Re: [HACKERS] psql: add \pset true/false

2015-12-04 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-12-04 9:37 GMT+01:00 Kyotaro HORIGUCHI : > Hello, I think this is the my last proposal of an idea on > psql-side generic solution. Sorry for bothering. > > > My environment is CentOS7. But completely forgot Windows > > environment (or other platforms). I

Re: [HACKERS] Error with index on unlogged table

2015-12-04 Thread Andres Freund
On 2015-12-04 17:00:13 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Andres Freud wrote: > >> @@ -450,14 +450,21 @@ ginbuildempty(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS) > >> START_CRIT_SECTION(); > >> GinInitMetabuffer(MetaBuffer); > >> MarkBufferDirty(MetaBuffer); > >> - log_newpage_buffer(MetaBuffer, false);

Re: [HACKERS] Error with index on unlogged table

2015-12-04 Thread Michael Paquier
Andres Freud wrote: > On 2015-11-20 16:11:15 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> diff --git a/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c >> b/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c >> index cc845d2..4883697 100644 >> --- a/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c >> +++ b/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c >> @@ -9503,6

Re: [HACKERS] parallel joins, and better parallel explain

2015-12-04 Thread Amit Kapila
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 3:25 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > - There seems to be some inconsistency in Explain's output when > > multiple workers are used. > > > So the net result of this is that

Re: [HACKERS] psql: add \pset true/false

2015-12-04 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Hello, I think this is the my last proposal of an idea on psql-side generic solution. Sorry for bothering. > My environment is CentOS7. But completely forgot Windows > environment (or other platforms). I agree with you. It will > indeed too much considering all possible platforms. Ok, DLL is not

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: add 'waiting for replication' to pg_stat_activity.state

2015-12-04 Thread Craig Ringer
On 3 December 2015 at 22:58, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Craig Ringer > wrote: > > > > On 3 December 2015 at 09:32, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> > >> On 12/2/15 7:00 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > >> > I

[HACKERS] Patch: ResourceOwner optimization for tables with many partitions

2015-12-04 Thread Aleksander Alekseev
Hello all, Current implementation of ResourceOwner uses arrays to store resources like TupleDescs, Snapshots, etc. When we want to release one of these resources ResourceOwner finds it with linear scan. Granted, resource array are usually small so its not a problem most of the time. But it

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: add 'waiting for replication' to pg_stat_activity.state

2015-12-04 Thread Andres Freund
On December 4, 2015 9:48:55 AM GMT+01:00, Craig Ringer wrote: >On 3 December 2015 at 22:58, Amit Kapila >wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Craig Ringer >> wrote:

Re: [HACKERS] Confusing results with lateral references

2015-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
Ashutosh Bapat writes: > I am seeing different results with two queries which AFAIU have same > semantics and hence are expected to give same results. > postgres=# select * from t1, (select distinct val, val2 from t2) t2ss where > t1.val = t2ss.val for update of

Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] max_worker_processes on the standby

2015-12-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Fujii Masao wrote: > Sorry for not reviewing the patch before you push it... > > In HEAD, I ran very simple test case: > > 1. enable track_commit_timestamp > 2. start the server > 3. run some transactions > 4. execute pg_last_committed_xact() -- returns non-null values > 5. shutdown the server

Re: [HACKERS] Confusing results with lateral references

2015-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
Ashutosh Bapat writes: > There's another seemingly wrong result, not with lateral, but with FOR > UPDATE. [ shrug... ] You're getting the post-update images of the two join rows that would have been reported without FOR UPDATE. This one is definitely not a bug.

Re: [HACKERS] Remaining 9.5 open items

2015-12-04 Thread Simon Riggs
On 1 December 2015 at 17:05, Robert Haas wrote: > do we want to > back-patch those changes to 9.5 at this late date? > Surely the whole point of a release process is to fix issues in the release. If we don't ever dare put something in the release, we may as well have

Re: CustomScan in a larger structure (RE: [HACKERS] CustomScan support on readfuncs.c)

2015-12-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:06 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2015-12-02 08:52:20 +, Kouhei Kaigai wrote: >> diff --git a/src/backend/nodes/copyfuncs.c b/src/backend/nodes/copyfuncs.c >> index 26264cb..c4bb76e 100644 >> --- a/src/backend/nodes/copyfuncs.c >> +++

