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Untested patch attached.
That fixes the installcheck failure on my machine.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 08:29:51PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Where are we with this? Do we feel confident that this bug is only on
> old versions of Solaris we don't care about? Or does it remain to be
> resolved?
Affected systems either have an available vendor update addressing the problem
o
Tom Lane writes:
> Well, I certainly think all of these represent bugs:
>
> [...]
thanks for priorizing them. I'll try to digest them somewhat before
posting.
> This one's pretty darn odd, because 2619 is pg_statistic and not an index
> at all:
>
>> 4 | ERROR: cache lookup failed for inde
On 07/17/2015 06:28 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 2:21 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 06/29/2015 09:44 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 4:55 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
But we'll still need to han
On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I propose to back-patch this into 9.5, but not further; it's not an
> important enough issue to justify changing SQLSTATE behavior in stable
> branches.
+1. As I've said in the past, I think that making it possible to
determine mechanically that a
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 07:54:27PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 07/30/2015 12:40 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >We should describe test sets by what they test, not by how they test. TAP
I agree with that philosophy. I also respect the practicality of grouping by
test harness as a shorthand. T
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 04:42:55PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> The next hump is this, in restoring contrib_regression_test_ddl_parse:
>
>pg_restore: creating FUNCTION "public"."text_w_default_in("cstring")"
>pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error while PROCESSING TOC:
>pg_restore: [archi
On 08/01/2015 04:44 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
--enable-tap-tests is a reasonable configuration setting, because it's
about whether or not we have a TAP testing framework available, but I
think we should stop calling the bin tests "TAP tests" and we should
change the test name in vcregress.pl to a
On Sat, Aug 01, 2015 at 07:13:04PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 08/01/2015 04:44 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> >>>--enable-tap-tests is a reasonable configuration setting, because it's
> >>>about whether or not we have a TAP testing framework available, but I
> >>>think we should stop calling the bi
On 08/01/2015 07:13 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 04:42:55PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
The next hump is this, in restoring contrib_regression_test_ddl_parse:
pg_restore: creating FUNCTION "public"."text_w_default_in("cstring")"
pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error while
Amit,
Let me ask three more detailed questions.
Why Funnel has a valid qual of the subplan?
The 2nd argument of make_funnel() is qualifier of the subplan
(PartialSeqScan) then it is initialized at ExecInitFunnel,
but never executed on the run-time. Why does Funnel node has
useless qualifier expre
27 matches
Mail list logo