Re: [HACKERS] Remaining 9.5 open items

2015-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs writes: > On 1 December 2015 at 17:05, Robert Haas wrote: >> do we want to >> back-patch those changes to 9.5 at this late date? > Surely the whole point of a release process is to fix issues in the > release. If we don't ever dare put

Re: [HACKERS] Support of partial decompression for datums

2015-12-04 Thread Simon Riggs
On 4 December 2015 at 13:47, Ildus Kurbangaliev < i.kurbangal...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > Attached patch adds support of partial decompression for datums. > It will be useful in many cases when extracting part of data is > enough for big varlena structures. > > It is especially useful for

Re: [HACKERS] Remaining 9.5 open items

2015-12-04 Thread Simon Riggs
On 4 December 2015 at 16:29, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs writes: > > On 1 December 2015 at 17:05, Robert Haas wrote: > >> do we want to > >> back-patch those changes to 9.5 at this late date? > > > Surely the whole point of a

Re: [HACKERS] parallel joins, and better parallel explain

2015-12-04 Thread Simon Riggs
On 30 November 2015 at 17:52, Robert Haas wrote: > My idea is that you'd end up with a plan like this: > > Gather > -> Hash Join > -> Parallel Seq Scan > -> Parallel Hash > -> Parallel Seq Scan > > Not only does this build only one copy of the hash table instead

[HACKERS] Support of partial decompression for datums

2015-12-04 Thread Ildus Kurbangaliev
Attached patch adds support of partial decompression for datums. It will be useful in many cases when extracting part of data is enough for big varlena structures. It is especially useful for expanded datums, because it provides storage for partial results. I have another patch, which removes

Re: [HACKERS] Error with index on unlogged table

2015-12-04 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2015-12-04 17:00:13 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Andres Freud wrote: >> >> extern void InitXLogInsert(void); >> >> diff --git a/src/include/catalog/pg_control.h >> >> b/src/include/catalog/pg_control.h >> >> index

Re: [HACKERS] Support of partial decompression for datums

2015-12-04 Thread Ildus Kurbangaliev
On Fri, 4 Dec 2015 22:13:58 +0900 Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Ildus Kurbangaliev > wrote: > > Attached patch adds support of partial decompression for datums. > > It will be useful in many cases when

Re: [HACKERS] Some bugs in psql_complete of psql

2015-12-04 Thread Fujii Masao
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Hello, thank you for the comments. > > The revised version of this patch is attached. Thanks for updating the patch! I tested whether the following patterns work as expected or not. CREATE UNIQUE INDEX

Re: [HACKERS] Support of partial decompression for datums

2015-12-04 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Ildus Kurbangaliev wrote: > Attached patch adds support of partial decompression for datums. > It will be useful in many cases when extracting part of data is > enough for big varlena structures. > > It is especially useful for

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: multiple psql option -c

2015-12-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> Yeah, I don't think that's a big issue either to be honest. The code >> is kept consistent a maximum with what is there previously. >> >> Patch is switched to ready for committer. > > perfect > > Thank you very much

Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication and multimaster

2015-12-04 Thread Craig Ringer
On 3 December 2015 at 20:39, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 30 November 2015 at 17:20, Konstantin Knizhnik < > k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > > >> But looks like there is not so much sense in having multiple network >> connection between one pair of nodes. >> It seems to be

Re: [HACKERS] atomic reads & writes (with no barriers)

2015-12-04 Thread Kevin Grittner
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 6:35 AM, Greg Stark wrote: > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> Is the c.h change above on anything resembling the right track for >> a patch for this? If not, what would such a patch look like? > > It would be

Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] max_worker_processes on the standby

2015-12-04 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I paraphrase Fujii Masao, who wrote: > >> 1. Start the master and standby servers with track_commit_timestamp enabled. >> 2. Disable track_commit_timestamp in the master and restart the master >> server. >> 3. Run

Re: [HACKERS] atomic reads & writes (with no barriers)

2015-12-04 Thread Greg Stark
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Is the c.h change above on anything resembling the right track for > a patch for this? If not, what would such a patch look like? It would be nicer if we could come up with an interface that didn't require #ifdefs

Re: [HACKERS] Some questions about the array.

2015-12-04 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Some inconsistency (if we believe that omitted lower bound is equal to 1): regression=# insert into arrtest_s values ('[-1:9]={3,1,4,1,5,9,5,6,7,8,9}'::int[], null); INSERT 0 1 regression=# UPDATE arrtest_s SET a[:2] = '{23, 24, 25}'; ERROR: source array too small regression=# UPDATE arrtest_s

Re: [HACKERS] Freeze avoidance of very large table.

2015-12-04 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Masahiko Sawada > wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 3:04 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Masahiko Sawada

Re: [HACKERS] More stable query plans via more predictable column statistics

2015-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > Still, maybe we should try to sneak at least this much into > 9.5 RSN, because I have to think this is going to help people with > mostly-NULL (or mostly-really-wide) columns. Please no. We are trying to get to release, not destabilize things. I

Re: [HACKERS] dynloader.h missing in prebuilt package for Windows?

2015-12-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 07:11:32PM -0500, Chapman Flack wrote: > I use the PG dynloader because, hey, you guys have already done the work > of abstracting up from 12 different platforms' variations on dlopen, and > it seems smarter to stand on your shoulders and not reinvent that. The > one minor

Re: [HACKERS] More stable query plans via more predictable column statistics

2015-12-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Shulgin, Oleksandr wrote: > Hi Hackers! > > This post summarizes a few weeks of research of ANALYZE statistics > distribution on one of our bigger production databases with some real-world > data and proposes a patch to rectify some

Re: [HACKERS] Remaining 9.5 open items

2015-12-04 Thread Stephen Frost
* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > > Stephen Frost wrote: > > > > > > > The non-documentation question is around DROP OWNED. We need to either > > > > have policies dropped by DROP OWNED (well,

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba_lookup function to get all matching pg_hba.conf entries

2015-12-04 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-12-04 17:34 GMT+01:00 Alvaro Herrera : > Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > It should be disabled by default > > > > only when you have some problems, then you can enable it > > That still seems mostly unworkable to me. Are we going to tell DBAs to > set PGOPTIONS when

Re: [HACKERS] Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

2015-12-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Michael Paquier wrote: > By the way, if there are no objections, I am going to mark this patch > as committed in the CF app. Putting in the infrastructure is already a > good step forward, and I will add an entry in next CF to track the > patch to add tests for recovery itself. Alvaro, what do

Re: [HACKERS] Re: In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.

2015-12-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Noah Misch wrote: > git checkout 807b9e0 > (find src -name \*.pl -o -name \*.pm ) | sort -u | xargs perltidy > --profile=src/tools/pgindent/perltidyrc > > perltidy v20090616 leaves the working directory clean, but perltidy v20150815 > introduces diffs: > > src/backend/catalog/genbki.pl

[HACKERS] Random crud left behind by aborted TAP tests

2015-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
Yesterday I was fooling around with the TAP tests, and at least once I changed my mind and control-C'd out of a run. Today I find: [postgres@sss1 pgsql]$ git status On branch master Your branch is up-to-date with 'origin/master'. Untracked files: (use "git add ..." to include in what will be

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: multiple psql option -c

2015-12-04 Thread Catalin Iacob
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > For the most part, the cleanups in this version are just cosmetic: I > fixed some whitespace damage, and reverted some needless changes to > the psql references page that were whitespace-only adjustments. In a > few

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba_lookup function to get all matching pg_hba.conf entries

2015-12-04 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-12-04 17:16 GMT+01:00 Alvaro Herrera : > Haribabu Kommi wrote: > > > The trace messages that are going to print doesn't come to client until > the > > connection gets successful. The traces may not useful for the clients > > to find out > > why the connection is

Re: [HACKERS] Random crud left behind by aborted TAP tests

2015-12-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Yesterday I was fooling around with the TAP tests, and at least once > > I changed my mind and control-C'd out of a run. Today I find: > > > > [postgres@sss1 pgsql]$ git status > > On branch master > > Your branch is up-to-date with 'origin/master'. >

Re: [HACKERS]WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

2015-12-04 Thread Anastasia Lubennikova
03.12.2015 04:03, Robert Haas пишет: On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote: If we don't need c4 as an index scankey, we don't need any btree opclass on it. But we still want to have it in covering index for queries like SELECT c4 FROM tbl

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba_lookup function to get all matching pg_hba.conf entries

2015-12-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Haribabu Kommi wrote: > The trace messages that are going to print doesn't come to client until the > connection gets successful. The traces may not useful for the clients > to find out > why the connection is failing. But it may be useful for administrators. > How about the attached patch? > >

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba_lookup function to get all matching pg_hba.conf entries

2015-12-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Haribabu Kommi wrote: > How about as follows? > > postgres=# select * from pg_hba_lookup('all','all','::1'); > line_number | type | database | user | address | hostname | method | > options | mode >

Re: [HACKERS] atomic reads & writes (with no barriers)

2015-12-04 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2015-12-03 16:10:51 -0600, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Is the c.h change above on anything resembling the right track for > a patch for this? If not, what would such a patch look like? I think a better path would be to add fallback support for 64bit atomics - like we already have for 32bit.

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba_lookup function to get all matching pg_hba.conf entries

2015-12-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Pavel Stehule wrote: > It should be disabled by default > > only when you have some problems, then you can enable it That still seems mostly unworkable to me. Are we going to tell DBAs to set PGOPTIONS when they have some pg_hba problem? What's the issue with calling the function when you

[HACKERS] Replication stats from slaves

2015-12-04 Thread Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
Hi hackers, We are developing and maintaining a Pacemaker resource agent for PostgreSQL here. This agent is "stateful", ie. it knows where is the master and where are the slaves. See [1]. Now that this resource agent version is close to what we wanted to achieve, we will make some official

Re: [HACKERS] Freeze avoidance of very large table.

2015-12-04 Thread Jeff Janes
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 3:04 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Masahiko Sawada >> wrote: >>> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 2:21 AM, Jeff Janes

Re: [HACKERS] Random crud left behind by aborted TAP tests

2015-12-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane wrote: > Yesterday I was fooling around with the TAP tests, and at least once > I changed my mind and control-C'd out of a run. Today I find: > > [postgres@sss1 pgsql]$ git status > On branch master > Your branch is up-to-date with 'origin/master'. > > Untracked files: > (use "git

Re: [HACKERS] Remaining 9.5 open items

2015-12-04 Thread Geoff Winkless
On 4 December 2015 at 15:50, Simon Riggs wrote: > Do we think they ever launched a Saturn V that didn't have some marginal > flashing lights somewhere? > ​Almost certainly. They had triple-redundant systems that were certified for correctness. You don't knowingly send

Re: [HACKERS] Random crud left behind by aborted TAP tests

2015-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera writes: >> Hmm ... I would have supposed that this directory should have been >> removed by File::Temp's END block. Are END blocks abandoned completely >> when a signal is received? That seems pretty surprising. > Yes, they are. Quoth man perlmod: >

Re: [HACKERS] Support of partial decompression for datums

2015-12-04 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 12:10 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 4 December 2015 at 13:47, Ildus Kurbangaliev > wrote: > >> >> Attached patch adds support of partial decompression for datums. >> It will be useful in many cases when extracting part of

Re: [HACKERS] Size of Path nodes

2015-12-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > So over in my private branch where I've been fooling around with upper > planner pathification, I've been sweating bullets to avoid enlarging the > size of struct Path, because I was aware that common path types like >

Re: [HACKERS] Size of Path nodes

2015-12-04 Thread Jim Nasby
On 12/4/15 11:50 AM, Tom Lane wrote: which means Robert has already blown the planner's space consumption out by close to a factor of 2, and I should stop worrying. Or else he should start worrying. Do we really need this field? Did anyone pay any attention to what happened to planner space

Re: [HACKERS] Remaining 9.5 open items

2015-12-04 Thread Stephen Frost
* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > Stephen Frost wrote: > > Still, I'll get a patch worked up for it and then we can discuss the > > merits of that patch going in to 9.5 now versus just into HEAD. > > Cool. While working on the DROP OWNED BY patch, and part of what took me a

[HACKERS] remapped localhost causes connections to localhost to fail using Postgres

2015-12-04 Thread Dann Corbit
Using a Windows computer, editing the file: C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts the localhost entry was remapped to the machine name by adding the following line: 127.0.0.1 After this change, Postgres would not allow access using the address localhost. Only using the machine name to

Re: [HACKERS] remapped localhost causes connections to localhost to fail using Postgres

2015-12-04 Thread Bill Moran
On Fri, 4 Dec 2015 21:55:23 + Dann Corbit wrote: > Using a Windows computer, editing the file: > C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts > the localhost entry was remapped to the machine name by adding the following > line: > 127.0.0.1 > > After this change,

Re: [HACKERS] Size of Path nodes

2015-12-04 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > I suspect Cachegrind[1] would answer a lot of these questions (though I've > never actually used it). I can't get postgres to run under valgrind on my > laptop, but maybe someone that's been successful at valgrind can

Re: [HACKERS] Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual

2015-12-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > One thing I can think of is that we can keep both the structure of a > ForeignPath node and the API of create_foreignscan_path as-is. The latter > is a good thing for FDW authors. And IIUC the patch you posted

Re: [HACKERS] dynloader.h missing in prebuilt package for Windows?

2015-12-04 Thread Chapman Flack
On 12/04/15 12:56, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > OK, good logical reason to install dynloader.h on Windows. Ah! Thanks. I was starting to wonder whether I had said something wrong and been sent to the bit bucket within my first two -hackers posts. :) > What do we need to do to close this item?

Re: [HACKERS] Size of Path nodes

2015-12-04 Thread Jim Nasby
On 12/4/15 5:14 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: >I suspect Cachegrind[1] would answer a lot of these questions (though I've >never actually used it). I can't get postgres to run under valgrind on my >laptop, but maybe

Re: [HACKERS] Size of Path nodes

2015-12-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > As frustrated as I've sometimes been with those discussions, I do > recognize that there has to be a middle ground, and that the emphasis > on distributed costs has as much to do with fairness for every > contributor as

Re: [HACKERS] Size of Path nodes

2015-12-04 Thread Amit Kapila
On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 2:30 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > So over in my private branch where I've been fooling around with upper > > planner pathification, I've been sweating bullets to avoid enlarging

Re: [HACKERS] Rework the way multixact truncations work

2015-12-04 Thread Noah Misch
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 07:03:21PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2015-12-03 04:38:45 -0500, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 04:46:26PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > > > Especially if reverting and redoing includes conflicts that mainly > > > increases the chance of accidental

[HACKERS] libxml2 2.9.3 breaks xml test output

2015-12-04 Thread Christian Ullrich
Hello, I just noticed that last night all built branches failed on my buildfarm animal, jaguarundi. They all failed on the "xml" test, and the output is essentially the same everywhere: *** *** 9,16 LINE 1: INSERT INTO xmltest VALUES (3, '

Re: [HACKERS] libxml2 2.9.3 breaks xml test output

2015-12-04 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Christian Ullrich wrote: > I have zero experience with libxml2, so no idea if the previous context > level can be turned on again. IMHO, the libxml2 change is a bug in itself; > PostgreSQL's error messages are more readable with the XML text

[HACKERS] Size of Path nodes

2015-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
So over in my private branch where I've been fooling around with upper planner pathification, I've been sweating bullets to avoid enlarging the size of struct Path, because I was aware that common path types like IndexPath and AppendPath were already a power-of-2 size (at least on 64-bit

Re: [HACKERS] Size of Path nodes

2015-12-04 Thread Andres Freund
On 2015-12-04 12:50:09 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > So over in my private branch where I've been fooling around with upper > planner pathification, I've been sweating bullets to avoid enlarging the > size of struct Path, because I was aware that common path types like > IndexPath and AppendPath were

Re: [HACKERS] Remaining 9.5 open items

2015-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost writes: > I noticed in passing that the role removal documentation should really > also discuss shared objects (as the DROP OWNED BY reference page does). If you're speaking of section 20.4, that text is all my fault ... but I'm not clear on what you think needs

Re: [HACKERS] Remaining 9.5 open items

2015-12-04 Thread Stephen Frost
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Stephen Frost writes: > > I noticed in passing that the role removal documentation should really > > also discuss shared objects (as the DROP OWNED BY reference page does). > > If you're speaking of section 20.4, that text is all my

Re: [HACKERS] Size of Path nodes

2015-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > On 2015-12-04 12:50:09 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> which means Robert has already blown the planner's space consumption out >> by close to a factor of 2, and I should stop worrying. > FWIW, for me it's still <= 64 bytes: No, it's not bare Path I'm

Re: [HACKERS] Remaining 9.5 open items

2015-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
Stephen Frost writes: > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: >> If you're speaking of section 20.4, that text is all my fault ... but >> I'm not clear on what you think needs to be added? The first DROP OWNED >> BY will take care of any privileges on shared objects, so I